Everybody a breeder ?

[Tom Hill]

Inbreeding is the guardian of outcrossing and to poddy-mouth it is incredibly shortsighted. If we do not have the foresight to keep lines and families separated around the world, then we would eventually have nothing left to outcross to. It would all be a related watered down version of what it once was and all it could be. Sound familiar(?), yes we've seen how that little experiment/scenario plays out before.

When we utilize intensive inbreeding, deleterious recessives are brought to the surface where we can detect/deal with/cull them, less intense methods only serve to mask/hide them, and do nothing to rid the population of them.

Using pools of parents pre-homozygosity is just slowly going nowhere as I mentioned before, or as Allard put it in the book Raco just gave us a picture of, "...such matings are of essentially no consequence in concentrating favorable alleles in selection programs in outcrossing species."

SSD would be a fine method to use, providing we could look thousands of families after many cycles, and combine/bulk the very best of them. But cannabis doesn't self without help, and gives plenty enough seed to utilize more appropriate methods.

What is rubbish is thinking we can reasonably expect a plant to pass on anything reliably in any hybrid cross, prior to (proving) homozygosity via such methods as observing the selfed progeny.

 

[Nunsacred]

Inbreeding is the guardian of outcrossing and to poddy-mouth it is incredibly shortsighted. If we do not have the foresight to keep lines and families separated around the world, then we would eventually have nothing left to outcross to. It would all be a related watered down version of what it once was and all it could be. Sound familiar(?), yes we've seen how that little experiment/scenario plays out before.

Er, ..... is this relevant? And no it doesn't sound familiar, what are you referring to?

When we utilize intensive inbreeding, deleterious recessives are brought to the surface where we can detect/deal with/cull them, less intense methods only serve to mask/hide them, and do nothing to rid the population of them.

Intensive inbreeding promotes many DR "traits" which you don't initially see and probably don't select out, but indeed, you enrich them in your controlled population. Bad news.
In such a controlled population, less intense methods leave some individuals unaffected, should you find that you've accidentally shortened your seeds viability or whatever, you can at least try to rid your population of the trait before it's too late.
In many cases you can be successful in rescuing the linkage groups you worked to enrich if you at least leave the chance for yourself.

Using pools of parents pre-homozygosity is just slowly going nowhere as I mentioned before, or as Allard put it in the book Raco just gave us a picture of, "...such matings are of essentially no consequence in concentrating favorable alleles in selection programs in outcrossing species."

But you said yourself that hacks can make lucky crosses.
In fact I'd go so far as to say they're more likely to find a novel, world-beating combination than an inbreeding programme can hope to.

What is rubbish is thinking we can reasonably expect a plant to pass on anything reliably in any hybrid cross, prior to (proving) homozygosity via such methods as observing the selfed progeny.

So, erm, no-one's Exodus Cheese crosses can ever be expected to yield a Cheese dominant line unless they perform a litmus test to check whether it will?

Come on Tom, admit it.
Inbreeding is just a convenience, a logical simplification, a short-term perceived benefit, excused by providing such a soft environment for the plants that their inbreeding is tolerable.

For anyone with amateur breeding resources, the text books and the maths equates to piddle in the wind.

 

[Tom Hill]

Er, yes of course it is relevent, ever been to Holland?

I do not understand your using of the word "promotes", if you are trying to say that intensive inbreeding causes deleterious recessives then that is of course incorrect. It is exactly what we use to see them, and select them out, enrich them? No. That's as weak of an argument as those who claim reversals cause hermies, instead of the plants selected being the actual culprit.

Look you guys can pretend that you have some magical touch and that Allards words are incorrect and you don't agree with them and that you'll get somewhere with these selection methods which do not even have a name, but you'd do better to just open pollinate and stop kidding yourselves in thinking that you're actually making progress.

I would imagine Cheese crosses out well due to being heavily inbred and thus highly homozygous, is this not the case? (I have never worked with it)

I am quite sure hacks are lapping up your comments Nunsacred num num num, for if you were correct it would give them leave to continue their ignoramus convention. Unfortunately, almost everything you are saying is incorrect, and quite so. Inbreeding is a convenience? short-term perceived benefit? Good lord, put the brushes down and step away from the paint, the fumes seem to be causing insanity.

 

[Green Supreme]

Tom, illegitimus noncarborundum. You da man bro. Peace GS

 

[OLDproLg]

fatabellious stillahippious.......

Keep it going....crack them whips!

