Epigenetics:)

[englishrick]

Epigenetics discoveries challenge outdated medical beliefs about DNA, inheritance and gene expression ...

Epigentics is the reason why i run the same cutting twice,,,,,

Epigentics is the reason why i would NOT use a male thats was less than 6months old.......

Epigentics is WHY my weed is better than yours,,,even tho we run the same clone....

Epigenics is 1 of the main factors in selective breeding programs ,,,,,,,

Epigentics effects our beloved plants future state.........

BUT WHAT IS IT ????????????








would anyone like to say something????

thanks

 

[englishrick]

an i know i need to learn how to spell "Epigenetics".......thankyou very mutch

 

[Moldy Dreads]

spill the beans....

 

[Moldy Dreads]

an i know i need to learn how to spell "Epigenetics".......thankyou very mutch

yes as well as "and" "I" "thank you" and "much" LMAO

just kidding, but really, how have you changed phenotype through epigenetics, how many generations did it take and what are the changes you say? yield? taste? color?

 

[Guest]

Hi Rick, did you run these experiments in a controlled setting, if so please explain your variables and set-up. How many different phenotypes have you tried this on to test accuracy over multiple sets of genes? Epigenetics is something that tickles my ear, but can't cross the moat into my brain.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

Epigenetics is the reason why one should only ever select the healthiest branches for cuttings.

Epigenetic traits are simply this: Traits which a cell passes along for multiple divisions, but which are not genetic. OR, Phenotypic variations which can take on the inheritability of genotypic variation for multiple cell divisions.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

rick, what 'outdated medical beliefs about DNA, inheritance and gene expression' does the existence of epigenetic traits challenge? Epigenetic traits are conditionally temporary.

 

[Guest]

Thank you Grat3fulh3ad. I was aware of these epogenetic traits on a basic level. In they are passed along to future generations, and that is what proper selection is for. For some reason I took englishrick's posting as if there was something he was doing to individual cuttings in addition to providing optimal environment settings and seeing the traits switch within the same clone over time as a mutated benefit. Perhaps it was the remark from english rick about his being better even with the same clone. I believe I misread englishrick's post.

 

[konstantgrdnr]

Epigenetics

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sciencenow/3411/02.html

 

[kopite]

Epigenetic traits are conditionally temporary.

thats what I'm led to believe too...

heres a bed time read on it with regards to plants....

http://aob.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/97/1/11
http://aob.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/96/7/1143

 

[englishrick]

strike a pose,,,and

Bear in mind that adaptation is mutation.

As indoor Cannabis cultivation (and to a slightly lesser extent, outdoor cultivation in less than optimal climes) becomes more popular, the incidence of intersex traits will increase. This is largely due to poor genetic selections and poor growing conditions; which when combined, exploits the plants' survival mechanism

vogue

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

And?
I always knew charles was somewhat off base.
Are you saying his statement was the "outdated medical beliefs about DNA, inheritance and gene expression"?

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

I spent an entire thread and three weeks once arguing the genetic sex of a plant vs. a plant's ability to produce inter-sex flowers in response to the sort of extreme stresses which might decimate a population and make self pollination a viable reproduction strategy.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

Epigenetic traits are not passed to offspring, since by their very nature they do not affect the structure of the DNA. Epigenetic traits are conditionally temporary, they do not become part of the plant's permanent makeup.


Incidentally, on a side note in regards to what you quoted by CharlesX... Adaption is not mutation. One of the mechanisms by which organisms adapt is mutation.

 

[Guest]

what?

So because CharlesX says adaptation is mutation, then that is all there is to it? This is not a nock at CharlesX post, I agree with what CharlesX says about poor selections expressing themselves under less than optimal conditions, but fail to see the correlation with epigenetics. I believe adaptation can be related to mutation, but not all adaptations are mutations. IMO a mutation or epigenetic shift is permanant (my opinion is wrong and it is temporary*edit*) and not easily reverted back. I try very hard to stay out of these advanced subjects because I am not a scientist and struggle with the technical terms. Please set me on track if I am misguided.

Using CharlesX quote how is an adaptation in response to a less than perfect environment considered epigenetic any more so than a variety of stress tests sorting out what is considered not wanted to whomever is making selections? Would the process of human selection be a way of epigenetic shifts?

This brings me back to my original post, you mentioned you are seeing positive results. What variables have you tested and how was your testing model set? IMO in order to see a positive mutation shift as you claim to be benefiting, then something additional and beneficial must be added to your garden. Spill it, what is your secret? How have you concluded this?
Again, forgive my limited understanding on epigenetics. Much respect to those who drop the knowledge, you know who you are! Chime in suzy, where are you?

 

[Guest]

Epigenetic traits are not passed to offspring, since by their very nature they do not affect the structure of the DNA. Epigenetic traits are conditionally temporary, they do not become part of the plant's permanent makeup.

This clears much up in my brain. Thanks again Grat3.

So an epigenetic trait is in a sense a temporary mutation.

 

[englishrick]

PLEASE PLEASE will someone explain Hard and Soft inheritance to the masses........im not upto it,

It is widely accepted in scientific circles that organisms inherit DNA from their predecessors through a process known as hard inheritance -- so named because changes in the nucleotide sequence of the passed-on DNA is rare and only happens through random mutation -- but soft inheritance, or the affect of non-genetic factors on DNA, is emerging as a new science that overrides hard genetics.

