Stabilizing desirable traits in heterozygous plants?

[moses wellfleet]

I am sure this subject has been beaten to death I have a clone of Burmaberry which I would like to make crosses with but I want to try and first work with it so that it passes on more of its desirable traits to the progeny.

I already out crossed it to another untested line, the results were volatile to say the least, from pure sativas to pure indicas and every imaginable combination in between.

I know that Burmaberry is a cross of shiksaberry #3 and a Burmese land race or at least an IBL (reeferman seeds). I believe it was a straight pollen chuck, no real breeding was done.

Obviously an IBL would have been first prize but I don't have a male. So that leaves back crossing. But I remember chimera saying that back crossing a known heterozygous plant is futile. So what options does this leave me?

 

[Tom Hill]

Not beaten to death and not sufficiently answered often either, and it's a damn good question.

If you are experiencing volatile results it is because the individual is indeed heterozygous. What needs to be done is to find an offspring/s of the individual that is homozygous, yet gives the same phenotype, and use that as the parent/s in further breeding projects. The most efficient way to do this would be to self the individual, and then do the same with it's small percentage of it's outstanding progeny, and rank said individuals according to their homozygosity. Then explore crosses etc with the highest ranking individuals within that scenario.

 

[moses wellfleet]

I was hoping for a reply from either Tom or Chimera so it looks like its my day!


I only recently became interested in selfing so I don't know too much about it as a breeding tool. Would the technique described above hold all the benefits of a true IBL?. Is selfing like back crossing in that it leads to inbreeding depression very quickly?

If I understand you correctly I should self each subsequent generation of desirable individuals until I see the traits under selection breeding true?

 

[Tom Hill]

Hey again Moses howzit, and thanks for the kind thought man.

Yes various breeding methods that utilize selfing are the most efficient ways to create inbred lines.

Inbreeding depression is caused by a deficit of heterozygous individuals within any given population, and yet, that is a goal of a true breeding line.

Whether or not inbreeding in this or any other manner will cause problematic issues to arise in any given population is very much under the influence of the starting material, the method/s used, and how it is carried out from beginning to end.

Yes I think you have it correct, but to expand further, let's give a couple of examples.

Example 1)

We self Burmaberry, grow out 100 seeds and self the single most outstanding example of it's progeny again. This gives rise to another 100 and we repeat. By about the S3, although the line is beginning to firm up and express our desired phenotype in a larger percentage of the population, vigor and fitness are clearly on the wane, inbreeding depression is setting in. This will often happen, and is an example of how the technique may be misused, as we left ourselves no proper countering of negative effects.

Example 2)

We self Burmaberry, grow out 100 seeds and self the 5 most outstanding individuals. Grow their progeny in 5 separate plots and label them families 1-5. From within those families, we again look for the top 5% without regard to which family they come from. You might get two outstanding individuals from family 1 but zero from family 2, etc, so family 2 is over, culled from the program. As we continue, by about the S3 generation we might decide that family 1 and family 3 are performing the best of all. They are both producing a high percentage of our ideotype, except now they are doing so in a homozygous (true breeding) condition unlike our original clone.

The other thing to note, is while the original clone might have been Aa/Bb/etc at some loci, family 1 might be aa/BB at the same, yet family 3 might be AA/bb/etc, all at the same locus/loci, yet all giving rise to the same ideal phenotype. At the end (and sometimes during) of these cycles, you can now bring several outstanding individuals from family 1 and family 3 and mate or bulk them together, restoring fitness/vigor to the line, and countering the deficit of heterozygous individuals within the population. This would be an example of how these techniques may be used more properly to counter some concerns one may have regarding inbreeding depression and etc.

 

[moses wellfleet]

Very interesting to me that a heterozygous plant can still produce homozygous individuals, with the desired traits, in its progeny. Obviously this is why it is so important to select from as large a population as possible.

Tom if I have a clone and I know nothing of its history would it be advisable to cross it with a known true breeding line, to reveal its stability?

 

[inquest]

Self the clone. Grow out the S1's. Look for the Mendelian ratios that should arise in different traits.

Aa x Aa = AA,Aa, & aa @ 25%, 50%, & 25%.

 

[moses wellfleet]

Ok I get it so selfing has become a serious breeding tool!

If I use pollen from a reversed female and I out cross it to an unrelated line then will the resultant seeds still be so called 'feminized' seed?

 

[gloryoskie]

Yup.

 

[moses wellfleet]

I think I have almost enough info to get started on my breeding project. I will update in this thread!

Off to study Phenomenal's thread on making colloidal silver!

 

[scai]

Ok I get it so selfing has become a serious breeding tool!

