This sounds like a pretty amazing idea! I have never heard of this before but it makes a lot of sense. I think providing cheaper seeds is the only way we're going to be able to promote amateur breeding projects. Also being able to reintroduce a ton of IBL back into the gene pool would be super beneficial.
-
Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
-
Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!
Inbreeding.....the Skill of the Breeder.....
- Thread starter Gypsy Nirvana
- Start date
This sounds like a pretty amazing idea! I have never heard of this before but it makes a lot of sense. I think providing cheaper seeds is the only way we're going to be able to promote amateur breeding projects. Also being able to reintroduce a ton of IBL back into the gene pool would be super beneficial.
thanks for postingGreenthumb68
New member
There you are Nirvana... Great site by-the-way... I think better than Overgrow. That was truly great knowledge you shared. I have a question..... I bought some PurePowerPlant from SeedsDirect about 13 years ago,that, i had inbred intensively. The seeds became tiny,but the pot was killer. I have been gone for 10 years. I vacuumed packed them with rice in a film container. What do you think the chance of them germing are? I really,really don't want to lose that strain..
Thank you gypsy, this has been the best written peice ive ever seen on breeding. super thread all round !!! I appreciate all of this information so much !! I AM CONSIDERING PURCHASING SOME BEANS FROM YOU ( gypsy ) JUST BASED ON how well written this was
H
HerbScience
the less organized the organism the less a defective gene causes harm in general, a tree that has two extra branches is a good bushy tree, a human with two extra arms is usually not born or has physical problems
T
tazz11
before a true study of cannabis genetics can be done a simple fact has to be under stood first ..your talking about RNA structure . something that is living and growing and developing ,time dose not wait for no man or his plants ....
It is my opinion that with out a set test standard there is answer to the problems in our future grows..
with out the test samples there is simply no way to judge the incoming data ...
what this means , is simple . if you have 100 of the best breeders in the world grow the same strain base they will get different results , the simple variations with in a grow environment and the skills of the given breeder are beyond infinite...
until we as a governing body in the study ,take the time to set a standard .we can not hope for the future with in our control. . a controlled environment can limit the variation with in the given grow ,if we can agree on this alone . we can set a standard that defines variations in any give strain base ...
how far do you want to take the wisdom ...
set 10 plastic cups on a table .now picture 10 seedlings in those cups . now you have 100 cups ,you pick those 10 first cups out of the 100, by them self's those 10 cups are a starting point only . yet when observed in relationship to a given mass ,we have the abilities to under stand what there variations are and how many variations there are with in the mass ,yet with the under standing the mass is for ever changing and developing to the environments its grown in and the changes of that said environment ..
our under stand of cannabis genetics can only be as great as the abilities of our skills to take the time to set down and create the standards needed to control the variations with in a strain base mass before we can under stand the variations of any one given plant with in the mass ...
example . you get a pack of ww seeds in the mail .. you give 2 of those seeds to friend you both grow them , you go over and look at his plants and they don't look the same as yours .. why ?
its simple logic . there was a breeder that grew the seed and that seed was grown in a given environment ,so ask your self dose your in environment match that of the breeder of those seeds ..? dose your friends environment match the breeders environment? ...dose your environment match your friends environment ..?
the seeds are from the same breeder , now what his strain base variation is not in question here ..we can assume the breeder is like my old friend Gypsy and his work has been long hours and his variation with in the seeds is given him a nice strong IBL , so what is the question and where is our answers ..
the question is . how do we reach a controllable strain base variation standard ? what test standards do we need to reach a under standing of those variations ?
with a goal in mind of stabilization of the cannabis genetic pool we can use those test standards to first control the strain bases with in our own environments , until that happens were just spinning our wheels ..
"with time comes a infinity of variations ,and the never ending lack of a controlled over your own environment"
It is my opinion that with out a set test standard there is answer to the problems in our future grows..
with out the test samples there is simply no way to judge the incoming data ...
what this means , is simple . if you have 100 of the best breeders in the world grow the same strain base they will get different results , the simple variations with in a grow environment and the skills of the given breeder are beyond infinite...
until we as a governing body in the study ,take the time to set a standard .we can not hope for the future with in our control. . a controlled environment can limit the variation with in the given grow ,if we can agree on this alone . we can set a standard that defines variations in any give strain base ...
how far do you want to take the wisdom ...
set 10 plastic cups on a table .now picture 10 seedlings in those cups . now you have 100 cups ,you pick those 10 first cups out of the 100, by them self's those 10 cups are a starting point only . yet when observed in relationship to a given mass ,we have the abilities to under stand what there variations are and how many variations there are with in the mass ,yet with the under standing the mass is for ever changing and developing to the environments its grown in and the changes of that said environment ..
