Dud Identification Collective Knowledge.

[Sam_Skunkman]

This subject for some reason brings out the worst in Men.. Not sure why. Meanwhile, You Guys are dealing with something I conquered. So Hate on Me all You want. And Have Bugs.

I have no hate on you, zero. I also have few bugs, very few.

C'mon People. Science is all that matters. Not personal Pride. Growing problems are not a reflection of One's self worth. Nor is being right.

I agree.

There's a reason why certain people with Keen knowledge of the problem are NOT Taking part in this thread. It seems to court Mental Masturbation, and not progress.

If people with more experience then me want to post here I am a happy guy, but I do have more then 40 years hands on experience with Cannabis and IPM and Bio-controls. I have yet to meet anyone with my experience with Cannabis and beneficials and IPM's, but anything is possible...

It's a pissing contest now. With all Due respect, the venerable Controlling Sam S, has appointed Himself Mayor in a town he knows very little about. But, He'll find out everything for Us, the slobbering masses.. (reinvent the wheel).

I have zero interest in a pissing contest, I can even believe many even most dud's can be BM, CM, RM related problems.
Can you believe that there are viruses found in Dud Cannabis? There are bacterial and fungal pathogens that can get mixed up with BM, CM, RM, damages by some? I think so. I am trying to help not trying to make anyone believe their problems is anything other then it is. Maybe the plant could even have more then one problem at the same time?
-SamS

 

[Backyard Farmer]

Big up again to Sam Skunk

Thank you we appreciate you and we see you just trying to help,

Sam Skunk, The original Ganja Man

Your approach is truly a scientific one. Again thank you for Hemp Pests & Diseases.

Massive Respect!

 

[high life 45]

Stasis, everyone in the thread knows you think we are all in navigating an Egyptian river. post some pics already. Get some photos of the undersides of your leaves without any eggs. Please. Proof to us that you have conquered BMs, that would be a form of contribution.

The denial you claim that we are all in for exploring the possibilities of poor growth due to non bm caused duds is not getting us anywhere. I have had BMs. I have actually conquered them before. I had three different indoor gardens and an outdoor going last year and one quarter of one garden got BMs. I didn't spread them to my other plants. I'm am experienced with BMs. I have a scope in my vehicle and check plants everywhere I go.

Everyone knows how you feel about the issue, your not adding anything new to the thread by repeating your already stated opinion. Two people posted scientific research papers that mentioned witches broom and non bm causes for it. The growth I showed in my pics looks very witches broom like and nothing like the pictures on page 6&7 in the bm thread you mentioned. So the science is there for many people to entertain the perspective of non bm causes..

Go spend your time and energy to find some research papers about mites causing fan leaf branches or witches broom like growth, this will bring more validity and support to your belief on the issue and be a contribution. It will be a form of progress, instead of repeating yourself.

Your talking and talking about science, but I have yet to see you attempt any in this thread. You have stated your opinion but no data.

I have stated my reasons for starting this thread multiple times, your killing yourself by getting worked up about this thread. We are not killing you.

I'm not hating on you, I have no problems with you. I do believe that BMs could cause duds.

If you have been paying attention we have recently been discussing how to get the plant material tested, if and when this happens we will have ourselves a scientific answer. Your broken record approach is getting annoying and not bringing us any closer to the science you say matters so much. Please practice what you preach and come forth with something scientific in your next post in this thread, or wait until some test results come back in.

I'll state your view one last time just to make sure everyone know how you feel again.

EVERYONE, STASIS is of the opinion that duds described in this thread are caused by broad mites.

(He probably thinks it is caused by the toxins in the broad mites saliva but he doesn't know what the toxin is called)

Anyway thanks to everyone who is contributing and sharing their experience with the plant. Wether you think I'm the dud or the plants the dud.

If anyone can find out what the toxins in BMs saliva is called that would be awesome. I imagine some university in SoCal or Florida might have some some research with BMs on citrus crops.

 

[dank.frank]

I've looked at nearly every agricultural extension I can on and off for the last 2 years at different times for an actual substance that is in the saliva of the broad mites - and all I can ever find is the simple labeling of it being a toxin...

