Serious Seeds Females

[Claude]

Hi Peoples,

I am stunt to see how much peoples are concern about female seeds.

To clarify one point is that it is true that Simon was force into feminized as other company were doing it but was not Simon's and therefore were not the Serious quality. People who were buying these were not happy and think that it was because of Serious Seeds quality.
So instead of having other company destroying the AK47 reputation, and that is what is making Simon mad about this.

It was not Simon's ideal to start fem. but mine. I push him so hard that he decided to go with it and see what will happen in a year test.
BTW I am not a breeder and I do not have read books on cannabis apart one that do not have an editor name. (L'Hydroponie)

As for the new strain (Serious 6) it will be feminized as I did not had the proper male to give to Simon but the right mother.

Also we had peoples reported that they had hermie in the regular seeds. So no matter what we will still get report of hermie's in the feminized. Females seeds can produce hermie if we do not care for them as well as regular seeds.

My thought

Respect
Claude

 

[TomPope]

Females seeds can produce hermie if we do not care for them as well as regular seeds

Is this really what it looks like? This sentence can be read both way's. One way that the breeder is responsible for hermies, the other one would make it the problem of the grower again...

I'm not sure who you mean with "we", maybe stupid question, my english is limited...

 

[crackhead]

you lose alot of the gene pool when you self seeds to feminise but as long as theres also an option for regular seeds i dont see it as a problem. if made right hermes shouldnt be any more frequent

 

[dan_kass]

Tom, I think he's saying that hermies have happened regardless so if stressed out there's a good chance they'll show up be it female or regular seed. I bred with a Chronic female years ago and when I grew those seeds out recently I found a plant that threw out male preflowers due to heat/light stress. I don't know about any of the other varieties but my experience with Chronic from 2000ish showed that if stressed it will hermie to some degree.

~DK

 

[nyy27]

Just to save a little time in explaination this is what Englishrick is talking about (English if you really are reading this caliber of material we should definately talk more bro, molecular genetics is one of my favourite fields of study!)... not to mention I'm a scientific journal junkie!

From Wikipedia:

In evolutionary genetics, Muller's ratchet (named after Hermann Joseph Muller and a mechanical device) is the process by which the genomes of an asexual population accumulate deleterious mutations in an irreversible manner.

Muller proposed this mechanism as a theory to explain the evolution of sex. Although Muller's ratchet is proposed to explain the success of sexual reproduction over asexual reproduction, the negative effect of accumulating irreversible deleterious mutations may not be prevalent in organisms which, while they reproduce asexually, also undergo other forms of recombination. This effect has also been observed in those regions of sexual organisms' genomes which do not undergo recombination.

Asexual reproduction compels genomes to be inherited as indivisible blocks so that once the least mutated genomes in an asexual population begin to carry at least one deleterious mutation, no genomes with fewer such mutations can be expected to be found in future generations (except as a result of back mutation). In sexual populations, the process of genetic recombination allows the genomes of the progeny to be different from the genomes of the parents. In particular, progeny genomes with fewer mutations can be generated from more highly mutated parental genomes by putting together in progeny genomes mutation-free portions of parental chromosomes.
Among protists and prokaryotes there is a plethora of supposedly asexual organisms. More and more are being shown to exchange genetic information through a variety of mechanisms. In contrast, the genomes of mitochondria and chloroplasts do not recombine and would undergo Muller's ratchet were they not as small as they are. Indeed, the probability that the least mutated genomes in an asexual population end up carrying at least one (additional) mutation depends heavily on the genomic mutation rate and this increases more or less linearly with the size of the genome (more accurately, with the number of base pairs present in active genes). However, reductions in genome size specially in parasites and symbionts can also be caused by direct selection to get rid of genes that have become unnecessary. Therefore a smaller genome is not a sure indication of the action of Muller's Ratchet.

In sexually reproducing organisms non-recombining chromosomes or chromosomal regions such as the mammalian Y chromosome, should also undergo Muller's Ratchet. (The Y chromosome appears to repair double-strand breaks by means of template-assisted recombinational repair at its mirror-like sequences but this "self-recombination" does not neutralize this chromosome's tendency to undergo Muller's Ratchet). And indeed such non-recombining sequences tend to shrink and evolve quickly. However, such fast evolution can also be due to these sequences' inability to repair DNA damage via template-assisted repair which de facto equates to an increase in the mutation rate. Therefore it is not easy to ascribe such cases of genome shrinkage and/or fast evolution only to Muller's Ratchet sensu stricto, i.e., to an accelerated accumulation of bad mutations that is caused by an inability to generate recombinant progeny.

Muller's Ratchet turns faster in smaller populations and it is thought to set limits to the maximum size of asexual genomes and to the long-term evolutionary continuity of asexual lineages (but some asexual lineages are thought to be quite ancient: Bdelloid rotifers, e.g., appear to have been asexual for nearly 40 million years).

This thread has turned into a bigger waste of bandwidth then the Peace thread...let it go already or argue via PM. This thread is/was about Serious Seeds, at least keep it on topic.

