is this how you breed quality genetics?

[Mr. Lovebuzzed]

Tom and Chimera understand not only everything that has been done, but also why it succeeded, and everything that should be done from here on out. Not that clown that is yapping about GSC, not that clown that bred your favorite what the fuck ever, and not you, understand wtf is going on with any of this if this is your input. We can have a 20 minute conversation with you and turn you into a pot-star. But you seem to want to cling desperately, to avoiding that whole conversation altogether. Why? And no, you have no clue now, make zero mistake, this is exactly where you are starting. Okay then, go.

hi Tom, fun to read you nad yes i have no clue, cause i didnt get any from you.. for me clue is a fact.. not idea, not concept, not method... gimme those homozygous seeds, that should be fact.. hope they are not boring like skunk1..

also i dont see any other breeders coming here and agitating.. they just work in silence, and work good, like ACE or CBG..

the problem with scientists is that they believe the Reason has no limits.. scientific faith its you who tries to regulate mistake or unpredictable, with maths and probability, its funny if we assume polydiversity, multiplicity of cannabis genes, tendency to reduce heterogeneity is leading your logic..

homozygous is just concept, in some logic program which starts your method.. and in these limits(hypothesis) its real.. but its not fact, cannabis fact fact of cannabis is irreducible heterogeneity.. you cant count it right?

 

[purple_man]

ow shit! here we go again

blessss

 

[VerdantGreen]

I think the people that needed to see that information were paying attention at the time. Thanks again Tom for taking the time to spread the knowledge/information. I particularly enjoyed the exchange with GMT. That, along with the link to ebay, was pure gold. (Note: Tom advised using a ratio of 3:9 rather than the 1:9 that is recommended by BudResearch.com).

M.

i can sympathise with the mods, it cant be much fun dealing with all that argy bargy... but in the shady world of cannabis, where most people's practices diverged from science a long while ago, info and knowledge like that is a rare and precious commodity, and destroying it is kind of moving into Fahrenheit 451 territory
i was just in the middle of re-reading it too, so thanks for the google cache link.

VG

 

[bombadil.360]

hi Tom, fun to read you nad yes i have no clue, cause i didnt get any from you.. for me clue is a fact.. not idea, not concept, not method... gimme those homozygous seeds, that should be fact.. hope they are not boring like skunk1..

also i dont see any other breeders coming here and agitating.. they just work in silence, and work good, like ACE or CBG..

the problem with scientists is that they believe the Reason has no limits.. scientific faith its you who tries to regulate mistake or unpredictable, with maths and probability, its funny if we assume polydiversity, multiplicity of cannabis genes, tendency to reduce heterogeneity is leading your logic..

homozygous is just concept, in some logic program which starts your method.. and in these limits(hypothesis) its real.. but its not fact, cannabis fact fact of cannabis is irreducible heterogeneity.. you cant count it right?

in all fairness, can you point us to where Tom is advertising homozygous seeds though?

take the haze he works with, he clearly states that the most desirable plants out of the heterogeneous lot will show at a rate of 5%.

also, science understood properly, as well as the proper application of its tools, leaves quite clear the fact of the limitations imposed on us by nature in relation to what is possible.

if you re-read Chimera's post, you also see this clearly stated, as well as the fact that by nature's design, cannabis is heterogeneous, and breeding only helps us to an extent in reaching homogenous results within very understood limits.

science helps us understanding our limitations, and hence helps us in setting methods to achieve realistic goals.

that's the whole point, specially in regards the claims of several seed sellers who claim they create and control their breeding projects at will.

peace

 

[Mr. Lovebuzzed]

its induction: because the most of S1 plants resemble parent in most traits, parent is homozygous.

but induction is not empirical at all.. induction provides forms of theory through analysis, its concept and not empiric, empiric cognition go through so called contrainductive methods. thats why scientist has to have pluralistic methodology and bashing human nose, or human body as an instrument of cognition is just tendency to state that Reason knows more than senses while Reason has all material from senses.. tendency against plural of methods.. mathematics is only logic method, and adds nothing to reality, cause its composed of parities..

only your way is right? uniformity of method? uniformity is place where real science disappears..

