K
kopite
That covers it for me :}
F1 Question
- Thread starter Pantalicious
- Start date
That covers it for me :}
K
kopite
if they started dancing and doing handstands I might be amazed...
Kopite
thats how it has been explained to me bro, mating plants from a BC1, results in the BC1f2 and so on.
i think the IX1 is a made up term as ive never come across it anywhere else. in fact i never heard of it till rez came up with it in a thread where i had asked what a BC1 X BC1 would be. at the time i was doin the BC1F2 with subbies Jacks Cleaner BC1 seed offerin.
what do ya call this???
(SCremeF2 X PHaze) X (PHaze X SCreme BC1) the 2 PHaze plants came from different generations
i call it Strawberry Hill
CBF
another example, Strawberry cough S1s, a male was found in the population, seed made and called F2, couldnt be called a S2, as the line wasnt selfed again.
did 2 filial gens, then a BC1 back to a F2 cut, then a BC2 back to the same cut.
now take both the BC1 and BC2 plants and go back to the F2, usin all males and females from both gens, which is the 3rd BC in the breeding which results in F7 or 7 generations in the work.
what would the correct term for this work be?
CBF
did 2 filial gens, then a BC1 back to a F2 cut, then a BC2 back to the same cut.
now take both the BC1 and BC2 plants and go back to the F2, usin all males and females from both gens, which is the 3rd BC in the breeding which results in F7 or 7 generations in the work.
what would the correct term for this work be?
CBF
K
kopite
S1xS1=S1F2
so after 2 gens = S1F4 then F2(recurrent)xS1F4 = BC1 then F2(recurrent)xBC1 = BC2
I'm unsure why you would then take BC1 and BC2 I would of thought just BC2 would be needed for F2(recurrent)xBC2 = BC3
in a cubed way
unless you meant you did 2 lines of BC1 ? perhaps I have read it wrong
but thats just how I see it, perhaps someone can corect it
Kopite
right on, the reason I use the Ix/Ic terms is so folks dont misunderstand it with F1,F2 etc, that Id only Designate on offspring derived from two unrelated IBL/Landrace strains.
as I said, same theory, different terminology.
what do ya call this???
(SCremeF2 X PHaze) X (PHaze X SCreme BC1) the 2 PHaze plants came from different generations
i call it Strawberry Hill
CBF
that would be a kick ass polyhybrid imo!
nah you got it right bro, and thank you for takin the time to line me out.
im goin back with both BCs, due to the fact i used 3 males in the BC1, and then only one in the BC2. i want to restore vigor, add a higher percent of strawberry in the line as well as keepin some of the flavors in the F2 that i have lost in the seedmakin.
more or less learnin with trial and error.
CBF
Hola bub good to see ya around. both outcrosses were very good, so the mating of both should be just as good, with more purple is my hopes.
thanks for sayin so
CBF
E
EvilTwin
Hi Guys,
You've clearly gone beyond my understanding...
But OG Bub, this statement concerns me.
"Incross. "IC or IX"
I would use the term incross, when breeding inwardly from Polyhybrid offspring, an accurate way to keep track of inbred generations that would not be represented by "filial" generations. IE, inbreeding two unrelated Hybrids.."
"inbreeding" by all definitions is within a family. How can you use that term to describe a cross of two unrelated hybrids? So your statement here seems illogical to me. I don't mean to be a nitpicker...but without appropriate use of terms, nobody will ever come to any understanding.
Peace,
ET
You've clearly gone beyond my understanding...
But OG Bub, this statement concerns me.
"Incross. "IC or IX"
I would use the term incross, when breeding inwardly from Polyhybrid offspring, an accurate way to keep track of inbred generations that would not be represented by "filial" generations. IE, inbreeding two unrelated Hybrids.."
"inbreeding" by all definitions is within a family. How can you use that term to describe a cross of two unrelated hybrids? So your statement here seems illogical to me. I don't mean to be a nitpicker...but without appropriate use of terms, nobody will ever come to any understanding.
Peace,
ET
no yer right, I could have made myself more clear.
what Ive tried to make clear, is that Id use the term "incross" when breeding within unrelated lines that are per say, Hybrids, that are NOT standard to the Filial system as I understand it.