I've shown pictures of plants about 5wks into flower that were infected with broad mites...

The flowers formed under such conditions are 1000% DIFFERENT than anything I ever experience when dealing with what is commonly being referred to as a "dud" in this thread.

Sour Dubb - was when I first encountered this issue - back in 2009 or 2010 - if I'm not mistaken.

I dealt with broad mites in spring of winter / spring of 2011/2012 when I got a grip on the GSC forum cut...

For the record - THIS - is BROAD MITE damage, when a plant is allowed to flower:

-----

Now that being said - THE ONLY - similarity I remember between the "dud" and the broad mite damage, from a naked eye perspective - is the yellowing along the leaf edge.

And I do understand that it is being discussed not as a one vs the other - but as an after effect of having broad mites, once their populations have been defeated...

My point being, is the damage from a broad mite - in my experience, is MUCH MORE SEVERE, than the issues caused and being experienced with the "dud" phenomenon...

A dud - could still be passed off as regs - a broad mite infected plant might as well be broccoli...



dank.Frank

 

[bobblehead]

BM toxin is not what you guys should be looking for. IDK why we can't listen to Sam.

A toxin runs its course. You survive, or you don't. Toxins lyse cells or cause them to act irregularly. A toxin can't reproduce. An infection on the other hand can be chronic without killing the host. Immunocompromised plants such as those under mite attack are more susceptible to infection, and insects can be vectors of infection.

 

[dank.frank]

^^^ EXACTLY.

The fact it has moved from room to room - even in rooms where NO broad mites were present, suggests something SYSTEMIC.



dank.Frank

 

[Hammerhead]

Also Agree ^^^^^

 

[RetroGrow]

I think trichoderma is naturally occurring in coco, not just the Canna brand, if that's what you were referring to. I wondered about dry brick versions, though, whether the drying process permanently killed the trichoderma or whether rewetting will revive the spores?

True. I mentioned Canna because it's what I use, and it is a great product. All coco has bennies. From the web:
"Coconuts are naturally high in compounds called lignins. This compound is able to help encourage the development of beneficial bacteria, which makes it less likely for harmful bacteria to invade your system. This also means that if you choose to use a hydroponic supplement that contains beneficial microbes, they are more likely to grow, thrive, and benefit your system. These organisms, such as bacillus, mycorrhizae and trichoderma all form symbiotic relationships with the plant that can increase overall performance and yield. Bacillus is used world wide for the control of insect pests and opportunistic fungi pathogens. Mycorrhizae are beneficial fungi that colonize the root surface, helping the plant take up nutrients."
So the likelihood of getting fungal pathogens in coco is diminished, as compared to soil.

 

[Backyard Farmer]

People like to throw around the word Systemic on cannabis forums...

Is PM systemic too? No it isn't...It is Endophytic...

That is the correct term that you are looking for...

How can you expect to solve the problem if you can't even talk about it correctly?

If you call up an Extension lab and talk to them with Bro Science they will not help you.

 

[Cep]

Are pathogens endophytes? Do you mean endotrophic? Edit: Endophyte fits, used to thinking of them as symbionts.

It's true though that the lingo commonly used in canna culture doesn't go far with people in academia. Heady miticides brah

 

[Hammerhead]

I have been using a product that doesn't have extra trichoderma added. It's called Root Bloom from Beneficial Biologic's. I love the stuff. I use most of there additives.

http://www.beneficialbiologics.com/index.php/root-bloom

 

[RetroGrow]

People like to throw around the word Systemic on cannabis forums...

Is PM systemic too? No it isn't...It is Endophytic...

That is the correct term that you are looking for...

How can you expect to solve the problem if you can't even talk about it correctly?

If you call up an Extension lab and talk to them with Bro Science they will not help you.

