Everybody a breeder ?

[Weird]

A little bit dramatic......

Judgement of how another person expresses their passion for the plant is what started this tread's decline. Respecting each others passion regardless of how it is expressed will simply push it in a better direction.

We still as a community are missing out on possible synergies because of infighting, and that is a byproduct of prohibition.

Prohibition is punishment enough.

 

[mexcurandero420]

one example odd of a cannabis cultivar intended for use as an ornamental is the hungarian cultivar Panorama.It's a back-cross hybrid between a globe-shaped dwarf mutant that spontaneously occured in a Lebanese drug strain and the monoecious fiber cultivar Fibrimon (Bocsa personal communication, 1990)

Had some Lebs in my garden and with one with the same odd.

It's good to know your basics from books, but sometimes it's difficult to explain why something like this occur.

Keep on growing

 

[Tom Hill]

Judgement of how another person expresses their passion for the plant is what started this tread's decline. Respecting each others passion regardless of how it is expressed will simply push it in a better direction.

We still as a community are missing out on possible synergies because of infighting, and that is a byproduct of prohibition.

Prohibition is punishment enough.

Yeah I can't do that Weird. People who refuse to pick up a book or two in order to further develop that passion are kidding themselves in believing they have any passion for the plant at all. They are just lazy hippie stoners grasping for excuses and spinning around in fairytale land as far as I can tell. I can try until the cows came home, but I'll never have any respect for that at all. We are missing out on possible synergies because the vast majority are lazy ignorant stoners, and they work very hard to keep it that way.

 

[OLDproLg]

Hey cool,we got some pics in here besides mine!

Tom buddy,i was just ahead of this thread with re-selfing
the cheese as i mentioned.....did know what i was looking for
but did NOT know how to use the TOOL of selfing as a tool it self!
Did know everyone out there was selfing ofcorse,but thought they were
just trying to make quick copies of moms to sell quick??
Never believed in breeding this way,but the TOOL method really makes sence!!
After all the nonsence an quaggerbabbling it was a good read after all!
PEACE n GREEN,Lg!

 

[OLDproLg]

WOW!!!

Love that LEB plant MEX.....
damb interesting looking!!
MORE...

 

[Infinitesimal]

I still think its funny how tom is just recommending people read a couple books... and people cry... like little kids getting assigned homework...

I hate reading books too but come the F' on, what are doing here on the internet but reading, and actually I find the breeding books quite interesting and I get stuck into it and end up finishing 'em pretty quickly because I find learning more about the plant and genetics pertaining to it very interesting, fun and exiting to learn about.

he's not saying anything earth shattering or saying to stop chucking pollen, just that you and your cannabis plants would benefits some from you guys educating yourselves more... how can anyone argue with that... logically?

if a person can't spend around 50 bucks and a couple weeks reading, re-reading and digesting some information on the subject... what kind of effort can they really put into their selection? and can they (other than with luck) ever move above and beyond the current average quality that the line has to offer?

 

[Tom Hill]

They can't argue with it (not logically anyway) without having to read/investigate the subject deeper, pretty trixy eh ?

 

[offthehook]

Yeah I can't do that Weird. People who refuse to pick up a book or two in order to further develop that passion are kidding themselves in believing they have any passion for the plant at all. They are just lazy hippie stoners grasping for excuses and spinning around in fairytale land as far as I can tell. I can try until the cows came home, but I'll never have any respect for that at all. We are missing out on possible synergies because the vast majority are lazy ignorant stoners, and they work very hard to keep it that way.

I donno Tom, there's also this language called 'women'.

And since it makes up for 50 + % of the worlds spoken languages, things will not always pan out as was rationally hoped for.
Nothing to do with beeing lazy ignorant stoners.


Though when I think of it, these lazy ignorant stoners are the ones to uphold your market place.

Is n't that supposed to be a good thing for you & yours?

