Genetic Drift?
- Thread starter krunchbubble
- Start date
I clearly said mutations are usually caused only by extreme stresses like radiation.
Get off my nutsack if you can't even remember what I said, troll. And while you are at it try to educate yourself.
Last edited:
both. disease resistance is integral to the plant's environmental response.
Nice article. I had said earlier that the structure and functioning of the epigenome must be programed by the genome.
At any rate, since it is only a percentage of the clones from a given mother which "dud out" epigenetic response still seems much more probable than mutation. The fact that the tops on "dud plants" seem to regain health, is also indicative that my original instinctive answer was spot on.
Last edited:
K
kopite
right on... I'm enjoying the line of conversation... interesting concepts...
Methinks legalization will eventually open the door to all manner of interesting labwork.
A mutation can occur simply by overwatering a plant, or overfeeding. It can also occur when we soak a female in silver nitrate solution and produce male stamen...stress induced mutations. Common occurrences.Grat3fulh3ad said:
But then, I see you have been doing a little editing. (typical crawdad move)
Look, I am here to discuss and learn like everyone else. I also will offer up what I have to others. I am not the dumbass you like to make me out to be, Head. I actually have my college degree(s) (that's plural, Jr.) and am quite learned and at the top of my craft.
And I think it was you that claimed to be a dropout. (shrug)
In any event, I suggest you leave your goddamn condescending shit in the off topic threads.
You tell me how you already had the thing nailed down in your first response (thanks btw for providing the number of the post otherwise I might not have found it)sheesh(
yet your response was accompanied by a question mark. Were you not as confident when you typed it as you are now? What changed, did you see someone agree with you?
I'd go back and edit that too if I were you.
Fuck you very much!
That's some of the most ignorant posting I've ever read. Those are not mutations.
Reversing sex does not involve altering the DNA. You are confusing still genetic/epigenetic response with mutation.
It sounds like you do not really understand what a mutation is.
mutation |myoōˈtā sh ən|
noun
the changing of the structure of a gene, resulting in a variant form that may be transmitted to subsequent generations, caused by the alteration of single base units in DNA, or the deletion, insertion, or rearrangement of larger sections of genes or chromosomes.
Mutations are changes in the DNA sequence of a cell's genome and are caused by radiation, some viruses, transposons and mutagenic chemicals, as well as occasional random errors that occur during meiosis or DNA replication.
Please explain how overwatering or overfeeding or any other common stress could alter the genome, since you must know something the rest of the world does not.
Please try to sell me the idea that overwatering causes molecular decay.
And... yes I nailed it on my first response... the "?" was rhetorical.
Last edited:
OK, I may have been mispeaking about mutation.
Now, will you admit that your edited post claiming my so much bullshit was also so much bullshit?
Now, will you admit that your edited post claiming my so much bullshit was also so much bullshit?
And can we now conclude that your instinctive, nail on the head answer (what was it..post #10?) was not the proper diagnosis after all? I mean, we are talking about clones of clones here, right?
The correct answer is more likely that not epigenetic, with a very high degree of probability.
I will admit that the manner in which I posted my original response was intended to insert the term epigenetic to the quest for a solution. I thought I was being tongue in cheek by phrasing a rhetorical question similarly to the thread title. I did not consider that some would take it too literally or think it was an actual question.
I did follow it up with clarification, but as I was responding to rick about another post when I did, I can see where it was easily overlooked.
I should have put the word "genetic" in front of drift, in the section you just quoted. Epigenetic drift could most certainly occur when cloning clones clones, but I would have left no room for nitpickers had I said "change" instead of drift. Thanks for policing my semantics, it'll keep me on the ball making sure I phrase things in a more untrollable language.
The problem he's having is due to epigenetic changes most likely, and I'll continue to stand by that assertion and clarify any point of it which is misunderstood.
I will admit that the manner in which I posted my original response was intended to insert the term epigenetic to the quest for a solution. I thought I was being tongue in cheek by phrasing a rhetorical question similarly to the thread title. I did not consider that some would take it too literally or think it was an actual question.
I did follow it up with clarification, but as I was responding to rick about another post when I did, I can see where it was easily overlooked.
I should have put the word "genetic" in front of drift, in the section you just quoted. Epigenetic drift could most certainly occur when cloning clones clones, but I would have left no room for nitpickers had I said "change" instead of drift. Thanks for policing my semantics, it'll keep me on the ball making sure I phrase things in a more untrollable language.