 

[xmobotx]

it would seem that continuous inbreeding minus the benefit of a population is where you find the problems

if one uses selfing to determine the most true breeding individuals to make an initial cross w/ and then open pollination to establish that IBL; assuming #s are high enough this is the equivalent or better than making a 'fortunate cross' by guessing {smelling} ~w/ that method; what is being argued? does this method not mimic nature only w/ the advantage of beginning w/ intentional selections

in a controlled environment where one lacks the means to run sufficient #s; if candidates are tested for selection and then progeny tested that also mutes the arguments of excessive inbreeding

 

[Tom Hill]

^^ bingo

There are zero legitimate selection methods that utilize this slowly going nowhere in the way that Nunsacred is attempting to argue for it, and I do mean zero.

The way professional breeders utilize the thoughts he is attempting to convey, is to combine many individuals and families that test best, while/or after they have been intensively inbred as I am describing. Again, using many unproven/untested/heterozygous individuals each generation, well "such matings are of essentially no consequence in concentrating favorable alleles in selection programs", and better to just open pollinate.

 

[harry74]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFcUJ1tDqDA

 

[silverhazefiend]

It's alive ! Lol

Although I started it TOM + all the fully engaged members are the driving force behind this thread clearly ..I don't post much anymore but I read ALOT ..cool to see its back open

 

[FOE20]

Tom you have way thicker skin than I man...Ive been trolled and bagged on for yrs..but damn bro you take it dish it like no other..I'l give ya that sir...and still yet again much thnx for dealin with it all...Im still trying to just be a mental sponge and enjoy the concepts, theories and thoughts all round...props 2 ya..

so I have been thinkin on this tho....
Would a "population" have the same reaction if its not all the Same population?...
Lets say theres 1000 plants in a Large Controlled enviro but were only working aprox 50-150 in a certain program..But they exist naturally within these open populations..
No males are allowed and when they are their used on the Entire population openly...
So the varieties unrelated to the Donor males is populated yes but the Females within this same population that are related to the Males Directly would have the same advantage as a open population of its own Kind yes?...
Ive been using this particular method for quite some time and have to say it has proven to work quite well on Limited pool lines...
For deep or heavily mixed multi-hybred pools not so much...
but I'd like to hear feedback...thanks fellaz...keep rollin
FOE20

 

[bombadil.360]

it would seem that continuous inbreeding minus the benefit of a population is where you find the problems

the question is: what makes for a healthy population though?

lets say I stumble upon a wild patch of cannabis somewhere in Asia, half a kilometer radius.

out of how many specimens do I need to collect seeds from to capture well enough said population; so that selective breeding can be done upon it without inbreeding it into oblivion due to lack of a healthy population?

what has been the criteria for collecting seeds out of batches in the past?

 

[FOE20]

what specific criteria would one pursue in hopes of obtaining a certificate in the field of canna breeding ?

Botany, Plant Science, Genetics, all options man...
But for a true Herbsman IMO?...
Any schooling you can get book or direct and then..
Enjoying allot of varieties of herb.....as many as possible and dating back to as far as possible and experiencing them as clean possible...then you "Start",....
FOE20

 

[GeorgeWBush]

Botany, Plant Science, Genetics, all options man...
But for a true Herbsman IMO?...
Any schooling you can get book or direct and then..
Enjoying allot of varieties of herb.....as many as possible and dating back to as far as possible and experiencing them as clean possible...then you "Start",....
FOE20

as opposed to a false herbsman? so I guess the short answer is No.there is no such thing as a professional canna breeder.good thing this is a vegetable growers forum or some may find Tom's "truth"(theory) just a bit ridiculous,but of course those folks would be hackneyed idiots.

 

[oldchuck]

Naughty George.

 

[Tom Hill]

Poor George, Foe has it correct, anywhere and everywhere you can get it. But Georgie does not value books on breeding and plant genetics, for if they do not have pretty pics of cannabis in them then they can not possibly be applicable. You have a masters degree in psychology George, what's it called when someone throws a tantrum after they been shown that pretty much everything they thought they knew about a certain subject, is just false bs hackery? The term denial comes to mind.

 

[GeorgeWBush]

I suppose you could use that one.So which do you prefer in reference to completely making up a profession that does not actually exist in real life, delusional or pretentious ?

 

[YosemiteSam]

you got him now George...don't ease up brah.

 

[Tom Hill]

It does exist George and there are folks in the industry already utilizing some of the same exact methods under discussion. And I assure you, they did not gain their knowledge of plant breeding from online cannabis sites. What we call these facts, is reality. Yes, professional cannabis breeders being backed by both private as well as government entities are in existence today and have been for a very long time. That you are not aware of this is really is of no consequence, although it is par for the course.

 

[stickshift]

He should ask Etienne de meijer or such if he don't believe you.....

 

[stickshift]

you got him now George...don't ease up brah.

He's gonna come at him like a friggin spider monkey!