[Daub Marley]

Hello all,
I am new to the breeding section here so I first want to introduce myself. I am an engineering student with a basic understanding of plant biology. I have been smoking for about 15 years now and I want to recreate some of the best strains that came around before they got bastardized and diluted out of existence.
A basic problem I have run across is how to tell what male to keep and breed and which ones to throw out (hopefully you guys can still help me here some). I believe a useful tool in making these decisions should be leaf margin analysis.
Here is how it works. The more exaggerated the teeth are on the leaflets the more adapted the plant is to getting a head start on the growing season, but less tolerant to heat. To me this implies mountains, and in fact that's how paleontologist and geologists find the elevation from an ancient site.
My hypothesis is that for cannabis these mountainous strains would be more likely be drug type strains and the valleys (small teeth leaflets) would correspond to more hemp type strains.
I doubt it would make a huge difference using that trait alone for breeding, but it could be used to help to add one more item to your likes or dislikes about a male that should help you decide. Let me know what you guys think.

[MJPassion]

Strictly my opinion...
I'm no breeder but I like to make seeds.

Leaves of all shapes n sizes produce excellent quality product, ime. Leaf Margin analysis would be irrelevant for breeding because of this.

However, paying attention to the margins could lead to early detection of plant stresses.

[homebrew420]

Sounds like a pipe dream. The leafs give no indication of anything. Leaf morphology could be something one looks t o breed for but why? and the plants do make it as easy as they can to tell you what sex they are...unless they trick you a few weeks into flower.

Peace

[Daub Marley]

Originally Posted by homebrew420

Sounds like a pipe dream. The leafs give no indication of anything.

I disagree. They give you all kinds of information about their genetics, environment, stress levels, etc.

Originally Posted by homebrew420

Leaf morphology could be something one looks t o breed for but why? and the plants do make it as easy as they can to tell you what sex they are...unless they trick you a few weeks into flower.

Peace

Selecting males for breeding would be its main use. Selecting females is easy, but you only have an educated guess with males. So this is another way to help you decide.

I think the hypothesis is pretty logical, but the part that could be argued is if mountainous strain correspond to higher cannabinoid/THC levels.
There are several reasons why I believe this is true, but that is the weak point in my argument.

[trichrider]

I used to do leaf surface surveys to determine the number of trichomes a strain exhibited before flowering.
...a thousand points of light. it reminded me of R. Reagans speech.

take a scope with at least 60 power and look at tops of leaves. there are tiny points of light that I assumed were precursors of stalked capitate trichomes.

never occurred to me to take note of the margins. will take under advisement....thnx

[stoned-trout]

lab testing is the future and present

[Daub Marley]

Originally Posted by trichrider

I used to do leaf surface surveys to determine the number of trichomes a strain exhibited before flowering.

If you have a microscope you can count the number of trichomes per square millimeter. You can also survey their size and uniformity. Highly recommended.

Originally Posted by stoned-trout

lab testing is the future and present

Future more than present, but I'm certainly not going to disagree.

[HarvestMoon303]

Number of trichomes per area means nothing though, right? It is essentially inverse of trichome size and number of trichs doesn't translate into increased potency.

[MJPassion]

Potency is a factor of ALL compounds being ingested.
Some work synergisticaly, some antagonistically. (Are those real words? Lol)

Trich density shows nothing but trich density.

Far as recreating strains of the past goes... good luck...
I don't think it can happen.
Landrace strains (the greats of old) cannot be made from polyhybrids. There's too much genetic mud in the water.

[waveguide]

i like the thought, it's reasonable to consider everything, imo certainty is a dead end. there are probably multiple pertinent factors to morphology.

people have this idea of commodities and "classics" we can name and celebrate. it's like saying, "i'd like to preserve a japanese person from 50 years ago because they were classics" mr. tanaka would be perhaps flattered but nonplussed. we can see very clearly in our minds what we want, meanwhile reality is in motion.

i wonder if people are conceiving of the wrong place to look for quality.. instead of classic lines/individuals (things that we can observe and objectify easily) it may have as much to do with dynamics, things in transition, how happy the plants are/how they express themselves, eg. there seems to be a consensus of "hybrid vigor," if plants like to breed diversely, perhaps quality can be the result of what makes plants happy? i haven't done enough crosses yet to feel that it is a reliable route to improved individuals. (and i'm pretty sure human beings would also find artificial growth and breeding regimes somewhat less than idyllic).

pretty much though all celebrated landrace genetics came from somewhere else before then and will go someplace after then, maybe observing transition is as beneficial as stability (skunkman's dna project).

of course, you can't sell just anything at "legends" prices, which is where the root of the error may lie. needing to sell things.