Endophytes are beneficial.I don't think that's a "problem" here.
"An endophyte is an endosymbiont, often a bacterium or fungus, that lives within a plant for at least part of its life without causing apparent disease. Endophytes are ubiquitous and have been found in all the species of plants studied to date; however, most of these endophyte/plant relationships are not well understood. Many economically important grasses (e.g., Festuca spp., Lolium spp., Zea) carry fungal endophytes which enhance their growth, may improve the plant's to tolerate abiotic stresses such as drought, as well as improve their resistance to insect and mammalian herbivores.
Endophytes may benefit host plants by preventing pathogenic organisms from colonizing them. Extensive colonization of the plant tissue by endophytes creates a "barrier effect", where the local endophytes outcompete and prevent pathogenic organisms from taking hold. Endophytes may also produce chemicals which inhibit the growth of competitors, including pathogenic organisms. Some bacterial endophytes have proven to increase plant growth. The presence of fungal endophytes can cause higher rates of water loss in leaves. However, certain fungal endophytes help plants survive drought and heat. Fungal endophyte-related host benefits are common phenomena, and have been the focus of much research, particularly among the grass endophyte.
The wide range of compounds produced by endophytes have been shown to combat pathogens and even cancers in animals including humans. One notable endophyte with medicinal benefits to humans was discovered by Gary Strobel: Pestalotiopsis microspora, an endophytic fungus of Taxus wallachiana (Himalayan Yew) was found to produce taxol. Endophytes are also being investigated for roles in agriculture and biofuels production. Inoculating crop plants with certain endophytes may provide increased disease or parasite resistance while others may possess metabolic processes that convert cellulose and other carbon sources into "myco-diesel" hydrocarbons and hydrocarbon derivatives. Piriformospora indica is an interesting endophytic fungus of the order Sebacinales, the fungus is capable of colonising roots and forming symbiotic relationship with every possible plant on earth. P. indica has also been shown to increase both crop yield and plant defence of a variety of crops(barley, tomato, maize etc.) against root-pathogens.

It is speculated that there may be many thousands of endophytes useful to mankind but since there are few scientists working in this field, and since forests and areas of biodiversity are rapidly being destroyed, many useful endophytes for curing disease might be permanently lost for medicinal use before they are discovered. The effects of climate change on endophytes is being investigated. Studies of plants grown at different climates or at increased carbon dioxide levels have different distributions of endophytic species.

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

This link has good info on endophytes:

http://microbewiki.kenyon.edu/index.php/Plant_endophyte

 

[mofeta]

Hi guys

I haven't read this whole thread, but I kinda skimmed it. I would like to add some stuff anyway, I hope you find it useful.

I got interested in what I call "rogue" cuts/clones a few years back, I'm pretty sure it was post turn of the century, but stuff like that kinda runs together in my aging mind. I had noticed some interesting phenomena that did not have a obvious explanation. Mysterious, actually. I didn't have a lot of luck figuring it out, but never gave up, slow and steady wins the race, eh?

Some years later I started seeing people talking about what the called "duds", and it seemed that in at least some of the cases it was pretty similar to the peculiar behavior I had noticed. I commented in a thread around that time outlining what I had seen and what I thought might be going on. Here is a link to the part of the thread that discusses it:

PREVIOUS DUD/ROGUE CUT DISCUSSION

I am pretty sure I engaged Josey and a few other people on this topic in various threads too. I can't remember clearly what exactly we discussed.

I noticed that this thread seems to have a lot of extraneous material that doesn't have anything to do with the original dud concept: a clone that although not really sick, but is so markedly different phenotypically from the normal version that it is far outside even the most experienced grower's experience. I don't know if that is intentional, and the meaning of dud has changed to mean "cut that has something wrong with it that I don't know what it is", or if some of the folks commenting are not clear on the dud concept.

I think that the role of PGRs play in pathogenicity has been mentioned in this thread? Here are some subconcepts centered around this idea that I think are good to hold in mind:

Some pathogens secrete PGRs (or compounds functionally similar to them) that are the same as the plant makes naturally.

Some pathogens secrete compounds that stimulate the plant to make PGRs.

Some pathogens secrete PGRs that are not found naturally in the plant.

Some pathogens secrete compounds that will throw off the PGR regulatory system of the plant.

