Is low potency a recessive trait?

[Sam_Skunkman]

Learning is something that many could use, all of us included.
For you to point this out to others while ignoring the lessons you sorely need yourself is just another example of how you ignore the truth as inconvenient, and concentrate on your ideas and theories. I suggest you spend some time reading basic and advanced text books on breeding & genetics specially for dioecious plants. Then you will have an understanding of the basic issues and methodologies as well as breeding nomenclature maybe you wont need to reach for ideas that have no basis in science, and have not been proved yet. And then you can try and find some new scientific facts to add to the knowledge of Cannabis. Winning arguments is not the same as knowing the true facts and the science behind them. At least that's how I see it.

-SamS

 

[imnotcrazy]

BTW, Most of a F1 cross of a high THC and a low THC variety will be halfway between the two, the F2 generation will express all values between the two P1 & P2.

-SamS

So, how does this pertain to the first backcross in a line. For example, Rez offers many "boutique" crosses of tightly held, hard for *some* to acquire cuttings. How much should you see that variation bottleneck in the BX#1 generation?

I know Mr Soul of Brothers Grimm stipulated 75% at this point for the Cinderella lines (IE: Princess75, P88 and P94 aka Cindy99), based off of Mendel's work. But it's also dependant on how many positions are responsible for potency etc as to how large that Punnet Square will be IE: more possible combinations, more possible outcomes

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

I think you Grat3fuld3ad, may well have redefined that term, with your posting and comments. I would like to say that you will be missed, but I'm pretty sure I can do without the constant negativity, and personal attacks.

lol

I found you to have a very stifling attitute, and your a classic manifestation of the term " A little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing".

lol... fact always trumps fancy, my friend... If I have only 'a little' knowledge in the field, then you have none...

I've always been far more annoyed by an ignorant person who fancies themselves wise, than one who realizes their errors and desires to gain enough understanding to overcome their ignorance...

You, sir, are in the more annoying category. All your theories are based on impossible mechanics. It has been repeatedly proved to you by people who have a better understanding of the practicality of the issue better than either of us... It has been shown in simple terms, and in papers which are university level and over your head... Yet you still insist on trying to fit reality into your box...

Like you said yourself, I have no doubt you have had arguments with other members here before, and I just hope you will learn, that it doesn't do your reputation any good.

I could care fuck all about reputation. I don't want anyone here to be misguided by bullshit. The uneducated might think your wild ideas possible, if those who know better don't post.

High school kids worry about reputation... Grown ups just behave like themselves...

If a member is right or wrong, about any topic or subject, then you only need state your case, and move on. There's no need to constantly hound them, in an attempt to get them to somehow submit to your will. Probably bought about by a internal conflict, of wanting to be constant control and impotency.

Not trying to get you to submit, son.... just trying to get you to open those eyes which you insist on keeping closed so tightly you can only see what you imagine might be... No worries if you're still young enough to know everything, you'll outgrow that someday...

There's no doubt in my mind, that there's also a spiritual aspect to your life, that is gravely missing, but from your religeous hate comments, I some how doubt it would make much difference.


In the future I would try to keep comments on topic, and leave out the personal remarks.




Bubbl3r

You cannot argue fact in the face of faith... faith always wins because of it's blindness... I am an ordained minister, and a used to work as an assemblies of god youth pastor... I don't make assertions or comments about things I have no background in... I don't base comments on assumption or fancy...

I cannot with hold personal remarks in this conversation... It's all about your imagination vs. established fact... When the facts are stated and your next comments completely ignore the facts you've just been told, how can the next comment be anything but personal??

When you imagine that 200 years ago everyone thought the world was flat...
When you terms like dominant trait, even after being told there is really no such thing only dominant alleles...
When you think environment controls manifestation of dominant or recessive alleles...
When you think that there was once a perfect pure cannabis species of ultimate 'garden of eden' perfection which mankind has been devolving ever since...
When in the midst of all your wisdom and knowledge, you have to ask elementary questions about such basic concepts as "how does sexual reproduction recombine DNA"...

My comments can be about nothing but your misunderstanding/imagination/ignorance... Sorry if it is personal to you, but from the comments I've received most of the membership here appreciate the clarification about how things work in the real world...

Like Sam has said...
You're only believing what you would like to see... and to me you have no interest in opening your eyes.....

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

Winning arguments is not the same as knowing the true facts and the science behind them. At least that's how I see it.

-SamS

Dammit Sam... now I have to add another quote to my signature line...

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

All it takes for Ignorance to rule, is for educated men to say nothing.

 

[bubbl3r]

You remind me of some religious cultist, and arguing with you is akin to arguing FACT vs unprovable illogical religious dogma. An absolute waste of time.