IE: crossing two unrelated Hybrids results in a poly, but poly what.... IC/Ix 1, further inbreeding/incrossing would follow in order.
but where I may have lost you, is that I consider inbreeding, and the filial system, from the beginning of a tru F1, bred of unrelated, Stable parents. I choose to use the "incross" terms, so that folks are not mistaken on the filial system as it is known.
if you re-read some of my previous posts, mabey my way of thinking about it will become clear.
whats most important to me is that the seeds I produce, are represented so that folks know an accurate composition.. not all of us use the same terminology, but I think this thread is helping to clear alot of things up!
bub.
still learning,,,,,sorry guys
F1 = outcross .......eg,,,Haze x SK1................."crossing 2 unrelated M/F IBL seedlines"
F2 = incross..........eg,,,(Haxe x SK1) x (Haze x SK1) ,,,,,,,,"crossing related lines"
F1 = outcross .......eg,,,Haze x SK1................."crossing 2 unrelated M/F IBL seedlines"
F2 = incross..........eg,,,(Haxe x SK1) x (Haze x SK1) ,,,,,,,,"crossing related lines"
K
kopite
well I'd use the term inbred like the folk in some places(Isle of man) or the royal family....
yep you got it imo.
n screw me cause I entirely wrote a couple thing wrong I believe.. let me correct myself:
ANY initial combination of 2 unrelated parents, regaurdless their composition, is an outcross.
depending on the parents composition, would be whe I personally would begin defining the offspring as "Filial", or "Ic/Ix"..
sorry, Im just not wording things well today lol...
peace, bub.
LOL, yeah not alot of large populations in that line, LOLz.
terms are crazy
,,an "inbred line" or "IL" is a good word to discribe what i mean when i say incross...
thanks for being cool Kopite
LOL.. you did
@ALL : ... confusion often arises because botanists and animal breeders use slightly different terminology when labelling.
For example,, "line-bred" is another term commonly used by breeders.
Hope this helps
Charles Xavier
Member
Greetings
My God....it's like Christmas in July.
(what a fantastic present....thanks GMT)
My mens them reppin' in full on this thread...Big ups (yous know who yous is)
First: one absolutely needs to bear in mind that breeding is goal oriented and directed. Acknowledging this distinction, is akin to the Rosetta Stone.
It has been my experience that a technically accurate definition of an Incross (IC or IX) is best supported by example:
In a field in Afghanistan there is an Afghan cultivar. All the plants share specific traits which are passed on to the progeny making this population a true breeding inbred population i.e. a strain.
One year, the farmer (and this is important: there needs be a farmer for the full definition to be realized) notices two specimens in the field. In addition to all the shared traits, one specimen forms purple colas by maturation, the other specimen matures earlier than the rest.
The farmer decides: purple is pretty and early maturation is advantageous, and so he creates line bred populations of Purple Afghans and Early Afghans
One year, winter came early and harshly. The farmer notices: The purple specimens handle cold better than the green specimens and the early specimens did not offer so huge a loss, as they were close to being fully mature when the first snows whirled over the mountain.
The farmer slapped his forehead, danced a jig and resolved to create a plant that not only retained all the traits the strain was known for, but also to be purple and early maturing. He decided to cross an Early female with a Purple male, both specimens selected from divergent line bred populations within the same inbred genome.
That's an Incross.
Sincerely,
Charles.
My God....it's like Christmas in July.
(what a fantastic present....thanks GMT)
My mens them reppin' in full on this thread...Big ups (yous know who yous is)
First: one absolutely needs to bear in mind that breeding is goal oriented and directed. Acknowledging this distinction, is akin to the Rosetta Stone.
It has been my experience that a technically accurate definition of an Incross (IC or IX) is best supported by example:
In a field in Afghanistan there is an Afghan cultivar. All the plants share specific traits which are passed on to the progeny making this population a true breeding inbred population i.e. a strain.
One year, the farmer (and this is important: there needs be a farmer for the full definition to be realized) notices two specimens in the field. In addition to all the shared traits, one specimen forms purple colas by maturation, the other specimen matures earlier than the rest.
The farmer decides: purple is pretty and early maturation is advantageous, and so he creates line bred populations of Purple Afghans and Early Afghans
One year, winter came early and harshly. The farmer notices: The purple specimens handle cold better than the green specimens and the early specimens did not offer so huge a loss, as they were close to being fully mature when the first snows whirled over the mountain.
The farmer slapped his forehead, danced a jig and resolved to create a plant that not only retained all the traits the strain was known for, but also to be purple and early maturing. He decided to cross an Early female with a Purple male, both specimens selected from divergent line bred populations within the same inbred genome.
That's an Incross.
Sincerely,
Charles.
Hi Charles,
Glad to see you posting again! Your wisdom and knowledge is always a welcome addition to these kind of threads.
What do you mean by 'he creates line bred populations'?
Do you mean he takes a regular afgan and the purple specimen, crosses them to make seeds, and then takes another regular afghan and the early specimen and crosses them to make seeds?
