is this how you breed quality genetics?

[xmobotx]

n/m

 

[FRIENDinDEED]

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.

thanks, im gonna definitely check thosse link, hopefully others will as well

 

[PWF]

"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."
there is no way to understand what your intent is when on one hand you want zero phenos yet you say this ^.
ime, if you are selecting something youre choosing from a personalized set of criteria that has no choice but be different from one seedmaker to another. after growing a plant from seed i feel a level of proprietorship towards the future of its being in my care. having grown a few plants of diverse lineage i can get a phenotypical map of crude sorts and i recognize these different qualities in the various crosses going around and from there i am seeing the way theyre combing having made a bunch of polyhybrids myself. i love polyhybrids lol. i love the variety. freaks inc. hehe. a good breeder to me is someone who grows and smokes and evaluates a variety even up to handing out smoke report check lists to folks hehe. and they do this with as many different variety as they can working backwards into say a cross they like alot like blueberry say, and they decide they wanna check out chocolate thai. then they hear a cut of juicy fruit thai is around. then they start getting into SOL stuff where one frosty bb male was used in many varied crosses. you can see the "blue" influenced by that male distinctly in Steves crosses and bx's where he back crossed with the same male. the grapefruit clone was used in a couple crosses and now that ive toke a few haze crosses i can tell you i believe the sweetskunk clone is actually gfxnl/haze. this can only come from growing the actual plants for years. nevils haze is from 2 males and one female. i think his is actually just the males. i can't remember but i got it in my notes somewhere. this is alot less than we're led to believe by his saying he starts with thousands. he did, but only 3-4 popped, after he used gibberlic acid i think, im not exact here. i love his haze tho, i got decent plants in mns nevsf3 6/6 2 males 4 females. all pretty nice with the usual sandal wood, spice, citrus. one male threw pistils and was killed, the other is being used in various chucks. i grew a cpl s1 chem91 and they were like the mom. one thing i found in the butterscotch plants is that many of the males- and in crosses using a male butterscotch- produce pistils. i just had a [(chem91xbutterscotch)x(pre'88g13/hashplant)]xbutterscotch male reverse under stress and throw pistils resulting in 2 seeds. maybe oneday i'll get a chance to open those. ime there isn't enough time to be speculating about what a cross is going to be like before i do it because i'm very busy trying to catalog and experience the "pheno" i'm growing atm. cannabis is good all mixed up, it'll sort itself with a little help from us conscientiously or accidentaly. i think it matters if a person evaluating with their senses, is a cigarette smoker or a patient on pharma medications. opiates alter tastes like brushing ones teeth would before "smoking to evaluate". if this mundane "scratch and sniff" is done well and can be coupled with labratory testing and then these findings can be compared to others done on the same variety etc building a data base because no one person is going to be able to do this with any accuracy. team work and a desire to move forward would need to be the guiding force so that individual personalities wont interfere too much in the process of sharing our findings.
pie in the sky when capitalism trumps science.
i like my methods.
peace,
pwf

 

[inquest]

PWF:
Punctuation, bro. Not sure how many peeps labored through your post. I sure as hell didn't.


Friend in deed @ post #38:
Yeah, Tom, Chimera, SamS, GW Pharma & every other crop seed supplier watching MMJ news. Minus GC/LC testing: Charlie/Kaiki, Dubi, myself, Verdant Green, probably a some others.


@ICMAG community:

FWIW:
Tom is the most helping Breeder on these boards. This community comes here and asks for help, insights, etc. then when it's laid out for them they jump his shit cuz it's not what they want to hear. Maybe he seems opinionated but, he's the only breeder who doesn't currently sidestep that shit-storm! I for one am greatful for learning what I have over the years by searching for and reading his and others posts. It's helped fill in gaps left from reading other breeding related literature. I've had a lot of "aha!" moments studying multiple sources.

Maybe we should be asking why versus touting why not?