Some pathogens produce metabolites that are directly toxic to the cells by various mechanisms, and can cause the release of PGRs by the plant. The epinasty that is so evident in fungal wilts (not the actual wilting, which is prominent also) is caused by excess ethylene production stimulated by the fungal toxins.

Phytophagus mites and other arthropods secrete all sorts of compounds that affect plant growth, some of them disrupt SAR by interfering with salicylic and jasmonic acids, some are outright PGRs like IAA, some are toxins or digestive enzymes.


All the above bring about abnormal growth by manipulating the controls on the central molecular machinery of the plant, twisting the dials so to speak.

Viruses, on the other hand actually hijack and change the central machinery, by inserting its own transcription or translation apparatus (or both) into the cell, allowing it to control genomic expression. They can also target non-nuclear DNA found in chloroplasts or mitochondria.

I think it is likely that it will be discovered that prion-like misfolded proteins are also plant pathogens.

There are more, but the idea I want to get across is that all these things I have mentioned have enough shared characteristics so that someone familiar with enough of them can tell when strange growth is likely to be caused by a common pathogen or something else.

A lot of the photos I saw skimming this thread were obviously caused by the pathogens that you can find out about in Sam's book. None of those are what I was talking about in that old thread I linked to above. They are also not what dank.Frank is talking about apparently:

I've shown pictures of plants about 5wks into flower that were infected with broad mites...

The flowers formed under such conditions are 1000% DIFFERENT than anything I ever experience when dealing with what is commonly being referred to as a "dud" in this thread.

Sour Dubb - was when I first encountered this issue - back in 2009 or 2010 - if I'm not mistaken.

Now that being said - THE ONLY - similarity I remember between the "dud" and the broad mite damage, from a naked eye perspective - is the yellowing along the leaf edge.

And I do understand that it is being discussed not as a one vs the other - but as an after effect of having broad mites, once their populations have been defeated...

My point being, is the damage from a broad mite - in my experience, is MUCH MORE SEVERE, than the issues caused and being experienced with the "dud" phenomenon...

A dud - could still be passed off as regs - a broad mite infected plant might as well be broccoli...



dank.Frank

This sounds like a similar situation to the "rogue" clone effect I am interested in. And I do believe it was Josey or Zoolander or some other Sour Dubb early adopter that I first noticed making comments about what they called "dudds", that piqued my intrest in determinig if the two things had a common cause.

To make a long story short, I concluded that my epigenetic switch idea was basically correct, and that it was an exaggerrated response to environmental stimuli involving modulation of the epigenome. I just didn't know why.

The epigenome is the liaison between the genome and the environment for an organism. It helps the organism deal with environmental stresses immediately, not in the next generation like your classical genomic changes. It is the actor behind the famous G+E=P phenotypic plasticity. It is popular these days to talk about heritable epigenetic changes (with good reason), but the rapid, transient changes in gene regulation that the epigenome carries out second-by-second should not be forgotten.

That it was epigenetic was arrived at through the exclusion of all the other things I could think of.

I considered pathogens as the cause, although stem fasciation is generally thought to not be transmissable, it can be caused by microorganisms (actually as far as I know it is still pretty mysterious, maybe it is one of the unknown pathogens like a mis-folded protein like I mentioned before) so I considered that as a "why" on my rogue cut epigenetics theory.

Eventually I found this paper:

Genetic and Epigenetic Effects of Plant–Pathogen Interactions: An Evolutionary Perspective

This is an absolute fucking gem of a paper. I was going to quote a few especially tasty nuggets from it as a teaser, but the whole thing is just so excellent that I would end up just c&p the fulltext! lol!

I will bite the bullet and post a few truncated quotes:

Prolonged exposure to stress could convert an epigenetic modification into a stable (epi)genetic trait of tolerance or resistance ... These modifications would start with changes in DNA methylation and chromatin conformation patterns and, if the pathogen pressure continues over several generations, it could lead to a genetic mutation causing fixation of a new trait

Infection of Arabidopsis and tobacco plants with bacterial or viral pathogens results in a significant increase in somatic recombination frequency ... Importantly, the effects of a pathogen on the frequency of genome rearrangements are not restricted to somatic cells only: the rearrangements that occurred within a transgene sequence upon exposure to a virus could be inherited by the progeny.

