What Male to use in a cross?

[Sideshow-Bob]

oh it's not that difficult...

maybe view chimeras posts in this thread again, then think about them again, then maybe have a look at the strains he SELLS, still not seeing my point? i don't feel like spelling it out for you more clearly then i already did


but wait aren't you one of those nicknames that i have only seen in this and 2 or 3 other threads with the same topic? hmmmm maybe, just maybe... well i'll not type it - i think people can draw their own conclusions

have a good day

 

[URUK]

oh it's not that difficult...

clearly it is.

maybe view chimeras posts in this thread again, then think about them again, then maybe have a look at the strains he SELLS, still not seeing my point? i don't feel like spelling it out for you more clearly then i already did

and maybe you should go thru his actual posts and read some more before coming to your conclusions.

but wait aren't you one of those nicknames that i have only seen in this and 2 or 3 other threads with the same topic? hmmmm maybe, just maybe... well i'll not type it - i think people can draw their own conclusions

by all means have a look at my post count and through the topics I've posted in, what exactly does it prove? that I care and i'm passionate about this subject? Yes.

 

[Sideshow-Bob]

by all means have a look at my post count and through the topics I've posted in, what exactly does it prove? that I care and i'm passionate about this subject? Yes.

I am the last person who thinks post count, reg. date and green squares matters...

i was bringing this up because: i know how people behave when they are new to a site like this, and you def. don't behave like this, a blind man could tell you are a 2nd nick, now the question that arises is: why don't you use your 1st nick?


for me the proof always is in the pudding... and that's my last statement in this thread:

i smoked 2 strains of chimera before, they were average weed... i have smoked crossings derived from small populations that were in every aspect superior to the samples i got from chimeras strains...

now i see chimera around here hating against small breeding intents because it damages the gene-pool... well where is the final proof for good genes in drug cannabis? - right you are it's in the smoke...

is it really the gene-pool he is concerned about, or is it the money? (if it's the gene-pool i have to ask why he is selling seeds that produce average product? and why is he using old clones that have been used for decades and are over-represented in the gene-pool - spg, cali-o -? and not doing open pollination, where are his selections with thousands of plants? why does he go around canna-sites and tell people who knew steve personally that their spg cut isn't real?

please don't answer... these questions they are rethorical i have seen enough here to do my judgement and with this i'm finally off this thread...

btw i'm sure there will be some intent to discredit me now, but who knows me around here, knows that i'm neither here to sell something nor to talk shit, whereas somebody in this thread is here to sell something keep that in mind

greetings

 

[nvisionary]

I am going on a 2 day fishing trip, so Ill have to get back to you on GrowDocs thread. Then Thanksgiving Day...

Kaneh...? You know you wont be seeing any of these speed hacks on this thread. They dont have the 'ammo' to defend their shitty work. They know that what Ive laid out in this thread is fact: amateur breeding under prohibition incites genetic erosion. Do you not understand that? Do YOU want to argue that for them? ok. do it!

Tom Hill is here arguing on behalf of amateur hackjobs because he's in the seed game, but INTENDS to do good work. I think he could and would do good work too -and Chimera would- if it was legal to breed pot on a proper scale. But since it is not, they DONT. They dont have to do anything but make simple crosses and people will rely on the fact that they know more about genetics than the next guys, but thats not enough to make their seeds better. Its a numbers game too. And all the insight in the world doesnt make up for the deficits of short-term programs on small populations, no progeny tests, no F1 hybrid production, etc..

You should stop buying seeds. The dumbed down seeds you can make in your own home are no different than the dumbed down seeds youre buying from these seedmaker fools.
I dont produce seeds for any reasons any more. Do you think I would continue to make poor seeds and then tell you not to make your poor seeds? jesus...If it were legal, I could make better seeds for sure...but its not, so for now you and I and Tom and Chimera all make the same kind of seeds. Eroded unstabilized polyhybrids.

You know what clones are, dont you? Use em. You dont NEED to be making seeds and ruining the potential of the drug genepool.

Fish On!! later

 

[URUK]

i was bringing this up because: i know how people behave when they are new to a site like this, and you def. don't behave like this, a blind man could tell you are a 2nd nick, now the question that arises is: why don't you use your 1st nick?

I havn't stated I'm new have I ? nor should it concern you, all that should is what is written in posts.