Are you saying he then has to work those 2 batches of seeds to create these populations? or just the creation of those 2 batches of seeds is the creation of said line bred population?
What is the difference between doing the incross in your example above, and just crossing the purple specimen and early specimen?
If you are dealing with true breeding populations, wouldn't the end results be the same/very similar?
CX, nice to see ya again, its been a while!
great example.. but I just dont understand how inbreeding between phenos of a stable strain, could be anything other than inbreeding..
totally see what yer sayin tho. because if yer not breeding from an F1, "A x B", it wouldnt really be consistant to the "F" system either...
so rightfully, the following gens could be tracked by "Ic/Ix...
I guess thats a nother accurate representation of the term, incross.
peace, bub.
great example.. but I just dont understand how inbreeding between phenos of a stable strain, could be anything other than inbreeding..
totally see what yer sayin tho. because if yer not breeding from an F1, "A x B", it wouldnt really be consistant to the "F" system either...
so rightfully, the following gens could be tracked by "Ic/Ix...
I guess thats a nother accurate representation of the term, incross.
peace, bub.
Charles Xavier
Member
Greetings blynx
I'm rusty; but thank you for the kind welcome.
Precisely.
Yes; so that the populations breed true for the Purple or for the Early trait
No; here lies another point where the distinction between genotype and phenotype is crucial. Genotypically, the coding for all possible traits are held in the original inbred population, however, the traits are not recognized until they are phenotypically expressed; therefore, in order to be considered line bred, the following criteria must be met.
1) A specimen displaying an uncommon trait is selected (isolated) from an inbred population.
2) The progeny produced from the original isolated specimen, breeds true for the trait(s) selected.
3) All specimens that breed true for the selected trait are directly related to the parental specimen (P) originally isolated.
The difference is: one's designated IC or IX, the other is F(n+1) or f1.
One plant does not constitute a line.
The differing designations reveal whether selection was directed or random; simply taking two (2) plants and crossing them is in the stricter sense of the concept, not selection.
For an incross to be true, one needs be reasonably certain of phenotypic outcome (po) i.e. traits which the progeny will most likely express. Genomics is impractical for most, so the most universal way to predict po is to create line bred populations in order to track trait progression and influence frequency.
Really it's the difference between a hypothesis and a guess; you may arrive at the same conclusion, however, a hypothesis is scientifically legitimate, a guess is not.
An aside:
A practical example:
Informally Chem D X Chem '91 is considered an incross; this supposition is quite a stretch. It becomes less so if one assumes that 'Chem' is an inbred line (but still, not accurate).
Chem D/Kush X Chem '91 is not an incross, given the 'Chem' line is not derived from the Kush population.
Chem D/Kush X Chem D/Kush could be an incross if the original hybridized population were subsequently inbred (five (5) or more generations), line bred (true breeding populations for specific traits), selected and mated.
Sincerely,
Charles.
I'm rusty; but thank you for the kind welcome.
Precisely.
Yes; so that the populations breed true for the Purple or for the Early trait
No; here lies another point where the distinction between genotype and phenotype is crucial. Genotypically, the coding for all possible traits are held in the original inbred population, however, the traits are not recognized until they are phenotypically expressed; therefore, in order to be considered line bred, the following criteria must be met.
1) A specimen displaying an uncommon trait is selected (isolated) from an inbred population.
2) The progeny produced from the original isolated specimen, breeds true for the trait(s) selected.
3) All specimens that breed true for the selected trait are directly related to the parental specimen (P) originally isolated.
The difference is: one's designated IC or IX, the other is F(n+1) or f1.
One plant does not constitute a line.
The differing designations reveal whether selection was directed or random; simply taking two (2) plants and crossing them is in the stricter sense of the concept, not selection.
For an incross to be true, one needs be reasonably certain of phenotypic outcome (po) i.e. traits which the progeny will most likely express. Genomics is impractical for most, so the most universal way to predict po is to create line bred populations in order to track trait progression and influence frequency.
Really it's the difference between a hypothesis and a guess; you may arrive at the same conclusion, however, a hypothesis is scientifically legitimate, a guess is not.
An aside:
A practical example:
Informally Chem D X Chem '91 is considered an incross; this supposition is quite a stretch. It becomes less so if one assumes that 'Chem' is an inbred line (but still, not accurate).
Chem D/Kush X Chem '91 is not an incross, given the 'Chem' line is not derived from the Kush population.
Chem D/Kush X Chem D/Kush could be an incross if the original hybridized population were subsequently inbred (five (5) or more generations), line bred (true breeding populations for specific traits), selected and mated.
Sincerely,
Charles.