our under stand of cannabis genetics can only be as great as the abilities of our skills to take the time to set down and create the standards needed to control the variations with in a strain base mass before we can under stand the variations of any one given plant with in the mass ...
example . you get a pack of ww seeds in the mail .. you give 2 of those seeds to friend you both grow them , you go over and look at his plants and they don't look the same as yours .. why ?
its simple logic . there was a breeder that grew the seed and that seed was grown in a given environment ,so ask your self dose your in environment match that of the breeder of those seeds ..? dose your friends environment match the breeders environment? ...dose your environment match your friends environment ..?
the seeds are from the same breeder , now what his strain base variation is not in question here ..we can assume the breeder is like my old friend Gypsy and his work has been long hours and his variation with in the seeds is given him a nice strong IBL , so what is the question and where is our answers ..
the question is . how do we reach a controllable strain base variation standard ? what test standards do we need to reach a under standing of those variations ?
with a goal in mind of stabilization of the cannabis genetic pool we can use those test standards to first control the strain bases with in our own environments , until that happens were just spinning our wheels ..
"with time comes a infinity of variations ,and the never ending lack of a controlled over your own environment"
T
tazz11
........................OK simple terms ........................................
So I got some beans, they were F1, (Coastal Collision). I popped them, got boys and girls, and crossed them together, (inbreeding them I think..)
you now have F2 seed
I still have one of the original plants, (a clone taken from her) in my flower room now (that's called a F1 clone or gen 1)
the clone is a gen 1 or generation 1 clone from a F1 source ,all clones cut from a F1 are gen 1 , if you had a F2 and cut a clone from it , the clone would be a F2 gen 1
now this is a gray area ,some breeders will agree some will not ..
if you grow that gen1 clone to a full healthy plant then cut a clone from that gen 1 plant . the clone you cut will be a gen 2
now this is a (gray area) because the breeder is changing the nature of the plant structure vs its natural life span from seed to death ,this is part of the debate over cloning ...
T
tazz11
some of you may not under stand the debate about cloning .. here is my opinions and how I define cloning ..
if you take a F1 and cut a cutting . then root that cutting . you have change the nature of that cuttings life cycle ,
now if you root that cutting you have a clone ,in nature this could in fact happen naturally , but in the grow the breeder is doing this and selection of where and how are in fact under his control ...as a breeder ...as it should in fact up to the breeder .. some day the governments of the world may set standards but till then its up to the breeders where it should be .
so if you take that cutting off the plant it would most likely die under normal conditions ,and in rare case like dead fall trees the branches could re-root in a natural environment ...
this was part of a on going debate about tree grafting ...
for those that are trying to under stand , I will add some detail to this debate ..
if you take graft from one tree say a apple tree and you at it too another apple tree ,the question was have you change the natural life cycle of the apple tree or the grafting .
answer is yes , you have change both in fact ..
the apple tree could not naturally grow the fruit developed by the graft.. and that graft is now being feed by another full size host .so in true respect the graft acts as a clone would and your replacing its own roots with the roots of the Host .
so the debate is are clones grafts?
and logically the answer is Yes
so now the only question is what stage of growth is the clone . is it a seedling or is it now at a stage 3 of 4 seedling ,
and the logical answer is the latter ...
it is a stage 3 or 4 clone ,it would not exist unless it was a freak of nature ,we as a breeders altar its path in nature and create what we want its path to become ...
and this is just the reason why if you grow a clone from rooting it to a full size plant ,it develops beyond what its normal life cycle would have been .. thus we have altered its natural life cycle...
if you took a seed and grew it from germination to harvest it would complete a 12 stage growth cycle
a clone at stage 3 or 4 will grow to a stage 14 or 15 growth cycle , the debate is never ending . because the pro say the plants life must end at stage 12 , but the con say the clone changes the nature of the growth cycle thus must be accounted for by the breeders ..
note : we cut clones in veg stage 3 or 4 because we want the clone to grow to hold it natural abilities to start flowering ,clones cut why a mother plant is flowering will often auto flower ...this is common in larger breeder ops . they cut the mass and some are already flowering thus the traits of auto flowering ...
so now your going to ask so in your opinion what are Hermaphrodites
simple : remember that clone stage 3 or 4 . and you pushed its growth cycle to stage 14 or 15 .. your seeing the plants natural life cycle trying to reset it self . it would normally reset it self much as it dose in clones when they re-veg . but in the case where the breeder is changing the growth cycle ,the growth cycle is push beyond its nature and it over laps into a instinct of survival ,and it dose what nature tells it to . it boots the growth cycle ,much the same way if the tree fell in a storm and lays on the ground , some of the braches in contact with the ground will start growing roots ...