 

[VerdantGreen]

first, thanks to nvisionary for answering my previous questions. this whole concept about preserving genes is very thought-provoking, but i still think what is being proposed is both extreme and unpracticable.
if a lucky grower had an old 10 pack of, say, BG C99, or skunk1 or whatever, wouldnt it be better for him to make some seeds when he grew them out rather than not do so? i think to not make seeds at all just because it cant be done perfectly is kind of throwing the baby away with the bath water.

i wonder how many genetics would have been lost if no-one had ever made their own seeds on a small scale?. sure there are many mediocre hybrids made too but where do they go? - nowhere fast if they are crap - they will get grown out once and discarded, just as i have not kept hold of mums if i am not very inpressed with a strain (having limited space encourages ruthless quality control )

i also think that breeding by selection to get strains that are suitable for one's own environment or needs is a valuable practice that has surely bought a lot of good with it too.

there has to be a compromise, a third way that is palatable to those wanting to preserve genetic diversity as well as those who just want good sensi to get high on - and cuttings isnt the answer - too esoteric and to easy to loose.

wouldnt it be sensible for anyone embarking on a breeding project to first make seeds using as many genetics he has available (whether it be 10 or 100 or 1000 seeds) these could then be the backup, the seedlot that contains as many of the genetics as possible. then the breeder could go on and make his selections towards what he is driving at without permamently losing any diversity.

here in the UK, cannabis being legal has got further away recently, doing nothing until legalisation is in itself taking a big risk of standing still for a long long time - and if seeds become illegal (it's possible) then those who have been making a few seeds for a rainy day could be very glad that they did.

come on guys, get real about this - give us some advice or guidlines we have a chance of following in the real world.

V.

 

[Tom Hill]

Nvisionary,

Nope, I am here arguing on behalf of amateur hackjobs because I know it's a numbers game and some of them will succeed, it's inevitable - and you can't wiggle around that try as you may.

Just like I can't wiggle around the fact that somebody might pick-up my stock and do a better job with it than I - whether that event would be intentional and well planned or not does not concern me in the least. The fact is that germplasm I have spent decades collecting and maintaining stands a better chance today than it did one year ago in regards to its existence in the future.

More than 50% of this "gene pool" we have on this site is still likely derived from a very small handful of lines -like 3-4 haha. Putting forward the notion that this IS the gene pool ALL IN has a 100% probability of having me lmao - it would probably be tripled with a couple more guys' collections lol.

If you were to speak more generally instead of in absolutes I'd have a much easier time agreeing with you (just 2 examples- Re-mixes of re-mixes are RARELY beneficial, and short term programs based solely around phenotypic selection and small populations are RARELY effective <- this is correct, what you said, isn't), and do overall on much of this, though I believe we'd still disagree on the details regarding the best course of action.

My point is that you can not use the "it's a numbers game" when it's convenient, then tuck all that back in your pocket again when it suits. Well, you can, but it's not truthful regarding the subject matter.-Tom

PS, Have a good trip amigo.

 

[Vorsprung]

You know you wont be seeing any of these speed hacks on this thread. They dont have the 'ammo' to defend their shitty work. They know that what Ive laid out in this thread is fact: amateur breeding under prohibition incites genetic erosion. Do you not understand that? Do YOU want to argue that for them? ok. do it!

Doing the best they can under the circumstances they work -- and all with a good attitude - something to take note of.

As long as cannabis grows wild you can not erode the NATURAL genetic pool. I would view the seed companies as 'side branches' of the pool that have been taken from wild refined, interbred, etc. Sure some may be going down the wrong path, others the 'better' path from larger pools of selection. Either way who gives a shit it doesn't "ruin" the gene pool. Cannabis has evolved in the wild for thousands of years and you think you're making the gene pool BETTER because you're breeding solely for resin production and psychoactivity? Sorry.. there is so much more cannabis has to offer than to bottleneck the genetics (which is okay, because it's done in controlled situations, out of the wild). You're like a man trapped on an island full of one legged people screaming "oh my god what has happened to humanity! we have all been ruined!" not able to understand your island is not the world.

 

[SOTF420]

why does he go around canna-sites and tell people who knew steve personally that their spg cut isn't real?

I wonder why most Sweet Tooth backcrosses like #3, #4 smell exactly like pink grapefruit then? LMAO

If ANYONE had the real SPG it was Steve and because of him many of these other newer breeders have his fantastic bred strains (from very large populations in Switzerland) to recross and call new interesting names. We need more Breeders like Steve from SOL. His Sweet Tooth is so damn stable that the progency from it's inbred seeds grow out like clones. Every single plant I have ever seen from a pack of SOL seeds was good, same with any phenos - some different but all good. That's what good selection to begin with will get you.