In a study published in the May issue of Nature Reviews Genetics, Eric Richards, Ph.D. proposed that changes such as alternative DNA packaging and small chemical additions to DNA bases that prevent the expression can be passed on and should be considered soft inheritance.

Richards, professor of biology at Washington University in St. Louis, analyzed past studies of epigenetics -- a Greek term meaning "above and beyond the gene" -- and evolution, and found that there is evidence in both the plant and animal kingdoms that supports the notion of soft inheritance.

One of the mechanisms Richards points to is known as DNA methylation, or the chemical modification of the DNA chemical subunit cytosine. Studies have shown that a lack of proper DNA methylation can cause developmental problems in higher organisms, including stunted growth in plants and death in mice.

Richards has also studied epigentics' effect on DNA packaging, noting that DNA that is "loosely wrapped" around proteins is easier to access. This, along with the location of DNA within the nucleus, presents another factor that affects the regulation of gene expression.

Such theories, Richards said, tend to provoke a negative reaction from his peers who remain steeped in outmoded beliefs about DNA.

"Epigenetics as soft inheritance in mammals puts us on a slippery slope that many people don't want to visit," he said.

The reaction was similar for the theories of pre-Darwinian evolutionist Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, who believed that the environment plays an important role in organisms' acquisition of evolutionary characteristics. Shore birds, for example, acquired long legs by constantly trying to stretch their legs and lift themselves out of the water, Lamarck believed. But many of Lamarck's theories are now being shows to be surprisingly correct, decades later.

"When most biologists hear the name Lamarck or the term soft inheritance, the reaction is, 'Oh my God, here we go again,'" Richards said. "But from a molecular biology point of view there is a mechanism to do soft inheritance, and epigenetic inheritance can be construed as a form soft inheritance. That's all I'm saying."

"The really heretical thing to say is that the environment could be pushing the epigenetic information in a direction that is beneficial," he said. "This is the more extreme variation of soft inheritance that raises the hackles."

One such hackle-raising study observed the epigenetic changes in mice hybrids from diet in a field Richards refers to as "nutritional epigenomics." In the study, researchers attempted to affect the DNA methylation of pregnant mice through varying levels of folate and B vitamins.

"The idea was: If you pump these pregnant moms up with these dietary supplements, you might be able to skew the DNA methylation patterns, and thus skew the way the mice come out at the end of the day, and it works,'" Richards said. "In this particular instance that says what you're getting fed in the womb influences your phenotype; physical and physiological attributes."

"These findings are revolutionizing our understanding about the role of nutrition and other environmental factors in human health. What they are showing," added Mike Adams, a holistic nutritionist, "is that your health is certainly not controlled entirely by your genes. Nutrition, it turns out, affects the way your genetic code is expressed. As a result, nutrition and other environmental factors determine your health just as much as your genetic code."

According to a separate study, early grooming and nurturing of rat pups by their mothers affected the methylation of a glucocorticoid receptor gene, found in the hippocampus in the brain. This nurturing apparently activates the glucocorticoid receptor and provides the pups with an enhanced ability to handle stress later on in their lives. Richards said the process appears to be brought on by changes in DNA methylation through changes in DNA packaging.

"These studies do not demonstrate inheritance between generations, but they do show that the early nutritional environment in the mice and early behavioral environment in the rat studies can change the DNA packaging on the genome, and that that is 'remembered' in the cell divisions that make the rest of the organism, " Richards said. "But this is not from one generation to another. No one has shown that yet."

Richards said that more extreme variations of soft inheritance would require that it be proven, one way or another, whether environment can induce an inheritable epigenetic change in an organism.

"Certainly, nobody has shown that an epigenetically induced beneficial or adaptive change has been inherited," Richard admitted, but he pointed out that there was also no reason to discount the idea of epigenetic inheritance.

"The big questions to resolve are how many epigenetic changes are induced by the environment, what types of phenotypes result from these changes, and how many of these epigenetic changes are inherited," he said.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

The epigenetic trait is not inherited, but the potential to exhibit that trait is. This 'can be construed as a form of soft inheritance', i guess.

Careful though... there is a point where epigenetic ceases to be science and becomes pseudo-science. We can really only benefit here on this forum from exploring avenues which can be demonstrated and observed.

The Idea that not every possible gene in the dna of an organism is 'switched on' is a fine scientific principle. The idea that the stimuli which switch these expressions on can be manipulated to cause an epigenetic trait to be fixed to a line and 'permanently on' is pseudo science. Lamarckism anyone?

 

[englishrick]

me an my friend T made some seeds lately,,,,the seeds from MY growroom are larger in size than my friends,,,,WE made the same cross at the same time in 2 seperate growrooms across town,,,,he grew his plants in his way,,,an i grew mine how i allways do,,,,,,,,WE used the same female clones and the same polen harvested from 1 plant,,,,but WE ended up with results mendal would be shocked at,,,,

Small vs Large,,,,,,im growin the large 1s

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

Yup... Healthier plants make healthier seeds.

I'd wager Mendel much harder to shock than you assume.