Yeah yeah, spoken in true minister style man. I bet they just can't wait to flock to your church, you must have them cueing around the block...lol

Also, your frustration is getting tedious...can't you just go take it out on some choir boy or something...:-0

See, your constant bitching, has even got me off topic now.


Sam, I think most of the unwanted recessive variance, is being manifested during the duplication and segregation process in the meiosis stage. The "quality" and viability of the seed, is having a proportional effect on a variety of cannabinoid production, which is then compounded by a direct influence of the environment, on enzymatic/synthase distribution.

This would explain why identical clones grown in different environments, have the same quality or "profile" of high, but at varing strengths, and while at the same time, no 2 phenotypes from seed, have the exact same cannabinoid profile.





Bubbl3r

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

Yeah yeah, spoken in true minister style man. I bet they just can't wait to flock to your church, you must have them cueing around the block...lol

Also, your frustration is getting tedious...can't you just go take it out on some choir boy or something...:-0

See, your constant bitching, has even got me off topic now.

You've never been on topic... lol... and your reading comprehension is low... I never said I pastor a church... I'm not frustrated, just tired of talking to blind and deaf dreamer...

I see your thoughts quickly turn to taking out your frustration on young boys. Pretty telling, kiddo...

Sam, I think
Bubbl3r

No you don't... you imagine.

 

[bubbl3r]

Your wrong, and your premises are stupid. I'm out of this discussion...
Suzy and Sam... Enjoy banging your heads against this Brick Wall troll...

Thought you was gone once...I see your not satisfied with trolling, you gone into the haunting business now...lol





Bubbl3r

 

[Kinderfeld]

So, how does this pertain to the first backcross in a line. For example, Rez offers many "boutique" crosses of tightly held, hard for *some* to acquire cuttings. How much should you see that variation bottleneck in the BX#1 generation?

I'd like to know this as well. Or your take on it sam, head.

 

[Sam_Skunkman]

I don't use backcrosses and have no comment.

-SamS

 

[bubbl3r]

So, how does this pertain to the first backcross in a line. For example, Rez offers many "boutique" crosses of tightly held, hard for *some* to acquire cuttings. How much should you see that variation bottleneck in the BX#1 generation?

I know Mr Soul of Brothers Grimm stipulated 75% at this point for the Cinderella lines (IE: Princess75, P88 and P94 aka Cindy99), based off of Mendel's work. But it's also dependant on how many positions are responsible for potency etc as to how large that Punnet Square will be IE: more possible combinations, more possible outcomes

I believe the variance largely depends on what the status of the so called "elite clone" is to start with. Whether or not, it's an F1, F2, F3, bx, S1 etc etc....as it will have a bearing on the seeds viability and potential. I believe this is always overlooked by most growers.

If the F1 male(son) was used then the offspring would have 75% of the mum's dna material in them, which of course doesn't actually guarantee much in terms of potency either. It will still be 75% dna, if more than one F1 male is used, but it may well produce more viable seed, depending on the status of the mum to start with.




Bubbl3r

 

[Pops]

bubbl3r, it is not always true that that back crossing a F1male to the P1 female will give you 75% of the females genes. You might still only have 50% of the genes. It depends on which genes are transferred. If mom had only only 20 genes,for example, she would give 10 to the new plant and dad would give 10. Junior now has 10 of moms genes and when he has incestous sex with mom, he may give back 5 of her genes and 5 of dads genes to the offspring. However the 5 of her genes that he gives may be the same as 5 that she gives, meaning that junior2 still only has 10 of the original genes from mom, not 15.

 

[Pops]

This would explain why identical clones grown in different environments, have the same quality or "profile" of high, but at varing strengths, and while at the same time, no 2 phenotypes from seed, have the exact same cannabinoid profile.
Bubbl3r[/QUOTE]

The amount of yield in any cannabis crop depends on a number of factors, like the amount of biomass above ground,the weight proportion of inflorescence leaves and bracts and the total cannabinoid content of the inflorescence leaves and bracts. These polygenic traits are affected and modulated by environment. However, the ratios of cannabinoids are genetically regulated and will stay the same regardless of environment.

Because of the presence of either Bt or Bd alleles at the B locus, plants will either have THC, CBD or both. The ratios or % will only differ due to the presence of variant enzymes in the plant that cause the CBG to change to THC or CBD.There was no super plants in the distant past that was brought to us by the Annunaki and man fucked it up. Initially, all plants had the alleles to produce THC and CBD. During the natural breeding cycle, plants follow the Mendelian punnett square and produce a 1:2:1 ratio of THC, THC/CBD,CBD plants. Man selected what he wanted and went from there,as far as drug strains are concerned.