in the grow we as breeders are splitting hairs ,we have so much control and so little under standing of the out come we fail to see the path of the life cycle we change with a cut of a knife...
if you take a F1 and cut a cutting . then root that cutting . you have change the nature of that cuttings life cycle ,
now if you root that cutting you have a clone ,in nature this could in fact happen naturally , but in the grow the breeder is doing this and selection of where and how are in fact under his control ...as a breeder ...as it should in fact up to the breeder .. some day the governments of the world may set standards but till then its up to the breeders where it should be .
so if you take that cutting off the plant it would most likely die under normal conditions ,and in rare case like dead fall trees the branches could re-root in a natural environment ...
this was part of a on going debate about tree grafting ...
for those that are trying to under stand , I will add some detail to this debate ..
if you take graft from one tree say a apple tree and you at it too another apple tree ,the question was have you change the natural life cycle of the apple tree or the grafting .
answer is yes , you have change both in fact ..
the apple tree could not naturally grow the fruit developed by the graft.. and that graft is now being feed by another full size host .so in true respect the graft acts as a clone would and your replacing its own roots with the roots of the Host .
so the debate is are clones grafts?
and logically the answer is Yes
so now the only question is what stage of growth is the clone . is it a seedling or is it now at a stage 3 of 4 seedling ,
and the logical answer is the latter ...
it is a stage 3 or 4 clone ,it would not exist unless it was a freak of nature ,we as a breeders altar its path in nature and create what we want its path to become ...
and this is just the reason why if you grow a clone from rooting it to a full size plant ,it develops beyond what its normal life cycle would have been .. thus we have altered its natural life cycle...
if you took a seed and grew it from germination to harvest it would complete a 12 stage growth cycle
a clone at stage 3 or 4 will grow to a stage 14 or 15 growth cycle , the debate is never ending . because the pro say the plants life must end at stage 12 , but the con say the clone changes the nature of the growth cycle thus must be accounted for by the breeders ..
note : we cut clones in veg stage 3 or 4 because we want the clone to grow to hold it natural abilities to start flowering ,clones cut why a mother plant is flowering will often auto flower ...this is common in larger breeder ops . they cut the mass and some are already flowering thus the traits of auto flowering ...
so now your going to ask so in your opinion what are Hermaphrodites
simple : remember that clone stage 3 or 4 . and you pushed its growth cycle to stage 14 or 15 .. your seeing the plants natural life cycle trying to reset it self . it would normally reset it self much as it dose in clones when they re-veg . but in the case where the breeder is changing the growth cycle ,the growth cycle is push beyond its nature and it over laps into a instinct of survival ,and it dose what nature tells it to . it boots the growth cycle ,much the same way if the tree fell in a storm and lays on the ground , some of the braches in contact with the ground will start growing roots ...
in the grow we as breeders are splitting hairs ,we have so much control and so little under standing of the out come we fail to see the path of the life cycle we change with a cut of a knife...
Super information, thanks for the analogies. Great stuff!! Not breeding yet, collect ing and experimenting currently. If/ when I stop trying to produce so much I'd like to use my grow space for propagation and breeding. Some crazy sativa genetics crossed together or super hashy afghani.
T
tazz11
if you do get the chance to do that kind of a breeding op , something you should remember .. "timing is the key" to a good sativa /indiac cross look at the sativa and its flowering time . if its a 14-18weeks canter your time at 16 weeks and work with the veg stage to time them to bloom at the same time ...I grew a 9 1/2 ft Candy Cain Thai with a 15 3/4 by 23 1/2 inch cola ..sativa indoor take a lot more work and space
if your sativa goes to tall tie it off with string and bend it over . toping slows the bloom ...if your using it for breeding
Now think about the implications that Taz stated and the consequences in the F2 generation. Even though science says one thing, we know that more often than not theories are only theories and just because theories make sense at the time they may not remain that way for the years too come.
For example if you had a seedling that was cloned but you used the seedling and the same male (male1) to make F2's. Let's say you've ran the clone for years and then decided to use the pollen from Male1 to make F2's would the two F2 generations be identical? or would further inbreeding show differences?
For example if you had a seedling that was cloned but you used the seedling and the same male (male1) to make F2's. Let's say you've ran the clone for years and then decided to use the pollen from Male1 to make F2's would the two F2 generations be identical? or would further inbreeding show differences?
T
tazz11
well if some agree ,then look at the write up on sensi seeds big bud
Through extensive research and testing, Sensi Seeds was able to take the Big Bud clone back to her roots by breeding with a rare and special Afghani, resulting in the original, award-winning Big Bud seed-strain.
so they are saying they mated a special Afghani that was not part of the Original strain but now its resulting in the original strain being recovered ..
so how do you do that ?
how do you breed a new strain into a clone only and get it back to the Original strain ... ??