 

[oldchuck]

While it is true that the more folks working with cannabis, the better (imo). It holds doubly true that the more of those folks that are knowledgable, the better. So don't walk the other way or make excuses/arguments against the book end of your educations if you please, in doing so you are only doing a disservice to the plant. Best case scenario is that folks have all the tools necessary to increase the odds of their own crosses kicking ass. -Tom

Hmm...Now which species is cultivating which?

Perhaps this statement is good evidence for coevolution. Lots of people seem to worship the bush.

 

[mapinguari]

Hmm...Now which species is cultivating which?

Perhaps this statement is good evidence for coevolution. Lots of people seem to worship the bush.

Check out Michael Pollan's Botany of Desire, which also exists as a film, if you haven't seen it.

It has segments on apples, tulips, potatoes, and cannabis, and definitely brings up the notion that the plants are using us as much as we are using them.

Not to mention, the section on apples illustrates the difficulty in getting the plants we want from seed with some species.

 

[Tom Hill]

Offthehook,

Rampid ignorance of the subject like so many weeds growing unchecked is not a good thing for anybody, and it damn sure is not good for cannabis.

I do not care if guys want to say that they do not care enough about the subject to read about it, that's understandable. Just don't claim passion/caring for the plant followed by you know all you need to, man has been doing it for thousands of years, further education is overrated/unnecessary blah blah. All of that is just lazy ignorant stoner babble.

 

[NotaProfessor]

I do not care if guys want to say that they do not care enough about the subject to read about it, that's understandable. Just don't claim passion/caring for the plant followed by you know all you need to, man has been doing it for thousands of years, further education is overrated/unnecessary blah blah. All of that is just lazy ignorant stoner babble.

That reminds me of a quote by John K. Galbraith: "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof."

 

[Infinitesimal]

They can't argue with it (not logically anyway) without having to read/investigate the subject deeper, pretty trixy eh ?

Sort of paradoxical

 

[unspoken]

I humbly suggest that Tom starts a book club thread. He can recommend texts and maybe answer some questions that people might have or point out areas to pay particular attention to. It'd give an area for people who want to learn more to discuss it, and keep the conversation on a scientific as opposed to anecdotal track. Seems like it'd be much easier for him than putting together a whole breeding how to, and it would provide more benefit to people interested in learning than a shorter "tutorial." Even just a list of recommended texts would be nice.

 

[Tom Hill]

so will you help me see if i understand this?

let's say in a pairing where 1 plant expresses a trait and the other is homozygous and does not have the trait {how about 'dense buds'}

50% of the offspring could have dense buds {and the other 50% are heterozygous for dense buds}

penetrance would be how many of those 50% actually express the trait?

expressivity would be how dense the buds were?

Yes penetrance refers to the percentage of a population which expresses an expected trait based on it's gene/s, eg if AA = purple, but only 20% of plants in a homozygous AA population are purple, then the penetrance of that gene/s is 20%.

and yes you have it expressivity is referring to the manner or degree of expected expression a particular gene/s has in an individual.

Threshold effect refers to environmental cues that can strengthen or weaken the above gene/character relationship, eg if we drive the ambient temperature that the AA (for purple) population is exposed to down to 10c for a degree of time, we might see the penetrance of that gene/s rise to 90%.

 

[Tonygreen]

Shoulda just put this here. What do you guys think of this?

So I was reading this

http://mvgs.iaea.org/PDF/Chapter8.pdf

Apparently these guys will irradiate your seeds for free.

FAO/IAEA Agricultural
laboratory, Plant Breeding Unit, A-2444
Seibersdorf, Austria (<
Official.Mail@iaea.
org>

They say a lot of place will offer seed irradiation service. I wonder if there is one where hemp is a legal crop?

Apparently Australia is one, upon further reading. What do you think the chances of getting some "hemp" seeds irradiated?