 

[bubbl3r]

bubbl3r, it is not always true that that back crossing a F1male to the P1 female will give you 75% of the females genes. You might still only have 50% of the genes. It depends on which genes are transferred. If mom had only only 20 genes,for example, she would give 10 to the new plant and dad would give 10. Junior now has 10 of moms genes and when he has incestous sex with mom, he may give back 5 of her genes and 5 of dads genes to the offspring. However the 5 of her genes that he gives may be the same as 5 that she gives, meaning that junior2 still only has 10 of the original genes from mom, not 15.

Meiosis doesn't work that way, the genes duplicate, split, switch then recombine. Its 75% of the mum dna, as far as I'm concerned till I've seen proof of otherwise.



Bubbl3r

 

[Pops]

Well, you can tell that I am an Anthropologist rather than a genetics expert. I find it interesting that there are also CBG dominant plants, particularly among French fiber cultivars. There may also possibly be a 3rd allele Bc that gives a CBC dominant plant, though this have not been proven. There have been plants found that contain up to 64% CBC. It is postulated that the CBG plants may have damaged alleles at the B locus giving a Bo allele.

 

[bubbl3r]

This would explain why identical clones grown in different environments, have the same quality or "profile" of high, but at varing strengths, and while at the same time, no 2 phenotypes from seed, have the exact same cannabinoid profile.
Bubbl3r

[/QUOTE]The amount of yield in any cannabis crop depends on a number of factors, like the amount of biomass above ground,the weight proportion of inflorescence leaves and bracts and the total cannabinoid content of the inflorescence leaves and bracts. These polygenic traits are affected and modulated by environment. However, the ratios of cannabinoids are genetically regulated and will stay the same regardless of environment.

Because of the presence of either Bt or Bd alleles at the B locus, plants will either have THC, CBD or both. The ratios or % will only differ due to the presence of variant enzymes in the plant that cause the CBG to change to THC or CBD.There was no super plants in the distant past that was brought to us by the Annunaki and man fucked it up. Initially, all plants had the alleles to produce THC and CBD. During the natural breeding cycle, plants follow the Mendelian punnett square and produce a 1:2:1 ratio of THC, THC/CBD,CBD plants. Man selected what he wanted and went from there,as far as drug strains are concerned.[/QUOTE]

I never mentioned Annunaki....lol...and I don't agree with you either on that one.

Nature messed with it first, then came man to compound the problem.

Something that should also be considered, is a plant's ability to synthesize CBG in both quality and quantity. It is a direct precusor to THC and CBD, and as such should have a directly proportional effect.

Another intriguing thing for me is why are there co-dominant alleles found on the same locus. This dosn't seem totally natural to me and suspicious.

Does anyone here have any idea, of what is the percentage of codominant alleles, in the world of genetics?



Bubbl3r

 

[bubbl3r]

Well, you can tell that I am an Anthropologist rather than a genetics expert. I find it interesting that there are also CBG dominant plants, particularly among French fiber cultivars. There may also possibly be a 3rd allele Bc that gives a CBC dominant plant, though this have not been proven. There have been plants found that contain up to 64% CBC. It is postulated that the CBG plants may have damaged alleles at the B locus giving a Bo allele.

I see, any mutation on this B locus could be interesting. It's quite possible the B locus has already been mutated.






Bubbl3r

 

[Pops]

I just threw the Annunaki in there to fuck with you. Environment can play a part on the total quantity of cannabinoids. From my understanding in reading that I have done, there are differences in cannabinoid % due to variants of the enzyme that changes CBG into CBD or THC. It may have been Hilligs writing that suggested that to me. I have been trying to look up my sources, but I have downloaded and bookmarked so much shit that I can't find anything. Most of my downloads are on the medicinal effects of CBD, as I have a son who is dying.

 

[bubbl3r]

Sorry to hear that!...so, do high CBD plants help with the medication?

I've read there could be 2 isoforms of the synthase.



Bubbl3r

 

[Pops]

Unknown at this point. My son has Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis(ALS or Lou Gehrigs Disease),a motor neuron disease. It is characterized by high glutamate levels in the spinal fluid. normally, glutamates are there to protect neurons. If you have glutamate excititoxicity, the neurons are killed and are not replaced and the muscle fiber is worthless.

THC is a neuroprotector. Ironically, the U.S. Government ,who claims cannabis has no medicinal value, has patented cannabinoids for their antioxidant and neuroprotective values. CBD supposedly has neuroprotection against glutamate excititoxicity and is anti-convulsive to treat the muscle spasms and twitches that motor neuron patients have. Unfortunately, all drug strains are practically devoid of CBd. Sam has created a high CBD strain, but it is for a commercial venture and is not yet available to any of us in the States.