 

[bombadil.360]

its induction: because the most of S1 plants resemble parent in most traits, parent is homozygous.

but induction is not empirical at all.. induction provides forms of theory through analysis, its concept and not empiric, empiric cognition go through so called contrainductive methods. thats why scientist has to have pluralistic methodology and bashing human nose, or human body as an instrument of cognition is just tendency to state that Reason knows more than senses while Reason has all material from senses.. tendency against plural of methods.. mathematics is only logic method, and adds nothing to reality, cause its composed of parities..

only your way is right? uniformity of method? uniformity is place where real science disappears..

so far, no one has claimed that one must get rid of one's ability to discern through the senses in the name of the almighty reason.

what was actually said, is that through discerning desirability of traits through looks and smells alone, that such will not yield knowledge of whether an individual will pass on said discerned traits consistently enough to its progeny.

again, you seem to have missed the point.

peace

 

[Mr. Lovebuzzed]

in all fairness, can you point us to where Tom is advertising homozygous seeds though?

t

i thought its goal of his method, to reduce occurrence or presence of heterozygous plants.. no? cause through selfing and succeeding work of maths Tom selects homozygous plants.. why then? for what?

weed is weed. do you understand this parity?

 

[Mr. Lovebuzzed]

so far, no one has claimed that one must get rid of one's ability to discern through the senses in the name of the almighty reason.

i canz find it sorry bro, but im sure Tom Hill will confirm that he prefers other method to select over selecting plants by Nose.. because if you should sniff hundred plants - normal numbers in his breeding programs or projects i dunno. - your Nose can die

 

[bombadil.360]

i thought its goal of his method, to reduce occurrence or presence of heterozygous plants.. no?

that's the goal of most breeders, no?

however, the honesty expressed by breeders in general of up to what point nature allows us such a thing is quite another thing.

personally, I do not like the selfing method, even though I understand that it is effective and quite efficient; I still like the trial and error and time consuming effort involved in a more traditional female x male selection; mainly because of the heterogeneous nature of cannabis, more than one pheno and chemo-type are able to offer desirable traits within any given population.

peace

 

[purple_man]

in the end it must come down to INTENSIVE progeny testing with huge # (100s of thousands and more)... hence it is nearly impossible for canna breeders to do real breeding when it comes to achieving the set breeding programm goals (think about how many folks would be needed to at least document the physiological differences amongst the phenos?), next step would be evaluating the effect/flavor/etc... as well as having to deal with traits which are percieved very subjectivly (taste, effect)...

hence the easiest and most prevelant/common route is pollenchucking, hoping for "bag appeal"/high resin ammount/stank/etc... and if those traits ain't there, just give it a crazy name and hope rappers will jump on the bandwagon

blessss

 

[bombadil.360]

i canz find it sorry bro, but im sure Tom Hill will confirm that he prefers other method to select over selecting plants by Nose.. because if you should sniff hundred plants - normal numbers in his breeding programs or projects i dunno. - your Nose can die

lol, I'll let Tom answer that one, I really dunno what are his personal criteria for selection...

even though I'm sure everyone smells their plants to the utmost

peace

 

[FRIENDinDEED]

hi Tom, fun to read you nad yes i have no clue, cause i didnt get any from you.. for me clue is a fact.. not idea, not concept, not method... gimme those homozygous seeds, that should be fact.. hope they are not boring like skunk1..

also i dont see any other breeders coming here and agitating.. they just work in silence, and work good, like ACE or CBG..

the problem with scientists is that they believe the Reason has no limits.. scientific faith its you who tries to regulate mistake or unpredictable, with maths and probability, its funny if we assume polydiversity, multiplicity of cannabis genes, tendency to reduce heterogeneity is leading your logic..

homozygous is just concept, in some logic program which starts your method.. and in these limits(hypothesis) its real.. but its not fact, cannabis fact fact of cannabis is irreducible heterogeneity.. you cant count it right?

AHHHHH YES THERE YOU ARE!!!

yeah, you seem to be like the clowns I left at the last thread, the very reason why I started this one in the first place.