 

[xmobotx]

thanks Tom! i couldn't find threshold where it seemed to be relative to what we're discussing~ but i see now how it actually was {just needed to confirm since they were medical infos}

it would be funny to say i think i get it {because science probably doesnt quite "get it" yet}

so i wonder what the likelihood is that some plants express monoecious as a co-dominant trait and others as a recessive trait?

i wonder this because i did a pairing where the progeny were mostly mono but a more recent pairing i got to the 12th sprout before i even saw any staminate flowers {interestingly that individual had very few pistillate flowers}

here it would seem {non scientific non empirical} that the 1st pairing, the plants were going to be mono regardless of environment

likely w/ the 2nd pairing; 50% of the individuals would have expressed mono if stressed

all speculation and honestly kinda simplified by punnet math

 

[mega72]

Question for the dudes who were in the scene in multiple decades ago:

Has the average quality of cannabis genetics improved greatly along side the technology?

Breeders of old started with landrace strains and refined/hybridised them to produce results of a higher quality, is this correct?

If the quality of the genetics has indeed improved, then the hacks of today, making seeds in a tent, are starting with a much higher winning ratio then a few gens in on a landrace hybrid yes?

So all this dank around crossed with all this other dank, with traits that aren't optimal in some places due to restrictions on numbers/ laziness in method, certainly isn't a bad thing, just more opportunities for dankness i would agree.

I consider my education and efforts towards the improvement cannabis as a caretaker of the plant my duty.

One way we could possibly leverage social technology in this regard is to make the edifice necessary for everyone to be a breeder, together. People could work on seed projects of common interest and locale together, allowing them to bypass numbers while not creating a huge time drag. Of course theres no money to be made in community genetics is there? But perhaps, as companies develop their genetics, it could become similar to the open source movement, a way to stay at the level of the big companies while avoiding plant patent laws that may cause us trouble in the future. Am I just high or do I have a little something there? Distributed medical cannabis breeding like distributed computing.. everybody a breeder...

 

[Tom Hill]

Has the average quality of cannabis genetics improved greatly along side the technology?

No, very few if any are taking advantage of applied knowledge/science of plant breeding.

Breeders of old started with landrace strains and refined/hybridised them to produce results of a higher quality, is this correct?

Yes, although in most cases, without any idea of what they were really doing.

If the quality of the genetics has indeed improved, then the hacks of today, making seeds in a tent, are starting with a much higher winning ratio then a few gens in on a landrace hybrid yes?

The hacks of today are often working with homozygous individuals obtained via selfed generations of bagseed, with zero understanding of what any of that means, and then patting themselves on the back for their magnificent art in selection skills. But yes, massive potential is there for folks who understand how to best take advantage of it.

So all this dank around crossed with all this other dank, with traits that aren't optimal in some places due to restrictions on numbers/ laziness in method, certainly isn't a bad thing, just more opportunities for dankness i would agree.

I really don't think it's laziness of method, but ignorance of method and laziness to learn how they may do better.

I consider my education and efforts towards the improvement cannabis as a caretaker of the plant my duty.

I salute you sir, sincerely and with utmost respect.

 

[Tom Hill]

thanks Tom! i couldn't find threshold where it seemed to be relative to what we're discussing~ but i see now how it actually was {just needed to confirm since they were medical infos}

it would be funny to say i think i get it {because science probably doesnt quite "get it" yet}

so i wonder what the likelihood is that some plants express monoecious as a co-dominant trait and others as a recessive trait?

i wonder this because i did a pairing where the progeny were mostly mono but a more recent pairing i got to the 12th sprout before i even saw any staminate flowers {interestingly that individual had very few pistillate flowers}

here it would seem {non scientific non empirical} that the 1st pairing, the plants were going to be mono regardless of environment

likely w/ the 2nd pairing; 50% of the individuals would have expressed mono if stressed

all speculation and honestly kinda simplified by punnet math

Monoecious expression, as was your bud density example, is a complex trait imo (and why I veered from the later in the earlier example). They can not be thought of in the simple mendelian terms of dominant and recessive etc. That some plants will do fine (in regards to stability of sexual expression) in some environments, yet not in others (and further that they're influenced by many varying environmental inputs), is ample evidence of multiple modifying factors having influence on the expression - thus falling into the category of quantitative genetics. -T