Grafting infected tissues onto non-infected plants confirmed the existence of a systemic recombination signal (SRS) traveling to the non-infected tissue and triggering an increase in the frequency of homologous recombination. ....Similarly, local exposure to stresses such as UV and rose Bengal can trigger a systemic increase in homologous recombination frequency. This SRS may also result in an increased frequency of meiotic and inherited late somatic recombination events, ..... As plants do not have a predetermined germline, it is plausible that the changes triggered by SRS can be transmitted to the next generation, which would prepare progeny plants for future pathogen encounters.


Intriguingly, changes in DNA methylation levels at a given genomic locus could result in an altered frequency of gene rearrangements. ... recent plant studies indicated that a decrease in DNA methylation at the given genomic loci can attract genome rearrangements. If these observations are accurate, then the change of DNA methylation in response to stress may have a significant impact on the rate of genetic changes in genomic loci targeted by DNA methylation. It may help in directing and accelerating plant genome evolution. Unfortunately, there is still limited evidence supporting stress-induced transgenerational changes in DNA methylation. Moreover, more data on correlation between methylation level and the frequency of genomic rearrangements still need to be obtained.

Hey dank.Frank

When you say:

The fact it has moved from room to room...
dank.Frank

Do you mean it seems transmissible? Does it pass to cuts of other varieties? If it does then that would nail it down in my mind as a pathogen. It would be virtually non-virulent and would not even be noticeable most of the time, until a environmental trigger flipped an epigenetic switch in the pathogen (see Epigenetic Control of Effector Gene Expression in the Plant Pathogenic Fungus Leptosphaeria maculans) breaking its "dormancy", and causing it to (through various mechanisms) twist the "control dials" on the epigenome of the pot clone, in ways that are not normally encountered in typical plant growth. This would result in transmissible, heritable irregularities that could end up being solidified in the genome, by both inheritance of somatic mutation and homologous recombination.

This was not the case with the rogue BBXC99 I mentioned in the other thread, it was not transmissible. The stem fasciation, though makes me think it is still likely to be a pathogenic organism at the root of it. This one was also not a deleterious change, the rogue yielded more and had a pretty good taste, kinda like that gross pasteurized "cheese product" that they make those nut-crusted cheese balls out of, or that you find packaged in those little ceramic crocks, but in a good way.

I think a good avenue of inquiry would be to research phenotypic plasticity, somatic mutations and so forth that are found in clonally propagated food crops.

Oh, and I would be interested to know if most duds (the kind I am interested in) share the Sour Dubb lineage.


Well, I hope you find something worthwhile in this.

mofeta

 

[dank.frank]

People like to throw around the word Systemic on cannabis forums...

Is PM systemic too? No it isn't...It is Endophytic...

That is the correct term that you are looking for...

How can you expect to solve the problem if you can't even talk about it correctly?

If you call up an Extension lab and talk to them with Bro Science they will not help you.

Can't you ever contribute something useful without attempting to belittle others in the process??

I however, in spite of my personal disdain for your generally virulent and pompous attitude, do appreciate your contributions; I try REALLY hard to overlook this and still gain some benefit from your posts.

How do you expect to be a part of solving the problem when you fail to communicate with people respectfully, "BRO"...

pseudomonas fluorescens for systemic control.

Perhaps I should have been more technical and said for induced systemic resistance.

Even so, fusarium oxysporum is a vascular pathogen - and is not considered an endophyte. There are however, non-pathogenic strains of fusarium oxysporum as well, and that could be perhaps where you got confused??

But on a side note:

"A systemic infection is so named because the pathogen that causes it, and often the symptoms that it causes, are spread throughout the systems of the body, instead of being localized in one area."