 

[PWF]

im not your bro guy.
i'm not posting to win some literary award.
you are a rude person and i couldnt give a dang what you think about me after you address me with such insolence. you awta check out what i wrote right there at the last. it pertains to you and your character. i wrote my post as a statement in reply to the OP's question and wasnt requesting feedback from you. i am not really even interested in the OP giving any feedback. i posted my experiences as requested. i'm not sure who you think i am but you obviously think highly enough of yourself to denigrate the respect for others that would make you respectable yourself. you are displaying succinctly the exact problem we have in discusing these things.
btw, your post -short and punctuated as it is- is not understandable.
wtf are you even talking about???
never mind, i don't care and i don't care about anything else you have to say.
pwf

 

[FRIENDinDEED]

"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."
there is no way to understand what your intent is when on one hand you want zero phenos yet you say this ^.
ime, if you are selecting something youre choosing from a personalized set of criteria that has no choice but be different from one seedmaker to another. after growing a plant from seed i feel a level of proprietorship towards the future of its being in my care. having grown a few plants of diverse lineage i can get a phenotypical map of crude sorts and i recognize these different qualities in the various crosses going around and from there i am seeing the way theyre combing having made a bunch of polyhybrids myself. i love polyhybrids lol. i love the variety. freaks inc. hehe. a good breeder to me is someone who grows and smokes and evaluates a variety even up to handing out smoke report check lists to folks hehe. and they do this with as many different variety as they can working backwards into say a cross they like alot like blueberry say, and they decide they wanna check out chocolate thai. then they hear a cut of juicy fruit thai is around. then they start getting into SOL stuff where one frosty bb male was used in many varied crosses. you can see the "blue" influenced by that male distinctly in Steves crosses and bx's where he back crossed with the same male. the grapefruit clone was used in a couple crosses and now that ive toke a few haze crosses i can tell you i believe the sweetskunk clone is actually gfxnl/haze. this can only come from growing the actual plants for years. nevils haze is from 2 males and one female. i think his is actually just the males. i can't remember but i got it in my notes somewhere. this is alot less than we're led to believe by his saying he starts with thousands. he did, but only 3-4 popped, after he used gibberlic acid i think, im not exact here. i love his haze tho, i got decent plants in mns nevsf3 6/6 2 males 4 females. all pretty nice with the usual sandal wood, spice, citrus. one male threw pistils and was killed, the other is being used in various chucks. i grew a cpl s1 chem91 and they were like the mom. one thing i found in the butterscotch plants is that many of the males- and in crosses using a male butterscotch- produce pistils. i just had a [(chem91xbutterscotch)x(pre'88g13/hashplant)]xbutterscotch male reverse under stress and throw pistils resulting in 2 seeds. maybe oneday i'll get a chance to open those. ime there isn't enough time to be speculating about what a cross is going to be like before i do it because i'm very busy trying to catalog and experience the "pheno" i'm growing atm. cannabis is good all mixed up, it'll sort itself with a little help from us conscientiously or accidentaly. i think it matters if a person evaluating with their senses, is a cigarette smoker or a patient on pharma medications. opiates alter tastes like brushing ones teeth would before "smoking to evaluate". if this mundane "scratch and sniff" is done well and can be coupled with labratory testing and then these findings can be compared to others done on the same variety etc building a data base because no one person is going to be able to do this with any accuracy. team work and a desire to move forward would need to be the guiding force so that individual personalities wont interfere too much in the process of sharing our findings.
pie in the sky when capitalism trumps science.
i like my methods.
peace,
pwf

be clear about what im about to type to you, there is no malice involved:

I get what your saying and if that's the way you want to come across new and interesting strains then hey, I aint mad at you BUT if your going to be breeding seeds for retail then what you are saying near the end of your post has to ring true no matter what or who you are.

what I think is happening is that ppl are just doing one part and not the other when in fact its a complete science and process that needs to be undertaken when breeding seeds. im a laymen to breeding which is why I really want to understand it and although im still learning I understand the scientific process. not trying to be a breeder but if im going to spend all this money for something then I want to know, and im sorry but the more it costs the more I want to know. $40? awright cool, i'll rock with you; $400? DUDE! I want to know everything there is to know not only about your methods, seeds but you as well!!

I think in order to buy seeds from someone their methods of breeding need to be put on the table so to speak. I can honestly say that I don't want any manner of "agency" coming into the cannabis community in any aspect and regulating anything BUT imo the standards that are out there now need to be stepped up tremendously!!!

 

[FRIENDinDEED]

PWF:
Punctuation, bro. Not sure how many peeps labored through your post. I sure as hell didn't.


Friend in deed @ post #38:
Yeah, Tom, Chimera, SamS, GW Pharma & every other crop seed supplier watching MMJ news. Minus GC/LC testing: Charlie/Kaiki, Dubi, myself, Verdant Green, probably a some others.


