is this how you breed quality genetics?

[Tonygreen]

When you advertise a strain that is only recoverable 1 out of 1000 times in your seeds, that is false advertising.

I want to be able to reliably reproduce a strain so if I pop a blue satellite seed I bought for 150 $ I know it will turn out colored more often then not. OR whatever else thefuck its supposed to be. If I buy a pack of lemon super duper kush and it tastes like shit not lemons 9 times out of 10.... smdh

You dont get that?

 

[PWF]

The method of sexual reproduction has nothing to do with the stability of the line.
The genes do and how they match up...

how do you know this for sure?

 

[Tom Hill]

PWF, genetics is the bottom line, period. Maybe I misunderstood you, but I thought you were saying I was ignoring something, I was not, it's you, who by bringing up epigenetics is ignoring the bottom line, it kind of seemed like a straw grasp, I am used to it, but it holds no water.

 

[PWF]

When you advertise a strain that is only recoverable 1 out of 1000 times in your seeds, that is false advertising.

I want to be able to reliably reproduce a strain so if I pop a blue satellite seed I bought for 150 $ I know it will turn out colored more often then not. OR whatever else thefuck its supposed to be. If I buy a pack of lemon super duper kush and it tastes like shit not lemons 9 times out of 10.... smdh

You dont get that?

that should be address in marketing under truth in advertising. not breeding.

 

[Tonygreen]

It does matter if you want to reliably express your opinion to the world in legible fashion as to try get your point across. Unless you are babbling to babble.

 

[PWF]

what holds no water?
are not genes triggered by environment?
what is cancer then?
your style of communication is overly dismissive and therefore contemptuous and your use of words like nonsense in describing what i write are insulting if i were easily insulted.
i have seen a few people take insult to your comminications towards them.

 

[Tom Hill]

the method of reproduction does matter, just not in the way many would like to hypothesize. A selfed plant is on average equal to the same plant brought to f3, by way of male/female breeding. So we can't really say it doesn't matter, just that most folk are way off in the direction in which it matters.

 

[PWF]

It does matter if you want to reliably express your opinion to the world in legible fashion as to try get your point across. Unless you are babbling to babble.

so i am babbling now?

 

[Tonygreen]

that should be address in marketing under truth in advertising. not breeding.

No if you cant reproduce the pheno the strain is claimed to be to it means you got no real strain and the breeder did a shit job breeding.

 

[Tom Hill]

PWF, simply put, you are saying environment means a lot, and I am saying genes determine that, not you.

 

[PWF]

"A selfed plant is on average equal to the same plant brought to f3"
this is a loose theory and youre stating it as fact.
is this what youre trying to do? make it a fact via statement by yourself?

 

[PWF]

PWF, simply put, you are saying environment means a lot, and I am saying genes determine that, not you.

why are you putting it on me and not the environment like you began this sentence with?
youre starting shit with me more than youre discussing breeding.

 

[Tom Hill]

It's a fact I have been trying to bring to your guys' attention for years...

 

[Tom Hill]

I have discussed breeding a million times here, that you have never actually digested it is not really my concern.

 

[Tonygreen]

Isnt the whole reason to fix a trait in a line is so that its fixed and shows up reliably in the progeny, regardless of how the progeny is spawned? MxF, Selfed or in a petri dish?

 

[Tom Hill]

here, for about the 1000th time, now you tell me PWF what can we say about selfing vs male/female breeding, is it not about 1:3? From the principles of plant breeding:

The most useful measure of homozygosity is the inbreeding coefficient, F. This coefficient takes a value near zero in most large random-mating populations, and the coefficient increases toward unity under sustained genetic assortive mating. Self-fertilization (one individual in each generation in each family) leads to very rapid increases in homozygosity. Starting with a heterozygote (F=0.50), F takes the values 0.75, 0.875, 0.9375, 0.9688, 0.9844, 0.9922, ... in successive generations of selfing, thus exceeding 0.90 in the third generation. Under continued mating of 2 individuals per family (full sibs) each generation, F is not expected to exceed 0.90 until the eighth generation. With continued mating of 4 individuals per family (double first cousins), F is not expected to exceed 0.90 until the seventeenth generation and rates of increase in F with 8 individuals per family (quadruple second cousins) and 16 individuals per family (octuple third cousins) are much slower yet. The rate of increase in F is so slow with more than 16 mating individuals per family per generation that such matings are of essentially no consequence in concentrating favorable alleles in selection programs in outcrossing species. It is therefore not at all surprising that breeders of plant species nearly always choose schemes featuring very close inbreeding. Selfing schemes (one parent/generation) are by far the most common in breeding outcrossing plants, and the usual goal is to develop numerous highly homozygous lines that are first evaluated by top crossing to identify lines with good general combining ability, followed by testing specific combinations of pairs of lines to identify the very few pairs that have the potential to produce truly excellent single-cross hybrids

 

[PWF]

it is not a window into the future.
the cannabis plant and its genes are affected by environment especially the human aspect of its environment. from pampering to abusing a plant of the same specimin would affect the plants progeny. given the variability of all the different canna breeders out there this would be considered an epi-genetic influence of reasonably magnitude for it to be much more than a straw. i have seeded pampered plants and abused plants and will share the results. sofar it has affected sexual expression but im not smart or rich enough to know for certain. i am observing as much as possible and maybe oneday ill figure it out but i dont like the way you communicate to me or the descriptives you apply to my contribution so youre discounting your ability to be of help just as tony says my horrible punctuation will cause others to not read my posts. (maybe in their case theyre too lazy?)

 

[PWF]

tom by your own words youre wrong.
it is all about the genetics and not what you say.

 

[Tom Hill]

incorrect, some plants are affected to X degree, and some only affected to Y degree, the degree, is determined by genes, and that's why the hippy dippy argument holds no water in the end.

 

[Tom Hill]

man, you really have a hardon for my red tat, wtf part of the truth do you notunderstandd?