I started this because I had my own ideas, thoughts as to what a breeders should be looking for and actually doing with regard to breeding quality strains.

thing is, I always knew that it couldnt just rely on what I have termed "scratch and sniff" breeding, but there are other aspects of science that need to and actually should be involved. someone else on the other thread referred to breeding , specifically to aspect of selection, as a "science and art", I think that was the first time anything on the internet has ever enraged me!!! a "science and art" ?!?!?!?! since when?!?!?

so yeah, I can already see the hippie in you emerging in this thread. all you "woosaah" "Shangri-La" breeders need to take a back seat to what science has to say. thing is, without the proper scientific research all you ever do is grab at straws and do things in an incomplete manner, I think the operative term is ""half assed" if im correct?

so yeah, im gonna read a lot more of what the others on this site have to say in regard to what role the science of it all plays in the overall process. I will be more than willing to admit that I need to learn a lil more about it all as it pertains to cannabis and then I can see what im actually trying to understand.

its like you know something is there, it can be seen , felt BUT you just don't know what to call it or if it even has a name. with this thread im gonna figure that thing out.

with the couple of pages, hell the second post actually, I think I found the aspect of breeding that I think that most ppl don't do or invest the proper time or research.

yeah, be clear, there are a couple ppl that im willing to go at it with on this topic! what is it that breeders should be doing that they don't do? what, if any, are the standards or rulesa breeder should be held to or should follow in order to be able to put out quality seeds/product? what really makes a breeder a "breeder"?

yeah man, lets get to the bottom of this shit for real!!! seed prices are insanely high, there are no stable genetics around so what are "they" not doing properly? inquiring minds (lol, and paying customers!) want to know!!!

 

[Mr. Lovebuzzed]

hi FriendinDeed, apologize i wrote it in your thread, i didnt realize it.. im not shangrila im epistemologist i have itchy feeling when i see somebody writing about how only one method is good..

im sure you cant say difference bee-tween science and politics of science, so let it be..

 

[mega72]

No matter how many times you half ass something, you may never get a full ass out of the deal.

 

[xmobotx]

n/m

 

[FRIENDinDEED]

hi FriendinDeed, apologize i wrote it in your thread, i didnt realize it.. im not shangrila im epistemologist i have itchy feeling when i see somebody writing about how only one method is good..

im sure you cant say difference bee-tween science and politics of science, so let it be..

my asking/starting this thread is for me to find out what it is or are the current standards that a breeder comes by their stock.

I don't think that there is only one method to achieve a goal BUT I do believe in a COMPLETE METHODOLOGY in order to achieve the greatest results possible. its easy to say that there are a million and one hack breeders out there BUT what if that unknown/little guy is actually doing whats right and what needs to be done, but because she/he doesn't have a coffee shop, spot in the right place, won a cup or two then they are discounted and constantly to be denied credibility? if that's the current standard then that's kinda fucked up.

heres another topic that comes to mind: correct me if im wrong but from what ive come to understand breeders are always dealing/working with variables so is it really not worth it to work with bagseed? if your going to begin with observation in the process then why not work with bag seed?

my questions come from ppl constantly spewing about how important genetics are and that's just one factor to consider, ppl are always looking for parentage/lineage of a strain BUT its ignorant IMO to ask for those things because then you need to know where the parents of the parents of the strain came from in order to get an Idea of what kind of plant you "may" be dealing with in the long run and in seed form.

I hear what tom is saying and I think that's one way "along the path" to get a better handle on stabilizing a strain BUT what else is there? bombadil.360 mentioned some food for thought.

so chime in if you can abstain from the mundane of "scratch and sniff" breeding as the "end all, be all" to breeding. trust me I want to hear what you have to say BUT be clear if what your saying sounds like the "same ol" then I gotta call you on it.

 

[FRIENDinDEED]

No matter how many times you half ass something, you may never get a full ass out of the deal.

I completely agree and think that, that is what most breeders are doing. I just don't think that a breeder (known/unknown; established/just starting out) should not have a stable strain. there shouldn't be and pheno's popping up when I pop your beans IMO if your calling yourself a breeder.

the one thing that can be used is tomatoes: if im growing roma tomatoes from seed but I end up with some tomatoes looking like romas and others looking like a variety of other tomatoes then there is something wrong with that picture and someones not doing something right.