@ICMAG community:

FWIW:
Tom is the most helping Breeder on these boards. This community comes here and asks for help, insights, etc. then when it's laid out for them they jump his shit cuz it's not what they want to hear. Maybe he seems opinionated but, he's the only breeder who doesn't currently sidestep that shit-storm! I for one am greatful for learning what I have over the years by searching for and reading his and others posts. It's helped fill in gaps left from reading other breeding related literature. I've had a lot of "aha!" moments studying multiple sources.

Maybe we should be asking why versus touting why not?

then we are truly after the same thing and those ppl are the ones that I want and think that others need to pay attention too since they are keeping to not only "a standard" but a "complete standard".

I trust upstarts and objective ppl more so than others. in the other thread that inspired me to start this one, I had countless ppl telling me that im stupid, an asshole and didn't know what I was talking about BUT its funny how you can start a thread and mysteriously find ppl that get it.

and another thing im finding out is 8k+ posts and a couple banner titles under your tag name don't mean shit! I always tell ppl, who I am on here is who I am in real life. I don't do that "internet posturing"/ "internet thugging" bullshit. I have real conversations, asks real questions in the hopes that im talking to real ppl!!! if your not real about your shit then you need not bother to come at me in any way shape or form

so inquest, thanks for adding those real breeders that adhere to a complete code of standards, which for me, translates into a methodical and ETHICAL approach, much appreciated addition! once again, hopefuly it helps those who need a better understanding to achieve it!

 

[FRIENDinDEED]

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

I made the exact same point in another thread and said that cannabis is not important enough for anyone to throw that kind of money/time at it although with its abilities someone should.

BUT if you are inclined to attempt breeding a strain, then IMO there is a standard that can/should be followed and I want to know what that standard is or should be. what breeders should I really be buying my seeds from?

 

[FRIENDinDEED]

Here's the straight dope....

this whole IBL tag that popped up for marketing purposes a few years back did nothing but make a whole generation of newbs and wannabe breeders more ignorant, it set them about chasing a wagon that was heading squarely down the wrong path.

IBL was intended to denote InBred Line. How you inbred the line was moot, the point being that the line underwent intense selection for a specific set of traits.

The absolute fastest and tightest methodology for said task is the self-cross. The problem is that any trait that is the result of a heterozygous gene condition at a specific locus, falls apart in 50% of the progeny. Sure, it may also re-occur in %50 of the resulting as well, but it is by no means stable in those individuals, it's simply present.

The only way to recapitulate the hybrid (Aa) at that locus, is to take the 2x (25% classes, AA and aa) and intermate them to get the desired Aa genetic condition again.

A perfect example of this is the condition that leads to a mixed THC:CBD chemotype; if you self cross a THC:CBD individual, 25% will be CBD 'pure', 50% will recapitulate the hybrid condition (THC:CBD), and a further 25% will be THC 'pure'.

What I'm really getting at here is to back up Tom on a specific point, that the most reliable method for fixing a trait in a line is to cross to a plant that is a KNOWN carrier for that trait, IE- itself. If you were to chose a male sibling from the same population, there is no guarantee that such a male would also possess the same genetic condition that resulted in the trait appearing in your female. However, you KNOW the female possesses said trait, therefor mating the plant to itself is the surefire'est way to re-enforce the trait in the following generation.

The major drawback of this methodology is that you also fix undesirable traits in the line, at a rate of an increase of %50 homozygosity at every generation, therefor you require a serious selection pool to maintain your traits of interest, but purge the traits that are undesirable to the line. While I agree with Tom that the degree to shich you will see issues is very much attributed by the genetic burden hidden within the line, because at this point most cannabis individuals and lines, contain a relatively large genetic burden of undesirable alleles due to the obligate outcrossing nature of the species (coupled with the haphazard mating schemes she's been forced into for decades).

Yes, genetic gain is increased with respect to a very specific locus with each self-cross, but there is also a significant genetic burden placed on populations derived from such pool, to the increasing homozygosity of undesirable alleles @ 50% increase per generation. This is where Tom's families #'d 1-5 come into play... and while 1-5 is simply a number to demonstrate a point, I would suggest that %5 of 500 would be more appropriate to create these families, rather than say 5% of 50 or 100.