I like the company but you can only cube a strain with its own RNA even with its own parents the strain will not be the same ...can we project what the effects of time are on a given plants RNA . we still have no ability to do that even today in the modern world .. if they think they can I would love to see that first hand ..
Through extensive research and testing, Sensi Seeds was able to take the Big Bud clone back to her roots by breeding with a rare and special Afghani, resulting in the original, award-winning Big Bud seed-strain.
so they are saying they mated a special Afghani that was not part of the Original strain but now its resulting in the original strain being recovered ..
so how do you do that ?
how do you breed a new strain into a clone only and get it back to the Original strain ... ??
I like the company but you can only cube a strain with its own RNA even with its own parents the strain will not be the same ...can we project what the effects of time are on a given plants RNA . we still have no ability to do that even today in the modern world .. if they think they can I would love to see that first hand ..
Greetings all, thanks for a wonderful stimulating discussion. Even after more than 3 decades, a person can still learn new things all the time. I would say that the recent developments in the understanding of epigenetic variation opens an entire new frontier for cannabis and her many millions of enthusiastic participants. It's not all about Mendelian ratios anymore. Looking forward to seeing and hearing about the results of all the new experiments I read about here.
T
tazz11
OK skill of the breeder ,,
tell me this .. how do you judge the skill of the breeder , by the plant's abilities to react to what the breeder dose or the breeders abilities to observe and get the plant to react to his actions ..?
tell me this .. how do you judge the skill of the breeder , by the plant's abilities to react to what the breeder dose or the breeders abilities to observe and get the plant to react to his actions ..?
music to my ears
welp guys,
it was never really about mendelian ratios. With the outcrossing nature, no homozygous sources, unknown genetic basis for most traits, unstability, most important traits being polygenetic and so on. When there is a clear as day trait, that we could analyze - autoflowering is the perfect example, the sources are very unclear on how this trait really works genetically. Simple recessive, needs to be stabilized in further generations. Really?
There was an extensive debate about epigenetics, but I did not really understand. The simple part seems too obvious (environment affects selection), the complex part seems far behind the horizon for our purposes (scientists found, that treatment of plants affects some traits of progeny of some species of plants under some circumstances in small degree).
I have seen much more antiintelectualism, guys looking for excuse not to try and understand.
That is not good. You can say - I do not care, your choice. Never say (or imply) - it is not important and people trying are fools (everything is important to somebody).
I respect and value all approaches to breeding. I know about a variety of maize created literally as a spiritual project by a very hippy dude (supposed to be a very good variety too!). But trying to undestand the fuck out of an issue put in front of me is how I roll and frankly - these forum suck regarding actual knowledge.
I am still not sure, what the right approach should be. Because what really happens in general is that people pollenchuck and hope to be lucky.
And surprise, surprise, this seems more or less how you breed vegetativelly propagated species. So here you go.
So I do not really know, what we should be doing, where the benefit to the plant is, what is really happening, what should be happening, I just don't know.
i am moderatelly certain about few things. Selfing is your friend. Its about autoflowers in the future.
it was never really about mendelian ratios. With the outcrossing nature, no homozygous sources, unknown genetic basis for most traits, unstability, most important traits being polygenetic and so on. When there is a clear as day trait, that we could analyze - autoflowering is the perfect example, the sources are very unclear on how this trait really works genetically. Simple recessive, needs to be stabilized in further generations. Really?
There was an extensive debate about epigenetics, but I did not really understand. The simple part seems too obvious (environment affects selection), the complex part seems far behind the horizon for our purposes (scientists found, that treatment of plants affects some traits of progeny of some species of plants under some circumstances in small degree).
I have seen much more antiintelectualism, guys looking for excuse not to try and understand.
That is not good. You can say - I do not care, your choice. Never say (or imply) - it is not important and people trying are fools (everything is important to somebody).
I respect and value all approaches to breeding. I know about a variety of maize created literally as a spiritual project by a very hippy dude (supposed to be a very good variety too!). But trying to undestand the fuck out of an issue put in front of me is how I roll and frankly - these forum suck regarding actual knowledge.
I am still not sure, what the right approach should be. Because what really happens in general is that people pollenchuck and hope to be lucky.
And surprise, surprise, this seems more or less how you breed vegetativelly propagated species. So here you go.
So I do not really know, what we should be doing, where the benefit to the plant is, what is really happening, what should be happening, I just don't know.
i am moderatelly certain about few things. Selfing is your friend. Its about autoflowers in the future.
T
tazz11
LOL I love your wording "Pollenchuck"
i have been asked dozens of times to do another breeding op ... WHY ? because i am not a pollenchucker
...LOL
