Males are they even needed?

[GMT]

I honestly thought you were talking about the recombining of incomplete junk DNA, or genes that were no longer active in the plant. Its not like a y is preserved and passed on intact from father to son. Its still going to have some alterations in it, and different alterations in each grain of pollen.

 

[@hempy]

Yeah I understand genetic inheritance, its the memory part I'm confused about.

Well if the Y chromosome carries a virtual pedigree of his male family history then it is passing on stored memory.

 

[GMT]

Virtual pedigree of his family history? He only carries most of the contents of the male sex chromosome that came before him. Its not perfectly passed nor carries all of the genes of all of his ancestors.

 

[HalfArsedFarmer]

The big problem here, for most of us, is that it's impossible to do real breeding with the small numbers of seeds and plants we deal with. This is why I sound negative some of the time, don't mean to bust anybody's chops. But to use the tools we're talking about, successfully preserve strains, create new ones, utilize open or select pollination, you need a lot of plants. Almost all of us are using less then 100 and most of us probably less then 10. Compared to Sam or a guy in Afghanistan or Morocco who's able to plant tens of thousands of seeds. This is a primary reason even with the best of intentions we've collectively done a terrible job of preserving genetics. Open pollinating say, 5 males and 5 females when the parent population consisted of 5000 males and 5000 females is bound to lose most of the gene pool. Not trying to dissuade anyone, we all do the best we can with what we have. I'm proud of myself and the other pollen chuckers I know. Despite $, space, time, gov't, lined up against us we've managed to keep great genetics flowing through time and space.

The biggest question I have is where someone like Sam is in breeding right now. I'm not interested in the history of Skunk #1, asking questions about haze, all that other shit. That was 40-50 years ago. I know Sam likes his sift hashish, I know he's been breeding thousands of plants for many years, what's the cutting edge of cannabis breeding in 2020? What's he smoking right now? I'd love to see what he's got after 30 years of breeding for medical purposes. Along with the other medical breeding programs and gov't facilities around the world. It'd be great if seeds of that kind of stuff were made available or clones. We don't have anything to compare what the clandestine breeders have done to what can be done with large numbers. I notice Breeder Steve has a fun project going, his million seed search. He seems like a cool guy. Send him some of your seeds and if he's got time and space he'll grow them out and tell you what he thinks about them. And keep them for himself if he likes it haw haw...

I'll be sad when males become obsolete. One benefit of males, it allows me to sprout more seeds. Select from a larger gene pool of plants. If I was growing entirely feminized I'd be sprouting half as many plants. Then having to reverse my select females to pollinate the other females which would take a lot of time and space.

As things are now I can pick my best 5 or 6 males, yank the ones I don't like. Let the keepers get rootbound in a shaded area taking up minimal space. You don't need a big healthy plant to get all the pollen you need. It's true you can't sample the male to determine potency but you have a good idea if you compare it to your females and the previous generation. Structure and stem rubs. Then you can pollinate a few branches with different males on a select female. Instead of sacrificing the entire plant to seed or sacrificing it to reverse it into a male.

I believe there is a lot of good work going on in south America at the moment with large scale grows by A few of the Dutch & US seeds bank.
I know of A couple of banks who are down there, sadly one is only selling fems but the other one is very strict on regular seeds only in his country but the European side do sell Fems.


There are a few people left out there that realize we need to freshen the pool up and bring back strong genetics not just pretty colours and lots of THC heads for bag appeal with 600g a sq M yield potential and a desert name

 

[TychoMonolyth]

How your breeding program is planed

How it actually happens

What you got

What you kept

 

[therevverend]

Is this like a chicken still having t-rex genes that are turned off or something else?

Ha ha you make me think of an article I read about a monster rooster. A 16th century Italian philosopher/naturalist named Aldrovandi observed a super mutant rooster. Instead of trying to describe it here's the picture he drew of what he saw.

If it really existed it must have been quite a cock. The article was by Darren Naish, a paleontologist and zoologist, on his zoology blog Tet Zoo. Of course he brings up the dino-chicken shit. Using his professional expertise as a dinosaur expert he drew what a 'chicken dino' would look like. If you genetically fucked up it's genes to make it a dinosaur. Behold the horror, man's abomination..

A bit of an anti-climax. It's just a chicken with a tail and teeth.

Here's a link to the entire article.

https://tetzoo.com/blog/2018/11/14/aldrovandis-monstrous-rooster-a-15th-century-dino-chicken

I also recommend his article about bigfoot's genitals.

https://tetzoo.com/blog/2018/8/1/bigfoots-genitals-what-do-we-know

(edit) For some reason my computer doesn't like Tet Zoo's security, won't take me there when I click on the link. But when I google it the page comes right up. If you want to read the article, and I recommend it search,,
'Aldrovandi’s Monstrous Rooster, a 16th Century Dino-Chicken' Tet Zoo. I promise it's a harmless science blog not a scam porn site . And bigfoot's genitals.. 'Bigfoot's Genitals: What Do We Know? — Tetrapod Zoology'
I'll post this in my new post as well..