This is where IMO lab testing becomes truly advantageous- individuals can be scored on a whole range of traits, like cannabinoid and terpene profile, and evaluated on these characters alone to see if they fit the bill for further selfing or inclusion in the breeding regimen. If you don't have your own lab, this can get really expensive... because it's what we call a "brute force" screening method... it takes a pretty hefty resource budget to be able to screen hundreds of individuals by GC / LC... and a cost which most aren't interested in bearing when suckers line up to toss benjamins at you at trade shows because you told them your OG-blahblah was 30% THC (LOL!).

While you can make some progress SLOWLY by using the methods the naysayers and science-shunning types (from the Everybody a breeder thread) purport, you simply can't achieve the genetic gains associated with proper 'learned' scientific breeding methodologies coupled with solid analytical tools, which again is simply a fact in my world... having access to both methods. To paraphrase our old friend pnwhyb, we've made the same hack crosses years ago, we know it leads to dead ends compared to more appropriate, accepted breeding methods.

It's not just about selfing for homozygosity, it's about knowing what you are doing, understanding all the genetic possibilities, paying attention to phenoypes (chemotypes), and having the skills to read the cues that the genetics are telling you, by following traits/characters and spotting known accepted patterns (1:2:1, 9:3:3:1) when and where they arrise. If you make use of all this information, you'll be much further ahead of the curve than if you simply follow the 'I like this smell, it makes me feel good' breeding methods espoused by others. I can't emphasize enough that these types of insights are not precluded by developing an understanding of genetics, selection methodologies etc... you can still evaluate plants based on your chosen set of criteria and personal tastes, science doesn't take any of that away... much to the dismay of those trying to shun it as a useful tool in understanding just what the fuck we are trying to do.

-Chimera

SAY IT AGAIN, SAY IT AGAIN!!!! lol, absolute gold!!!

 

[FRIENDinDEED]

HERE's ANOTHER THREAD THAT NEEDS TO BE MADE NOTE OF:
"Stabilizing desirable traits in heterozygous plants?" https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=261616

 

[Nunsacred]

Breeding flowering plants is mostly about luck.

Therefore the best breeders are the ones with the biggest populations, which plays towards a lucky find, a lucky cross which gives relatively high incidence of desired traits.

It's more about NOT distributing seeds, being strict with selection, testing huge numbers of crosses and re-making the best ones for bulking up seed pools.

IMO intensive breeding is a cheap shortcut and its failure is measured in the vast amounts of sick/weak lines which must be ended. If you instead breed less intensively, you can still go forwards towards enriching your traits, seeing which crosses turned out best and bulking them up, with the right kind of variation around those traits.

Understanding ratios of simplistic inheritance actually means very little and certainly is less valuable than trying more kin crosses out to check for better parent plants.

So for all the angry folk who really need to blame someone for a perceived decline, please aim it at intensive indoor breeders who talk about homozygosity as though it were desirable or possible, because it is neither.
And aim it at yourselves for not demonstrating how you think it should be done instead.

 

[SmokinErb]

Was just checking out this thread after the "everyones a breeder" thread got deleted. Don't post much on these parts anymore, and deleting that thread is a perfect example of why. This place is too far gone for me to waste much time over here anymore. Really disappointing, honestly as this WAS my favorite forum. Ah well, all good things come to end.

To start, VG has the right idea. Deleting that thread was a fucking waste. There was some DAMN good info on there, and thanks to whoever posted the google cache link.

Don't have anything to add, except an apology to PWF I think his name was, I'm pretty sure I gave a neg rep unintentionally. Think you could use an attitude adjustment, but the neg rep was not intended.

 

[homebrew420]

Breeding flowering plants is mostly about luck.

Therefore the best breeders are the ones with the biggest populations, which plays towards a lucky find, a lucky cross which gives relatively high incidence of desired traits.

It's more about NOT distributing seeds, being strict with selection, testing huge numbers of crosses and re-making the best ones for bulking up seed pools.

IMO intensive breeding is a cheap shortcut and its failure is measured in the vast amounts of sick/weak lines which must be ended. If you instead breed less intensively, you can still go forwards towards enriching your traits, seeing which crosses turned out best and bulking them up, with the right kind of variation around those traits.

Understanding ratios of simplistic inheritance actually means very little and certainly is less valuable than trying more kin crosses out to check for better parent plants.