I feel this aptly applies to the conditions being observed in these "dud" plants - as it affects everything from the flowers to the roots to the leaves.



dank.Frank

 

[dank.frank]

I noticed that this thread seems to have a lot of extraneous material that doesn't have anything to do with the original dud concept: a clone that although not really sick, but is so markedly different phenotypically from the normal version that it is far outside even the most experienced grower's experience. I don't know if that is intentional, and the meaning of dud has changed to mean "cut that has something wrong with it that I don't know what it is", or if some of the folks commenting are not clear on the dud concept.

We are discussing something very particular and yes, there is some "I don't know and it isn't growing right - OH - DUD" taking place for certain.

This sounds like a similar situation to the "rogue" clone effect I am interested in. And I do believe it was Josey or Zoolander or some other Sour Dubb early adopter that I first noticed making comments about what they called "dudds", that piqued my intrest in determinig if the two things had a common cause.

Yes, this was the first reference of the "dudd" and it was only called such because it was clever and rhymed with the clone it was happening with - ie the Sour Dubb.

People were having an unknown issue where they were trying to run rooms full of the Dubb - and out of however many cuts taken - there would be a few under performers that were no where near the quality they should be, while being exposed to the exact same environmental conditions and factors. This made people shy away from Sour Dubb because she became known as unpredictable.

Hey dank.Frank

Do you mean it seems transmissible? Does it pass to cuts of other varieties?

Yes. In my experience, when I dealt with "duds" in Sour Dubb, it did seem transmissible to other varieties. ESPECIALLY when in the cloning phase. Didn't matter if it was in a hydro cloner or in rooters under a dome....

Oh, and I would be interested to know if most duds (the kind I am interested in) share the Sour Dubb lineage.

Well, I hope you find something worthwhile in this.

mofeta

Yes, this thread was started in response to discussion taking place within the Gorilla Glue #4 thread. GG#4 is in fact an offspring of Sour Dubb.

HOWEVER, the cut was grown by several people for over a years time with ZERO issue. Those who have had cuts since early on have NOT experienced this "dud" issue with the GG#4. In fact, I have never personally seen a "dud" with GG#4...

I did see Sour Dubb in 2013 that was "dud" free...fwiw.

Thanks for chiming in Mofeta. I appreciate you taking the time to express your thoughts so thoroughly.



dank.Frank

 

[TickleMyBalls]

Personally I think that if these dud problems are not pathogen related, they are a very extreme example of a recessive SOUR phenotype. Sour diesel is one of the only plants I've ever had that I have grown mother and clone out side by side and seen different phenotypical expressions from them. One typical sour diesel, the other a more sandlewoody, spicy, long spear cola growing pheno. The smell and flavor are almost non existent comparatively and I would consider that representation a "dud", but it occurred side by side with other healthy versions of the same clone.... so is the dud phenomenon a recessive sour trait? if so it can be grown out of the way tom and Sam suggested.

 

[Miquiztli]

Great info Dank Frank and Mofeta!! Thank you both for sharing your knowledge

 

[xxxstr8edgexxx]

Incredibly good posts this evening.

 

[OvergrowDaWorld]

Incredibly good posts this evening.

Agreed. Dank Franks posts are always helpfull and informative.
I wish I had the patience to type like that. Major ADHD here.
Mofeta and RetroGrow too! Great posts guys.

 

[dank.frank]

fwiw - I've been told again, that endophytic is the correct terminology - I'm still not 100% sure myself, as I honestly thought systemic was accurate usage...

Even after a couple hours of reading I'm not entirely sure how I'm incorrect.

I'm NOT trying to spread any misinformation or keep us from learning - and Backyard is an excellent farmer, there is no doubt about that. I've learned a lot about outdoor from simply observing him over the years - and I want it to be noted that people should listen and consider what he says with an open mind...

I'm really not trying to do right vs wrong here - and I don't want it to come off as personal, because it isn't. I just don't want the sharing of information to become a means of verbally berating others...and the same thing applies to me.

Backyard - It wasn't my intent to "call you out" - but would you mind taking a minute to explain WHY endophytic is the correct terminology to use? Since you are insisting on this - then I feel as if I am overlooking or missing something.

I'm perfectly okay with being wrong - I would just like to understand why.



dank.Frank