Reversed Backcrossing:)

[heavy dank nugg]

i thought we were getting along untill you roundaboutly called me a idiot. for posting my Theroy clearly called it a theroy. key word being THEROY . might have mispelled that too. lucky your here. i like benjis post best lets all be putting up or shuting up.

 

[heavy dank nugg]

right, so basically what you stated here -



is just your own personal theory, which you refuse to explain any further or back up with any references.

thanks (for the clarification).
V.

im not a pot scientist. im a grower and a lover. and my theroy explains it self.

 

[VerdantGreen]

hdg, i'm certainly am not trying to call anyone an idiot - those were your words, not mine.

you stated your 'theory' as hard fact (or at least that is how it came accross to me) on page 16, and only pointed out that it was a theory on page 27, so you must be able to see where the confusion arises.

i had never seen those stats before and was curious to know where they came from, thats all - no offence intended.

stay safe
V.

 

[heavy dank nugg]

the idiot post was for nate... its all good....

 

[englishrick]

Hi Rick,
that quote is talking about the way in which populations evolve during competition in fields, for instance wheat fields. What it is saying is that as one new pheno type that is better at competing for resources comes into being, and breeds, then there will be more who compete better for resources, and so that advantage is reduced due to its competitors also becoming more competitive and so while the genes are passed on, the results within that population are reduced. Therefore the advantage is countered. However the genes now contain new instruction sets. So by looking at the field, the results will stay fairly constant yet there will have been a discrete evolution created by the need to compete for food. So while the environment has not changed, the appearance of the wheat has not changed, their genome has altered.

So that passage isn't really relevant to what you are proposing.

I wouldn't let it put you off your task though, which by now you should be doing and showing us the results of. Get the experiment under way, its the only way to move the thread forward really.

what i got from this is::::::

this guy is using "limited relative frequency" to force particular polygeneric phenotypes to sitck and arrise in a seedline

it reminds me of my project,,,,,,

am i wrong GMT?

We propose a model to analyze a quantitative trait under frequency-dependent disruptive selection. Selection on the trait is a combination of stabilizing selection and intraspecific competition, where competition is maximal between individuals with equal phenotypes. In addition, there is a density-dependent component induced by population regulation. The trait is determined additively by a number of biallelic loci, which can have different effects on the trait value. In contrast to most previous models, we assume that the allelic effects at the loci can evolve due to epistatic interactions with the genetic background. Using a modifier approach, we derive analytical results under the assumption of weak selection and constant population size, and we investigate the full model by numerical simulations. We find that frequency-dependent disruptive selection favors the evolution of a highly asymmetric genetic architecture, where most of the genetic variation is concentrated on a small number of loci. We show that the evolution of genetic architecture can be understood in terms of the ecological niches created by competition. The phenotypic distribution of a population with an adapted genetic architecture closely matches this niche structure. Thus, evolution of the genetic architecture seems to be a plausible way for populations to adapt to regimes of frequency-dependent disruptive selection. As such, it should be seen as a potential evolutionary pathway to discrete polymorphisms and as a potential alternative to other evolutionary responses, such as the evolution of sexual dimorphism or assortative mating.

 

[Raco]

Hey rick bro i hear were your coming from but more reading and less typing thats why i havent bothered posting in this thread anymore because its all over the place bro u need to get the STS already and put your theory in motion then come back to this thread and start posting your test results ACTIONS SPEAK A THOUSAND WORDS i mean its a good disscusion but thats all it is until u start doing what u actualy say and bro dont take this the wrong way or what others have said its all constructive criticism no more talk lets do this shit already...

One more thing asking chimera if your still an idiot makes u look like an idiot just chill bro between him and colina and charles we have years and years to catch up on them we must take what they say very very seriously they have been there and we havent until we have its just a theory...

Good one BENJI

rick,
no offence intended,but this shit is beyond your possibilities IMO

 

[englishrick]

comprehention is a massive factor HERE!!

 

[GMT]

Hi Rick, here's what I got, though frankly without reading the whole text it can be tricky getting much from such a small section of what is clearly a comprehensive text regarding a specific experiment that some serious boffins carried out.
He isn't using limited relative frequency to do anything, but rather reporting that he found limited relative frequency in genomes that differed significantly. The selection methods discussed are natural selection, as in the type that nature uses in evolution, which is what the paper is discussing. The situation is in an outdoor field, with significant numbers of plants, which are sharing genetics the old fashioned way, with pollen blown in the wind, or wild bees helping out. They are saying that the frequency with which they observed differing traits, relative to the population size, was limited (or not too often).

 

[englishrick]

its from a paper called

"THE EVOLUTION OF GENETIC ARCHITECTURE UNDER FREQUENCY-DEPENDENT DISRUPTIVE SELECTION" by Michael Koppab and Joachim Hermissonac

i thought it was explaining how frequency dependant selection can interperate evoloution...and thats exactly what i am trying to prove in this thread,,,,,,,

 

[englishrick]

the immense scope of the topic encompasses all living organisms on Earth and touches on all levels of biological organization. Therefore, the subject cannot be accurately pigeonholed into disciplines such as molecular biology or biochemistry......

 

[englishrick]

i call myself gifted

 

[Weedninja]

Just make sure that you don't dye your hands black with silver nitrate.

 

[englishrick]

i can tell you know me better than most ninja......



i would too.......id look at my black hands an determine the frequency of the event.....then i would limit the frequency next time

my hands would still be black tho

 

[Forest20]

i call myself gifted

Alvin Toffler:

The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn.
​

 

[Cinderella99]

I, for one, think ER is a very intelligent individual who just needs to tone it down and get away from internet for a bit. Peace, ER.

 

[englishrick]

Alvin Toffler:

The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn.
​

men after my own heart

 

[englishrick]

I, for one, think ER is a very intelligent individual who just needs to tone it down and get away from internet for a bit. Peace, ER.

im HEAR for YOU,,,,,anything you need just ask

 

[englishrick]

its from a paper called

"THE EVOLUTION OF GENETIC ARCHITECTURE UNDER FREQUENCY-DEPENDENT DISRUPTIVE SELECTION" by Michael Koppab and Joachim Hermissonac

i thought it was explaining how frequency dependant selection can interperate evoloution...and thats exactly what i am trying to prove in this thread,,,,,,,

hay GMT,,,if im right,,,,"IF",,,this guys thing works, then emigine what Reverced Backcrossing will do?.....Everyone thinks its a bad idea,,but im getting no feedbac of data

could Reverced Backcrossing "Reset" drift

 

[BENJI]

Well if u put it into motion you would find out and not everyone thinks its a bad idea but until u stop talking and start acting its just an idea bro..

I WANT TO SEE RESULTS ENOUGH TALK ALREADY!!!

 

[englishrick]

for the people who believe, its allready happening for them...

il kick off this week,,,,

check out Stax ChemD thread,,,he is on track for a Reverced Backcross...full respect to that group of dudes

im doing

Cheese S1..."SK S1"
Blues x Cheese...."possiblySK x SK"

il be mixing the STS "with gloves",,this week