So for all the angry folk who really need to blame someone for a perceived decline, please aim it at intensive indoor breeders who talk about homozygosity as though it were desirable or possible, because it is neither.
And aim it at yourselves for not demonstrating how you think it should be done instead.

Couldn't agree more. I don't really think there are many here that are disputing the science behind a HUGE breeding program. Agreed on my end anyway. Problem is nearly nobody has this kind of space.
The way I know the parents are godd is by growing the seeds out to harvest. And its mostly luck of finding the right parents.

I would say too that the breeders that these professionals are calling hacks, don't generally make claims of true breeding in future generations. Why are people being shit on for making hybrids? Prices, ok I get that...
So what if a breeder wants to or, more likely, inadvertently takes the long route to acheive their goal? There is NO way a test can currently quantify the experience the smoked flowers impart. testing is helpful imo, however not the determining factor (maybe with cbd detection).

Growing as many seeds as you can is going to give you the best picture into what the consumer will see as well. This should determine whether or not those seeds go to market. If I am not happy with the results from 40-50 they are bird seed as far as I am concerned. This is VERY difficult to do in a clandestine market.

Peace

 

[SmokinErb]

A breeder doesn't necessarily have to have a huge space to grow massive numbers in order to get the same final product.

A reliable team of good, solid test growers goes a long way with plant numbers. I'm not talking about selecting 10 people off a forum, I'm talking about dedicated testers with the same goal/vision as the breeder. Employees of the breeder, so to speak. Testers willing to run multiple packs of the breeders work, promptly, and document it cleanly, and in detail.

I believe karma said for every 10 packs he sends out, hes lucky to get 2 complete tests documented. That hurts, collecting only 20% of the data.

Problem is, the good reliable testers aren't always available, so you gotta go with unknowns. Thats why i said a team of testers, ready to run packs with just a few week notice. Does not require a massive set up.... i can run 2-3 packs every 4-5 weeks (strain dependent)with two 400w cabs + veg.

 

[Bag]

breeding weed is like breeding dogs , its like breeding anything, all the laws are the same. people that bred dogs didnt grow out thousands of dogs to get the dogs they wanted, they did it few dogs at a time, few litters at a time. yall guys are fuckin nuts. check out the story of dobermans. anyway im not a pro, i just know it aint as complicated as yall act, people been breeding flowers cats, dogs, veggies for thousands of years with no confusion, they know what they like and they try to make more !


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_breeding

 

[sdd420]

breeding weed is like breeding dogs , its like breeding anything, all the laws are the same. people that bred dogs didnt grow out thousands of dogs to get the dogs they wanted, they did it few dogs at a time, few litters at a time. yall guys are fuckin nuts. check out the story of dobermans. anyway im not a pro, i just know it aint as complicated as yall act, people been breeding flowers cats, dogs, veggies for thousands of years with no confusion, they know what they like and they try to make more !


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_breeding

No offense but this is not dogs. Some are trying to find the right combination of cannabinoids for they're particular needs. Peace and thanks to all the breeders

 

[Weird]

Here's the straight dope....

this whole IBL tag that popped up for marketing purposes a few years back did nothing but make a whole generation of newbs and wannabe breeders more ignorant, it set them about chasing a wagon that was heading squarely down the wrong path.

IBL was intended to denote InBred Line. How you inbred the line was moot, the point being that the line underwent intense selection for a specific set of traits.

The absolute fastest and tightest methodology for said task is the self-cross. The problem is that any trait that is the result of a heterozygous gene condition at a specific locus, falls apart in 50% of the progeny. Sure, it may also re-occur in %50 of the resulting as well, but it is by no means stable in those individuals, it's simply present.

The only way to recapitulate the hybrid (Aa) at that locus, is to take the 2x (25% classes, AA and aa) and intermate them to get the desired Aa genetic condition again.

A perfect example of this is the condition that leads to a mixed THC:CBD chemotype; if you self cross a THC:CBD individual, 25% will be CBD 'pure', 50% will recapitulate the hybrid condition (THC:CBD), and a further 25% will be THC 'pure'.