 

[VerdantGreen]

You should stop buying seeds. The dumbed down seeds you can make in your own home are no different than the dumbed down seeds youre buying from these seedmaker fools.

that sounds like a good reason to makes seeds - if the choice is to make seeds youself for free or pay 100's for someone elses seeds that you say are just as bad

You know what clones are, dont you? Use em. You dont NEED to be making seeds and ruining the potential of the drug genepool.

Fish On!! later

easy to say if you live in cali. not so easy where i am. getting hold of clones is a big enough risk for me to have turned down offer of them on quite a few occasions.

happy fishing

V.

 

[Kaneh]

You should stop buying seeds. The dumbed down seeds you can make in your own home are no different than the dumbed down seeds youre buying from these seedmaker fools.

Well, I have to buy seeds, before I can make my own, right?
+ I don't buy polyhybrids. I think I have one F1 strain, rest what I have right now are landraces and IBL, well technically some of them are probably stabilized polyhybrids, so it won't make difference to you. And you probably think that landrace-seeds are also done with too little population?

I dont produce seeds for any reasons any more. Do you think I would continue to make poor seeds and then tell you not to make your poor seeds? jesus...If it were legal, I could make better seeds for sure...but its not, so for now you and I and Tom and Chimera all make the same kind of seeds. Eroded unstab no ilized polyhybrids.

Why you have to continue making poor seeds? So you have done it before?
Legal issues are not problem to commercial growers, why should it be problem to breeder?
So, basicly you're saying that nobody in this planet makes seeds in "right" way? I find that very hard to believe.
Im basicly hobby-grower and I have done selections from over 100 plants. So 2000-3000 plants shouldn't be problem to pro like yourself? Stop whining and do it the right way, if you really are as good as you say, I'm sure you can make some difference.

You know what clones are, dont you? Use em. You dont NEED to be making seeds and ruining the potential of the drug genepool.

Fish On!! later

Hmm... Clones, think I heard that word before..
I don't use clones anymore. I'm not commercial grower, so I can afford to have couple not so good phenos.
It's more fun using seeds and getting lots of different kinds of plants.
Where I'm standing MJ-genepool looks just fine.

 

[Vorsprung]

that sounds like a good reason to makes seeds - if the choice is to make seeds youself for free or pay 100's for someone elses seeds that you say are just as bad


easy to say if you live in cali. not so easy where i am. getting hold of clones is a big enough risk for me to have turned down offer of them on quite a few occasions.

happy fishing

V.

Yeah don't worry about 'elite clone' marketing garbage. I found two plants from seed (C99 & LA Con...after popping only about 40 total) that are as good or better than any SoCal Master Kush, White Russian, OG Kush, etc that I got from a club cutting. Luck - maybe. Impossible - not at all.. I 'pollen chucked' a random single C99 male to a Hawaiian Purple Kush club cut.. well guess what - the single 'test germ' progeny seed grew to produce much better final flowers than the original mother cutting. Really ruined the gene pool with that one.

There are 'winners' to be found in 'pollen chuck' seeds. That being said I've grown out a bunch of hay, too... but it's worth it to find the couple superstars.

Here is something that will REALLY freak nvisionary out. I have a male Nirvana Papaya that has started throwing female pistils. I've read two schools of thought - one that it will just produce hermie offspring and toss it. The other (heresay from someone saying DJ Short said it) being that males that throw female pistils can produce some extremely potent offspring, and a good chance of female seed. Wives tales? Maybe. Should I do it - will it ruin the gene pool? No - it's all experimenting and fun in the name of learning and experience.

 

[URUK]

Here is something that will REALLY freak nvisionary out. I have a male Nirvana Papaya that has started throwing female pistils. I've read two schools of thought - one that it will just produce hermie offspring and toss it. The other (heresay from someone saying DJ Short said it) being that males that throw female pistils can produce some extremely potent offspring, and a good chance of female seed. Wives tales? Maybe. Should I do it - will it ruin the gene pool? No - it's all experimenting and fun in the name of learning and experience.

there are reasons for this, in this forum, try the breeders lab.

 

[DocLeaf]

Q: What male to use in a cross?

A: Use only those male plants that aren't disregarded.

Hope this helps

 

[whodair]

use g13xhaze male. hes a stud.