The problem he's having is due to epigenetic changes most likely, and I'll continue to stand by that assertion and clarify any point of it which is misunderstood.
I'm glad you learned something.
I consider a day passing without my having learned something to be a wasted day.
Now how about addressing the bullshit you edited?
point out what you perceive as "the bullshit" and I'll address it. I often spend a minute or two editing a post I just made, refining the language or adding evidence, to try and keep nit-picky trolls at bay, so I have no clue which post you are talking about.
The bullshit I referenced in post #128, and provided a quote of in post #126.
No bullshit.
From my first post I said the answer is epigenetic. I never said anything which was bullshit, and never said I thought it was anything other than epigenetic.
You understand that the term heritable changes applies to clones too, right?
Heritable changes simply means that the changes last through multiple cell divisions, it is not restricted to transgenerational heritability. Epigenetic changes are reversible, mutations are not.
Everything you were describing as mutations could correctly be labeled epigenetic changes.
Genetic drift generally occurs over multiple line bred generations.
Eppigenetic drift occurs over multiple cell divisions.
It's fairly simple to understand.
which I addressed in post #s 129 and now again in post 134.
Look, this is ridiculous. You made the following quote:
Just wanting to set things straight here. I take high offense to being told what to do and how to do it by those who are just as fucked up. You feel me?
You and your knowledge are not infallible.
And again, I am wanting to start a clean slate here, and I suggest you keep your comments to and about me from now on in the off topic sections. I refuse to lock horns with your ass in these fine threads. If you don't like what I post, fine and fucking dandy...post up what you will, but leave your suggestions to me out of it. You feel me?
The quote is also the one I was referring to when you chastised me and spouted off something about me not remembering what you posted. Well you edited it out apparently, but not before I had already quoted it. Was this not really a bonehead thing to post? Or are you going to qualify it as usual?Grat3fulh3ad said:
Just wanting to set things straight here. I take high offense to being told what to do and how to do it by those who are just as fucked up. You feel me?
You and your knowledge are not infallible.
And again, I am wanting to start a clean slate here, and I suggest you keep your comments to and about me from now on in the off topic sections. I refuse to lock horns with your ass in these fine threads. If you don't like what I post, fine and fucking dandy...post up what you will, but leave your suggestions to me out of it. You feel me?
I made that post only after I tried to say it politely, and you bashed me for it. Your use of the term was incorrect, I proved it, you admitted to it. No mutagen affected the plants, and simple stress is not a mutagen. I apologize if the manner in which I said so was offensive to you.
Please provide the post number of my alleged edit. The bottom of the post will show exactly when I edited it, if it was more than a minute or so after the post was originally made.
No I do not feel you.
I have never told you what do do or how, only made a couple of suggestions. Wether or not, I'm 'just as fucked up' is in the eye of the beholder, but rest assured I will not ever bother posting up when I have no clue.
I know I am not infallible, and have never implied that I am.
I do have a habit of not replying in a thread unless I know I can back up my post, so it may make me seem like I think I know everything... but there are plenty of subjects about which I would not dare post because I am clueless... cockfighting, for example, or mycology, or cars.
I will avoid direct dialogue from now on, if that is your wish... but if you post up something off base as an answer to someone's questions, I might correct it.
I would appreciate it if you would do me the same courtesy. If I say anything you can prove wrong, feel free to do so, but the random slinging of insult has gotten a bit trite.
Right on? clean slate? we leave the animosity and/or cockiness at the door? I'm game if you are.
For the record, my initial statement to hoosier was " You are headed in the right direction but, study up on epigenetics to increase your understanding of the inner workings of biology, and the mechanisms by which temporary heritable changes in genetic expression can be made resulting from environmental problems. It is not a "stressful mutation", it is an epigenetic change induced environmentally." after telling him i'd pegged the answer already.
and I thought it was a polite way to let him know his ideas concerning mutation were unrealistic.
Once again, hoos... I'm sorry the manner of the suggestion upset you.
and I thought it was a polite way to let him know his ideas concerning mutation were unrealistic.
Once again, hoos... I'm sorry the manner of the suggestion upset you.
Thanks for the entertainment guys. 
and for the record, I have met H3ad in person and I can say that what he says about himself is true. Dude is very humble and he knows a good bit about this plant.