If I use pollen from a reversed female and I out cross it to an unrelated line then will the resultant seeds still be so called 'feminized' seed?

If I understand right, that has nothing to do with selfing, it's about breeding all female plants and they can be what ever progeny/line/cross you choose?

 

[moses wellfleet]

The question was: does the plant have to be self pollinated to ensure all female seeds... Or can you use that same pollen from the reversed female to pollinate unrelated plants and still get female seeds?

Are you saying no you can't?

What has nothing to do with what?

 

[scai]

I'm sorry if I might not understand right.
Not my language this english.

What I'm trying to say, that if you pollinate female with female ( reversed ) they are going to be females, cause there is no male part in progeny..
There is only allele xx=female.
So the progeny is always females.
The pollen can come from lady itself or from some other female, some other cross/landrace too?
This is what I have understood.

 

[FRIENDinDEED]

FRIENDinDEED ((sits down with pad and pen)) all eyes and ears guys!!!

 

[FRIENDinDEED]

Ok I get it so selfing has become a serious breeding tool!

If I use pollen from a reversed female and I out cross it to an unrelated line then will the resultant seeds still be so called 'feminized' seed?

QUESTION (for the panel): so when ppl advertise "feminized seeds", do they mean that the seeds will definitely grow out to be females OR do they mean that that particular line has been self pollinated from a female plant as what moses wellfleet described?

 

[mega72]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]

[/FONT]

QUESTION (for the panel): so when ppl advertise "feminized seeds", do they mean that the seeds will definitely grow out to be females OR do they mean that that particular line has been self pollinated from a female plant as what moses wellfleet described?

As far as I know:
I think the first seeds of this type were advertised as "female seeds" (cant remember which company right now) however there is a certain percentage that can turn out male (look at peyote purple people are hunting for the males) so they changed the term to "feminized seeds" , because they cannot guarantee they will be definite females... not that they intend to educate you that the particular line has been self pollinated, because I can take two different females from the same line and cross them to reduce inbreeding depression... with "feminized" most seed companies are trying to say "mostly female" IMO

Edit: the definitive term for self pollinated is S1
so "feminized" can be an S1 or two females from the same line or even an outcross of two females...

and what i believe to be true is that there are no true females, its a sliding scale, so thats how you see male looking plants in the crosses.

 

[stoney917]

I would breed it to sumthing that is tested and has a known production history to see.... U say I bred it to a untested line so see what ya get it could be the other line fuckin shit up...
Listen to mr hill tho he knows more then most....
Some solid advice i gotten many many many years ago....guy wasnt breed cannabis butwhen it comes to breeding anything ...... U gotta cull hard to get desired results... Leave no middle ground nuthin is ok or maybe...if the speciman has undesired traits kill em all and move on and keep selecting.... Anything else is a waste of time and not worth feeding.... U do this long enough u will get ur desired results in time..... Good luck brotha....
I had a original Burmese that smelled and tasted lie straight BBQ sauce miss her a lot...

 

[stoney917]

Friend in deed ..... To ur ? Lol ... The seed company mean u are gaureenteed all female plants with no variation all identicle to clone mom.... That's what they mean and want to say to sell there seeds.... But in reality It's a crapshoot with any seeds and ppl always find things there not supposed to or said they wouldn't.... As for males found in these feminized lines I'm not certain but I can recall mr hill sayin sumthin along the lines as they are not true males but Hermed girls that just show male flowers and look like boys...Sumthin along them lines... When he back he clear it up... May have been chimera who broke that down for me ... Was def one of them cuz I wouldn't have retained that info if it just came from anyone.... Would of been in one ear out the other... When Tom or chimera speak ur not the only one takin notes...

 

[fadetoclear]

i have a question, in the original post, the term "self" is used in the context of crossing to it's own father correct? this term is also used to mean reversing females through stress.

 

[moses wellfleet]

Reversing means to induce male flowers on a female plant by spraying with colloidal silver... The female plant is then 'self' pollinated with pollen from said male flowers!

 

[fadetoclear]

so how is this considered an acceptable breeding technique?? it may be good for producing seeds from a clone only but as a general breeding practice, it should be avoided at all cost. this is the prime reason we have so many hermi ridden genetics in the pool. "selfing" in the context you've used it should NEVER be used in a proper breeding line.

i found it hard to believe tom hill was condoning reverse sexing so i looked back at his post and it seems to me that by using the word "self" he meant to cross it within it's own immediate gene pool (IE crossing with it's own father) then picking from that line, the plants that best represent the pheno you are trying to achieve.

the original post in this thread related to how one could lock down certain traits in a heterozygous line. at no point would reversing a female plant help in that endeavor. the term "self" has been used pretty freely lately what with all the people trying hard to make seeds from clone only's.