What I'm really getting at here is to back up Tom on a specific point, that the most reliable method for fixing a trait in a line is to cross to a plant that is a KNOWN carrier for that trait, IE- itself. If you were to chose a male sibling from the same population, there is no guarantee that such a male would also possess the same genetic condition that resulted in the trait appearing in your female. However, you KNOW the female possesses said trait, therefor mating the plant to itself is the surefire'est way to re-enforce the trait in the following generation.

The major drawback of this methodology is that you also fix undesirable traits in the line, at a rate of an increase of %50 homozygosity at every generation, therefor you require a serious selection pool to maintain your traits of interest, but purge the traits that are undesirable to the line. While I agree with Tom that the degree to shich you will see issues is very much attributed by the genetic burden hidden within the line, because at this point most cannabis individuals and lines, contain a relatively large genetic burden of undesirable alleles due to the obligate outcrossing nature of the species (coupled with the haphazard mating schemes she's been forced into for decades).

Yes, genetic gain is increased with respect to a very specific locus with each self-cross, but there is also a significant genetic burden placed on populations derived from such pool, to the increasing homozygosity of undesirable alleles @ 50% increase per generation. This is where Tom's families #'d 1-5 come into play... and while 1-5 is simply a number to demonstrate a point, I would suggest that %5 of 500 would be more appropriate to create these families, rather than say 5% of 50 or 100.

This is where IMO lab testing becomes truly advantageous- individuals can be scored on a whole range of traits, like cannabinoid and terpene profile, and evaluated on these characters alone to see if they fit the bill for further selfing or inclusion in the breeding regimen. If you don't have your own lab, this can get really expensive... because it's what we call a "brute force" screening method... it takes a pretty hefty resource budget to be able to screen hundreds of individuals by GC / LC... and a cost which most aren't interested in bearing when suckers line up to toss benjamins at you at trade shows because you told them your OG-blahblah was 30% THC (LOL!).

While you can make some progress SLOWLY by using the methods the naysayers and science-shunning types (from the Everybody a breeder thread) purport, you simply can't achieve the genetic gains associated with proper 'learned' scientific breeding methodologies coupled with solid analytical tools, which again is simply a fact in my world... having access to both methods. To paraphrase our old friend pnwhyb, we've made the same hack crosses years ago, we know it leads to dead ends compared to more appropriate, accepted breeding methods.

It's not just about selfing for homozygosity, it's about knowing what you are doing, understanding all the genetic possibilities, paying attention to phenoypes (chemotypes), and having the skills to read the cues that the genetics are telling you, by following traits/characters and spotting known accepted patterns (1:2:1, 9:3:3:1) when and where they arrise. If you make use of all this information, you'll be much further ahead of the curve than if you simply follow the 'I like this smell, it makes me feel good' breeding methods espoused by others. I can't emphasize enough that these types of insights are not precluded by developing an understanding of genetics, selection methodologies etc... you can still evaluate plants based on your chosen set of criteria and personal tastes, science doesn't take any of that away... much to the dismay of those trying to shun it as a useful tool in understanding just what the fuck we are trying to do.

-Chimera

No one shunned the use of science I just called Tom out on claiming it is the absolute difference between success and failure.

The successful application of science did not negate my results, nor does it negate the wealth of improved cultivars that were breed using less optimal methods/conditions (which are mostly a byproduct of prohibition not ignorance).

All I did was illustrate my own personal experience. I did not espouse anything I simply set a baseline since Tom refused to qualify the "genetic gains" he experienced using science.

If someone says they are better breeders because of science then they should be able to state the margin of success science has brought them to obviously make that conclusion. If they can't they shouldn't attack my person because it is simply a valid question. Quantifying the results of your breeding projects is part of plant breeding curriculum.

I don't sell seeds I don't breed for others, there is no personal gain to me if I bias the equation, I have no personal agenda just a personal testimony.

Show me where I have done anything other than state as much, please don't misrepresent what I have said.

 

[xmobotx]

go! weird go!

 

[Bag]

No offense but this is not dogs. Some are trying to find the right combination of cannabinoids for they're particular needs. Peace and thanks to all the breeders

the right combonation is dogs, same as dogs man , same as dogs man .
finding dogs to fit our needs !

 

[mega72]

Wierd: i put your avatar through tineye, and found the dreadlocks guy

(look bro it's your long lost brother who doesn't troll people espousing the scientific method with text walls) (and he looks like fabio)

But I cant for the life of me place the glasses wearing face right now... I wanna say it's from some movie yes?