 

[TychoMonolyth]

And I thought I had finished the internet.
Nice find!

 

[GMT]

Big foot? You know chickens are actually related to T-rex don't you? Its not a myth.

 

[Cvh]

 

[therevverend]

You know chickens are actually related to T-rex don't you? Its not a myth.

Correct. Science has proven that T Rex was basically a giant flightless chicken with a huge appetite. For instance one of T Rex's ancestors sported feathers so it's possible T Rex had them. Considering the climate and the size I doubt T Rex had many. Maybe juveniles. There were quite a few smaller flightless dinosaurs that had wings and tail feathers because they're useful for more stuff then flying. Nesting, insulation, looking sexy, Naish's article goes into some of this stuff and he has other articles about it. You'd be surprised how many birds have claws on their wings. For gripping trees, fighting and such. When I was a kid and into dinosaurs I saw a picture of a dinosaur's skeleton and always remembered it because the legs and body are so bird-like. It was a relative of T Rex. Gwar wrote a song about him. Gor-Gor.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30TQ-zSfwgs

Didn't realize how much I missed Sleazy P Martini. Anyway, check out the feet on this Gorgosaurus skeleton. I know I've eaten the miniature version at Dim Sum.

https://www.icmag.com/ic/picture.php?albumid=82778&pictureid=2040821

(edit) For some reason my computer doesn't like Tet Zoo's security, won't take me there when I click on the link. But when I google it the page comes right up. If you want to read the article, and I recommend it search,,
'Aldrovandi’s Monstrous Rooster, a 16th Century Dino-Chicken' Tet Zoo. I promise it's a harmless science blog for geeks not a scam porn site . And bigfoot's genitals.. 'Bigfoot's Genitals: What Do We Know? — Tetrapod Zoology'
I'll post this in my new post as well..

 

[Hookahhead]

The links you’re posting aren’t working because of ICMag security, not your computer. Any links posted on ICMag use “Https” instead of “Http”. The “Https” is for a secure connection, but not all websites use it. When you click the link, simply remove the “s” from the “https” in the beginning, so that it is back to plain “http”. As far as I know there is no way to turn this option off in ICMag, it will auto correct any links you post. It’s a shame because something so simple “breaks” a lot of links posted on this site.

 

[vanilla dutch]

Having males would be useful for seeing what was used in a female.such as two females breed to each other. Using 2 males u could see what females were used in the pedigree.something like that.the correct words I do not know how to explain

 

[vanilla dutch]

What if u have two seller males how do u breed them together? U reverse em twice? Or reverse one hit with other male repeat for the other male then breed that offspring? But are they needed?

 

[GMT]

Why would you do it both ways, just reverse the most vigorous to use his mitochondrial dna in all offspring. You really want as much ATP as you can get surely.

 

[ahortator]

https://ferrebeekeeper.wordpress.com/2011/05/16/turkeys-and-parthenogenesis/

 

[vanilla dutch]

Reversing males is probably quicker in seeing what it's females will look like.

 

[TychoMonolyth]

If x and y chromosome never exchange DNA, and all y chromosome are a history of thousands of generations, why bother even trying to select a male? If we're growing for females, one male will be as good as any other.

At first I thought you were serious, but I understand you are really saying Male selection if you use Males is important, I agree. -SamS

 

[troutman]

If x and y chromosome never exchange DNA, and all y chromosome are a history of thousands of generations, why bother even trying to select a male? If we're growing for females, one male will be as good as any other.

Not all males are created equally.

 

[GMT]

Quote @hempyAnd, unlike the 22 pairs of non-sex chromosomes each human has, there is almost no opportunity for the Y chromosome to swap or share its DNA with another chromosome. So all the information in a man's Y chromosome is passed to his son -- and every man's Y chromosome carries a virtual pedigree of his male family history.[/SIZE]/quote


You appear to be suggesting, and I'm asking for clarification, that the Y chromosomes is spared the standard, doubling, deleting and reversing randomised soup that is meiosis.
While I understand that the combining that occurs in the autosome does not occur in the sex chromosomes (mainly), I have never before heard that they get off scot free. Otherwise would we not share the same Y chromosome as giraffes, since all mammals have a common ancestor?

 

[Tonygreen]

Oh man, if this thread doesnt bring Tom Hill back nothing will ha.