 

[GreenintheThumb]

I wonder why most Sweet Tooth backcrosses like #3, #4 smell exactly like pink grapefruit then? LMAO

If ANYONE had the real SPG it was Steve and because of him many of these other newer breeders have his fantastic bred strains (from very large populations in Switzerland) to recross and call new interesting names. We need more Breeders like Steve from SOL. His Sweet Tooth is so damn stable that the progency from it's inbred seeds grow out like clones. Every single plant I have ever seen from a pack of SOL seeds was good, same with any phenos - some different but all good. That's what good selection to begin with will get you.

Yes, Steve did have the original SPG. Then he had to flee Switzerland. He couldn't really take all his clones with him, you see. Now who do you think he went to to get his beloved SPG back? But as I told you: who gives a shit, he isn't growing pot. He got a LEGAL job, notice how he seemed to pass the torch to Koot? And running big numbers is great but whittling that number down to a single male and a single female to sell 1:1 releases is STUPID and poor breeding practices. Continuously backcrossing everything to the SINGLE clone is also a stupid idea. And as I've mentioned to you again and again many people bitched about Swt3 being nothing more than big yielding good tasting hemp. Regardless, the discussion taking place in this thread seems to be beyond your understanding. Please hype Steve's wares somewhere else.

 

[GreenintheThumb]

Nope, I am here arguing on behalf of amateur hackjobs because I know it's a numbers game and some of them will succeed, it's inevitable - and you can't wiggle around that try as you may.

Yes, Tom. Some will produce superior releases. But all simply based on random chance. Don't you think that REAL success would be producing genetic gain WHILE maintaining diversity for the future. Instead of the random shuffling that made OG Kush so great?

Just like I can't wiggle around the fact that somebody might pick-up my stock and do a better job with it than I - whether that event would be intentional and well planned or not does not concern me in the least. The fact is that germplasm I have spent decades collecting and maintaining stands a better chance today than it did one year ago in regards to its existence in the future.

Yes, perhaps someone could pick up your stock and get something nicer. But isn't this due to you not running the numbers you could if this was legal? I also don't understand why this year your stuff has a better chance of survival than last year? You mean because you're selling your seeds I assume?

If you were to speak more generally instead of in absolutes I'd have a much easier time agreeing with you (just 2 examples- Re-mixes of re-mixes are RARELY beneficial, and short term programs based solely around phenotypic selection and small populations are RARELY effective <- this is correct, what you said, isn't), and do overall on much of this, though I believe we'd still disagree on the details regarding the best course of action.

And in regards to preservation of diversity how rarely are they effective? Even less often, I'd say. So what, every once in a while the random genetic drift that makes up this seed biz results in something great. It isn't worth the gene loss in many people's eyes.

My point is that you can not use the "it's a numbers game" when it's convenient, then tuck all that back in your pocket again when it suits. Well, you can, but it's not the truthful re the subject matter.-Tom

If you concentrate on preservation instead of the random chance of genetic drift giving you a good clone or line I think you'll see he's being very truthful.

PS, Have a good trip amigo.

 

[Tom Hill]

Yes, some will produce superior releases due to sheer numbers collectively. Is this ideal? Maybe not, maybe not by a long shot (though, if you back away from it, it might resemble plots, thousands strong, assuming the cream can rise to the top -collectively- and I see some evidence of this every time we share another clone etc), but it is -none the less- undeniable, for it is a numbers game.

Yes, I think my stock stands a better chance of surviving into the future than before because more numbers will be ran -collectively- than ever before.

In regards to maintenance of diversity within a population. It's the frequency of more rare alleles and allelic combinations that will determine an effective population size for regeneration and nobody anywhere has come up with the perfect number I don't think, the more the better is all that can truly be said.

If Nvisionary would just tweak his comments some, oh, he's fudging it around and bending the rules plenty - knowingly, and quite purposefully too, lol. Let's wait till he gets back though man not fair to bombard him when he's away from the office.-Tom

 

[GreenintheThumb]

No way, now's the time to really badmouth him .

Seriously, don't you think maybe some hemp breeders have looked into the proper population size? I'd be surprised if they didn't. But then again they can't even agree on sex determinism, seems like they may as well be breeding in closets as well.

And IMO thousands of noobs popping ten packs is a far cry from you or me actually looking at 1000 plants at once. When your sample size is that small you can't tell the keepers from the trash at all. Well, I guess you can tell the keepers, but many more people would choose to live in garbage and not know it

 

[Tom Hill]

Yes, I think Hemp breeders came up with 1000 plants for monoecious, and 2000 for dioecious per regeneration cycle to retain 99%. These numbers are based on retaining alleles that occur at X frequency within a population (too lazy to do the math, lol, but the real number is --> more is better). Here http://crop.scijournals.org/cgi/content/full/44/6/2246