 

[FRIENDinDEED]

hello,

lets say you take samples of those supposed 20 females and other X amount of males for lab testings, and you get wonderful results.

however, this does not translate as capacity for these individuals to pass on their specific traits to their progeny in a consistent way.

to see whether an individual is able to pass on its desired traits to the progeny, you need to test in different ways than simply measuring thc/cbd levels at a lab.

you have a couple avenues to do that; you can go with the selfing method that Tom champions, which is pretty efficient in terms of time needed to see up to what point an individual is able to pass on its traits.

or you can go the normal male/female route, which will take you longer to determine at what % of consistency a mom and dad is able to pass on its desired traits.

what makes a breeder a good breeder is not much which of these method he chooses to use, or whether he uses both; but rather, his complete understanding of how things actually work, and the honesty in accepting the limitations imposed on us by nature.

you cannot just decide what to breed for, for example, you can only observe which desired traits a given population has to offer, and try to see if you can manage to produce a population that produces acceptable homogenous offspring carrying the observed desired traits.

a point which by the way, is not understood very well. due to hubris mainly.

peace

and to add: a lab result indicating high thc content does not necessarily translates as well balanced herb in terms of high.

there are very many variables in the equation that determines what is an overall good cultivar or clone-only specimen.

such as: ceiling, type of high, taste, lung expansion, psyche-activity, narcotic/pain relief, inspirational, etc...

the overall chemical profile is more important than just how high or low a given sample tests in a lab for thc %.

peace

great post for the thread, makes absolute sense as a standard to follow.

does anyone know of any breeders, whether established or otherwise, that follow this methodology at least in part?

 

[FRIENDinDEED]

there has already been a thread that discussed this whole subject in some detail.

the 'everyone a breeder?' thread contained some rudeness, arguing and sh1t talking, but MOST IMPORTANTLY it contained a whole lot of knowledge that would be invaluable to anyone who wanted to practice plant breeding as responsibly as their situation allowed.

for some some reason, despite the valuable information that the thread contained, it got deleted.

imo deleting that thread was robbing the cannabis community of a valuable resource. and for a website that is supposed to champion cannabis knowledge, it is inexplicable and irresponsible.

VG

I remember that thread and threw a post up in the early pages of it. I remember my point of view was in regard to the instability and constant phenol variations that so many ppl see in the seeds/strains that they order. IMO if you call yourself a breeder then the strains that you "push" should be stable with no variations.

just don't understand how you can order a pack of seeds and you've got this one looking more "indicaish" and the others looking more "satviaish". I think the current state of affairs is what has these terms even coming into status

 

[FRIENDinDEED]

all breeding projects should start with a defined goal. that goal can be marketability, potency, a particular growth characteristic, or maybe just something new.

these decisions are entirely dependent on the user or the end use.

first and foremost, you should understand, you aren't a master breeder nor will you be for a LONG time (i don't say this disrespectfully. a LOT of people are intimidated about breeding and it keeps people from taking the first step). with that out of the way, just have fun. try what works and what doesn't. allow yourself to make a few mistakes (that's how the best things happen). you will learn more from your own experiences than you would from any advice for the simple fact that people's opinions are fragmented and based on their own experiences. never consider yourself a master and always consider yourself a student. unless you intend to open a seed business, you should focus on breeding what works for you.

if your goal IS to open a seed business, you should focus on making stable strains that can be duplicated and replicated. in this day and age, people want strains tailored to specific effects or qualities. i wish more breeders would focus on making new strains that cater to specific ailments or effects instead of trying to make a new diesel or OG knockoff. i wish there was more diversification in the gene pool and more breeders worked landraces back into these poly-hybrids...but i digress.

the key to breeding great strains is to use stable strains as parents. select for qualities that appeal to you and then use those original parents to backcross until you get a stable strain that produces a consistent seed. rinse, repeat.

I hear what your saying BUT there are too many "buts" toi what your saying.

if you start out with a set goal in mind and go after just that one thing then your eventually are going to be lacking in another area.

what im saying is that YES one should start out with a goal in mind BUT that goal should be to produce/create/breed the best strain possible with what you have; and if that is in fact how you set out your path then what is it that a person should definitely do whether they want to or not.

imo if you come out the gate on the good foot then no matter what you do it should come out to be the best it can be.

if your going to start something then why go at it, invest time/money/effort to only produce that one thing? why not produce the greatest thing you can.

of course if you have shitty stock to begin with then it may take a lil longer but it can be done as long as you are able to see what you need to see, recognize what you need to recognize and obtain a better more clear sense of your goal with the proper information and I think that all comes with the proper/complete process; leave nothing to chance so to speak