You can't argue what has not been officially studied. Prohibition of Cannabis has left all the research on this species up to those who put their lives at risk to grow it. Let's face it, there are no lab studies on why cannabis plants grow they way they grow and genomes and epigenomes and mutations and ball sacks and little hairy calyxes. We are all basing off of what we have experienced and researched which is based on research of other plants. Genetics is a crazy science...
I have been thinking a lot about genetics, epigenetics and memetics. I saw a video of Soma speaking about memes and it got my thinking juice flowing. Epigenetics is a new term for me, hell I didn't even know what it was until H3ad dropped it in this thread. I know what it is, just never knew what it was called. A theory I came up with while writing in a notebook of random thoughts I have was, what if Michael Jordan never grew up to play basketball? Would he be 6'6 and have hands that could palm a basketball? What if Michael Phelps(what is it with the best being called Mike?) never swam for a living? Would his feet be the size of fins and his shoulders be so massive? To me these are epigenetics. These are changes, both physical and mental, in an organism found in the genome that are unlocked by environmental causes. Both Mikes did their thing their whole life...during their growth in their teens their bodies reacted to this environmental stimulation and changed based on that environment. Are these genetic changes? On a genetic level...not quite, these is no change in the DNA strands themselves...this is REAL mutation. Think of a DNA strand as a hallway with open and closed doors. The open doors are dominant genes and the closed doors are recessive genes. Epigenetics can open these closed doors as an organism lives to better adapt that organism to whatever environment it is in. A mutation would be blowing a hole in the wall instead of unlocking the door. Unfortunately with blowing a hole in the wall you can also severely impact the structure and this is where mutation starts to go bad.
What if Phelps played basketball and Jordan swam instead? Would Jordan have Phelps physical qualities and vice versa? I can't say...I have never done the experiment nor do I think I have any qualifications to do anything like that. This is just random thoughts from the mind of a somewhat intelligent human being...don't take me too seriously, like I said I don't think I am even qualified to speak on the subject but I have this aching itch to share my thoughts.
and for the record, I have met H3ad in person and I can say that what he says about himself is true. Dude is very humble and he knows a good bit about this plant. You can't argue what has not been officially studied. Prohibition of Cannabis has left all the research on this species up to those who put their lives at risk to grow it. Let's face it, there are no lab studies on why cannabis plants grow they way they grow and genomes and epigenomes and mutations and ball sacks and little hairy calyxes. We are all basing off of what we have experienced and researched which is based on research of other plants. Genetics is a crazy science...
I have been thinking a lot about genetics, epigenetics and memetics. I saw a video of Soma speaking about memes and it got my thinking juice flowing. Epigenetics is a new term for me, hell I didn't even know what it was until H3ad dropped it in this thread. I know what it is, just never knew what it was called. A theory I came up with while writing in a notebook of random thoughts I have was, what if Michael Jordan never grew up to play basketball? Would he be 6'6 and have hands that could palm a basketball? What if Michael Phelps(what is it with the best being called Mike?) never swam for a living? Would his feet be the size of fins and his shoulders be so massive? To me these are epigenetics. These are changes, both physical and mental, in an organism found in the genome that are unlocked by environmental causes. Both Mikes did their thing their whole life...during their growth in their teens their bodies reacted to this environmental stimulation and changed based on that environment. Are these genetic changes? On a genetic level...not quite, these is no change in the DNA strands themselves...this is REAL mutation. Think of a DNA strand as a hallway with open and closed doors. The open doors are dominant genes and the closed doors are recessive genes. Epigenetics can open these closed doors as an organism lives to better adapt that organism to whatever environment it is in. A mutation would be blowing a hole in the wall instead of unlocking the door. Unfortunately with blowing a hole in the wall you can also severely impact the structure and this is where mutation starts to go bad.
What if Phelps played basketball and Jordan swam instead? Would Jordan have Phelps physical qualities and vice versa? I can't say...I have never done the experiment nor do I think I have any qualifications to do anything like that. This is just random thoughts from the mind of a somewhat intelligent human being...don't take me too seriously, like I said I don't think I am even qualified to speak on the subject but I have this aching itch to share my thoughts.
now i understand...
i wonder how many other growers have had this happen before their very eyes and kept mum? i know i did for a little while - its some twilight zone action for sure.
