Self Pollination vs Cubing Process???? why cube?

[darwinsbulldog]

you'd definitely be able to examine whatever genes are responsibly for monoecy, dioecy and hermaphrodites, it's just a matter of mapping which are responsible for it and then you're able to isolate them and play with them etc, i'm sure there's research out there in tinkering with these things. polymorphic genes = many different types of the one gene that has a certain function. ie eye colour in humans is a polymorphism where there're many variations in eye colour between different individuals, but it's all how one certain gene is expressed. i'd say that hermaphroditism, monoecy and dioecy are a lot more complex than just one gene, and i'd say they're probably all unique in their own right. in that it's not just variants of one gene that are responsible for whether a plant is monoecious or whether it's hermaphroditic. but yeah short answer is that there will be physical differences in the genome of plants in these different floral groups that will be discernible "under a microscope" though you probably can't literally see the differences in genes under your average microscope lol. when i've some more free time i'll try and look into it a bit more for you englishrick, as it is i'm just going off my knowledge of genetics etc so i may not be 100% correct here, it's just how i think it probably is. hope it helps and it's always a pleasure answering your questions, they always get me thinking

darwin

 

[englishrick]

i think your very close to answering it ,,,,,im gona keep digging

allways a pleasure Darwin,,,your an absoloute star

 

[gettitreal]

I dont think "monecious" OR "hermpahroditic" really describes the nature of cannabis sex.

The expression is really different than either of the definitions. Its best described by the term intersexed, intersexual.

In 1981, Clarke wrote "Marijuana Botany" and is seen referring to intersexed plants as "hermaphrodites" and "monoecious". However, by 2000 he has changed his wording to 'intersexual'.(see below)

From Hemp Diseases and Pests:
" Cannabis is normally dioecious- plants produce a 50:50 ratio of males(staminate) flowers and female(pistillate) flowers. Hemp breeders have developed monoecious plants with both female and male flowers. These are often called "hermaphrodites," incorrectly. As Borodina & Migal(1987) pointed out, monoecious plants with unisexual flowers(male and female) are intersexual, not hermaphroditic. Truly hermaphroditic(bisexual) flowers in cannabis are abnormal, usually sterile and rarely seen. Miller(1970) explained monoecism as the expression of heterozygous genes on X-chromosomes or autosomes in XX plants." (McPartland,Clarke 2000)

I also dont think the sex chromosomes are "turned off". Rather, they are modifed by autosomal 'andro' alleles of mixed heritability.

 

[darwinsbulldog]

yeah i agree with you there gettitreal, i think intersexual or monoecious is ok to use when you're talking about a plant that has been induced to produce separate male and female flowers on the same plant, but yes they're definitely not hermaphrodites unless they produce single flowers with both male and female sexual organs and this normally a mutation that results in nothing. too bad more studies haven't been done on sex in cannabis to really nut it all out.

 

[englishrick]

im gona have to read that [Mcpartland an Clarke] paper,,,it sounds very good

i wonder why Clarke changed his mind,,,,sounds like hes whent through the same learning curve ive been on

id just like to add this,,,maybe it will spark some intrest

Dioecy (separate sexes) has evolved independently from cosexuality in nearly half of all angiosperm families through a variety of selective forces and genetic mechanisms (reviewed in Geber et al. 1999). Two primary evolutionary pathways are commonly distinguished—the gynodioecy pathway, in which the intermediate stage involves populations polymorphic for females and hermaphrodites (Lloyd 1976), and the monoecy–paradioecy pathway, in which transitional populations are bimodal for gender and exhibit quantitative variation in female and male fertility (Lloyd 1980). These two pathways therefore differ in the relative importance of genes with large versus small phenotypic effects. The frequency with which each pathway has led to the evolution of dioecy is controversial: two recent comparative studies have come to contrasting conclusions (Renner & Ricklefs 1995; Weiblen et al. 2000).

Distinguishing between the evolutionary pathways for the origins of dioecy requires detailed studies of the genetic and environmental factors governing sex expression. First, the gynodioecy pathway entails mutations of large effect, and may often involve as few as two mutations, one determining male sterility and the other female sterility (B. Charlesworth & D. Charlesworth 1978). By contrast, the monoecy–paradioecy pathway is generally thought to involve gradual changes in quantitative variation in sex allocation via many mutational steps (D. Charlesworth & B. Charlesworth 1978). Second, for the gynodioecy pathway, male-sterility mutations of large effect usually prevent the production of pollen in females, and therefore sex inconstancy (e.g. the production of ovules by male plants) commonly occurs only among male plants (Lloyd 1980). By contrast, because the monoecy–paradioecy pathway involves multiple mutations, possibly in combination with environmental regulation of sex expression, sex inconstancy is a characteristic feature of both female and male plants (Lloyd 1975, 1980; Freeman et al. 1997; Renner & Won 2001). Investigations of the genetics of sex determination and patterns of sex inconstancy between the sexes should enable discrimination between the two main pathways involved in the origin of dioecy. Studies of sex determination in plants have revealed a variety of genetic systems, including sex chromosomes and cytoplasmic factors (Grant 1999; Charlesworth 2002); however, in most cases males are heterozygous at sexdetermining loci (or heterogametic when sex chromosomes occur; Westergaard 1958). Based on this observation, Charlesworth & Guttman (1999) developed an explicit genetic model for the evolution of dioecy via the gynodioecy pathway involving simple Mendelian inheritance and two sex-determining loci (figure 1). First, a cosexual population is invaded by a recessive male-sterility mutation leading to the establishment of females. This is then followed by the spread of a dominant suppressor of female fertility among cosexuals, conferring male heterozygosity. A necessary condition for the evolution of sexdetermining loci is that the male- and female-sterility loci are linked, reducing the occurrence of recombination between these loci (Charlesworth & Guttman 1999). Although this pathway is usually envisioned for populations with hermaphrodite flowers (see discussion in Renner & Won (2001)), we know of no a priori reason why these genetic mechanisms could not also be involved in the evolution of dioecy from monoecy. If so, the common assumption that dioecy originates via the monoecy– paradioecy pathway in monoecious groups may not always be true.

 

[vicious bee]

This is a great thread. Thanks for starting it Darwin.

 

[vicious bee]

yeah see at the end of the day, i'm just curious about the best methods for conserving the traits of one or more parents you really like and doing it in the quickest and best breeding manner...

darwin

Here's what you need. Clone seeds.
Haploid plants produced by centromere-mediated genome elimination



http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v464/n7288/full/nature08842.html

I wish I had the chemical. If you have any ideas on that PM me.
ETHYL METHANESULFONATE (CAS 62-50-0)