Very diplomatic of you dan_kass!

Tom, I think he's saying that hermies have happened regardless so if stressed out there's a good chance they'll show up be it female or regular seed. I bred with a Chronic female years ago and when I grew those seeds out recently I found a plant that threw out male preflowers due to heat/light stress. I don't know about any of the other varieties but my experience with Chronic from 2000ish showed that if stressed it will hermie to some degree.

~DK

With marijuana being dioecious there is always a probability (no matter how minute a chance) that chromosomal expression will divulge an occasional hermaphrodite, but on the scale Serious produces their seeds.... I would guestimate one would expect 90-95% females with a rare occurence of homozygous expression for male (0.1 - 0.5%) and a still slightly more pronounced probability of culling a hermaphrodite (5 - 7%).

For the basics of marijuana genetics one can follow the below link to view the Genetics and Breeding, chapter from "Marijuana Botany" by R.C. Clarke

http://www.marijuana2.com/growing/botany_guide.phphttp://www.marijuana2.com/growing/botany_guide.php#Chapter 3 - Genetics and Breeding of Marijuana

 

[Claude]

Tom, I think he's saying that hermies have happened regardless so if stressed out there's a good chance they'll show up be it female or regular seed. I bred with a Chronic female years ago and when I grew those seeds out recently I found a plant that threw out male preflowers due to heat/light stress. I don't know about any of the other varieties but my experience with Chronic from 2000ish showed that if stressed it will hermie to some degree.

~DK

Thanks you for explaining my post.

Respect
Claude

 

[englishrick]

yes,,,nyy,,,,

i thought this thread was die,,,,,,,

looks like it just got put in the microwave






Claude.......good to meet you man

 

[englishrick]

i have not edited this,

 

[jaybutta]

Thanks for engaging in informative, mature discourse nyy27...I would like to know your own personal take on the possible impacts of this "fem revolution"...the possible upsides, the possible downsides, and why you think the top breeders would never want to "fem"...I do appreciate you taking the time...jay

 

[englishrick]

yehhhh,,,,,thats the spirit jay,,,,,,,game on

id say using selfing as a breeding tool is very different from sendin out only fem seeds,,,,,dont you agree?

 

[jaybutta]

I agree...that's precisely the problem...continue...jay

 

[englishrick]

continue,,,,bro im a builder, if you want a propper job maye you should make me a brew,,,,,,,T2 if you dont mind

its not a problem when a seed company sells male and female seeds,,,,,what else do you want a lil bagi of polen an a paitbrush

comon jay,,,lets be mates

 

[jaybutta]

I'd like to hear you say why it's ok to hit a sacred plant with a chemical...other than profit...plz...jay

 

[englishrick]

get that outa your head jay,,,,,when your talikn about crop improvement its not a frigin kids game...fuc the bickiring between seed companys....look at the genepool as a whole,,,,,

divercity is the spice of life,,,yes,,,males spread the spice,,,,,

think about "contamination",,,,,,,,maybe f there were less males in the world maybe our landrace genepools would-be less tainted,,,,,

this coin has many sides bro

 

[englishrick]

bro,,,,if you wana prove that selfing promots mutation,,your gona have to come-up with some revolotonary data,,,reaserch /whatever,,,,,,its been used in the food industry for years,,,,,,,,stoners gezz

 

[jaybutta]

You are both questioning and playing with nature...that's shaky ground, my friend...jay

 

[englishrick]

jay,,,no1 is saying "incorperate selfing into every breeding project


remember,,,some landrace selfpolinate on there own,,,,no chemicals needed

^^how do you feel about selfpolinating cannabis,,,,,aka mono weed

 

[jaybutta]

Yes...they do...but again...that's natural...hormone therapy is not...

I think today's growers are providing just the revolutionary data you speak of...and if we find down the line that this "fem revolution" has set us back twenty years, I suppose you think the preverbial "oops" will be sufficient...well I don't...more trials need to be run before we really do something stupid...jay

 

[kopite]

I'd like to hear you say why it's ok to hit a sacred plant with a chemical...other than profit...plz...jay

Jay the issue seems to be not the method or tool of selfing but the ethics ? no matter what bad selection is bad selection.

from earlier:

In the absence of a male and under stressful conditions, yes, the process is natural...jay

no need for stress its still a natural movement from mono to dioecious or sub dioecious as in the case of most cannabis

http://www.jstor.org/pss/2460344

As to mullers rachet, well I find it more applicaple to mammels but thats just me... its alot more complex than mullers rachet.

http://www.jstor.org/pss/3066884

have a look at other dioecious plants see whats happening

http://www.springerlink.com/content/4cgf4xhqw7jhgau2/

http://www.springerlink.com/content/66dvkww9kq9a7fx6/fulltext.pdf

anyway all going a bit off topic now, back to point there is nothing wrong with selfing or "fem" beans as long as done right..

 

[jaybutta]

And the fact that it's only applicable to mammals is HUGE...we haven't even mapped this plant...jay