Lol, who know? So if neither Equatorial nor BLD cannabinoid nor terpenes are effective medically maybe it’s just a different treatment? I love cannabis, but have always been sceptical of the idea of it being a snake oil medical for everything. Sometimes there are just better options other than cannabis depending on what’s being treated.
. There is an immense pharmacopeia of natural options beyond cannabis to explore.
Wow these plants are amazing and some very cool work you’re doing. Definitely following this.
Thank you!
#2r4. Pure energy comes in waves like a roller coaster tickling mind and body. Zero load, no hangover. If the serotonin flush of Mali met the focus of Aderol in cannabis form. The effect was not like what most would recognize. Dripping wet dank frankincense on the burn.
Top knotch looking haze for sure 
Hope you reach your goal
real soon 
@StoneGuru
I’ll always be one move away, but that’s ok. I love the process.
You’ll still be 2 steps ahead than most 
Please keep at it I’m sure when you least expect it you’ll find your keeper.Who knows you might find something even better. 
Admirable work on this project by the way phenomenal job.
Nice to see you kickin round this site!!! As always plants looking amazing!
Love this thread @StoneGuru, and love that Silk research you did @Dirt_Wizard.
On the Silk, I got some of the Nigerian Silk from Beyond Organics a couple years back and it was the best medicine I ever tried, and I smoked a ton of the oldskool puday for many years. I’ve tried about 10 different phenos of the Silk now, so can offer some feedback and context from that side of it, but don’t want to muddy up the thread so I’ll respond elsewhere.
Super happy to watch this unfold and very eager to run the Alpine!
I second that about @Dirt_Wizard post. I think there is a high likelihood that Nigerian Silk was from that time period and probably Nigerian, in 3 landraces of Nigerian and I didn’t find anything similar, yet but there are likely many accessions I could never get.
One thing that is important and that I confirmed with Beyond organics is that several of the CLV1 meristem mutation are shared by both Nigerian Silk and Nevil’s Haze. These are very rare mutations overall and it is interesting to me that both old lines share this. One that is not shared in common is the blood red petioles which is one of the traits helpful in segregating isolations in the Nigerian Haze project. The Alpine Haze 1.0 is very much selected to Nevil’s, but not the one familiar in the A5t and '97 or a dozen other 5haze makes.
@Tykal please feel free to share your experiences with the line. I can toot the horn all I want about it, but doesn’t mean much. For me it does have an effect unique to any other herb I have had. Psychedelic but more like MDMA. A serotonin rush roller coaster of exuberance.
The common denominator combination of Ocimene, CBG and CBC are similarly off the charts relative to anything else out there. People have been looking for a while and it just is without compare. Aside from that I know that both R’s and my entries were sent in off seed run barely dry.l and those same cuts are much higher now. A third of the branches on the plant I entered were fully seeded themselves. We have had other plants go substantially higher.
I am generally selecting to the original 5haze in all ways except that Nigerian compliments the effect better. Less anxiety.
Very cool project. Will any seeds ever be available?
I am a perfectionist, so everything takes about 1-2 years and most of it never makes it. I have a lot of unique haze lines, specific selections that I intend to layer into complete works. I share what I like along the way. Most of what I have right now are something like sets of keys to unlock more.
This particular one isn’t ready…delayed in part from a keeper tray dropping and resulting labeling issue and a low seed count of reserve.
Each keeper will have to prove itself without a name which may be beneficial anyway. I am still testing different makes to study the dynamics and responses.
The most exciting one at the moment is Silk S x Soulmate in testing. They are wild vigorous mutants for sure. Everyone different. The terpenes equally so.
The only one in flower is 50/50 variegated in half…technically a meristem mutation. Very high and complex terpene. heavy yielder. Hopefully the effect of Silk S will remain.
Alpine 3.0 is extensively tested and is a complete work. At least for me. ET’s Nigerian x Buzzsaw. ET’s tested at 28%. The cross left the potency high and changed The profile from citrus carrot funk to mentholated pine cleaner. You can feel the icy hot expansive qualities right away A powerful hammer of a high, although doesn’t last much past 90 min. The reviews have been great, but it loses the effect I prefer. It is quite different then Rafiki by Doc D which uses the same mother to his A5bx
The top 3 pictures are Alpine 3.0. It is an extremely tacky resin. Sucks to break up or roll a joint, but great through water. 
@CocoaCoir , @ThePotanist @Cormoran thank you for taking the time to participate and help advance the conversation of ploidy.
If the other thread has relevance to the subject it won’t be known for around a year if at all. I can upload hundreds of anomalous mutations over multiple sgen accessions here as conversation pieces.
I had mentioned it early and several times over the years in other threads, but poloidy is not a goal of mine.
My goals have been driving the novel terpenes and cannabinoid levels higher in equatorial cultivars. It is near impossible to distinguish the inter-relationships of these so I incorporating the “mutations”. This was intended to use as marker to clearly observe the flow the interactions through populations.
Very early on the results were record setting in around 100 entries before even developing it and have now went well beyond that.
I will load more information here and thank you each again for sharing
The @ThePotanist . I have a question I haven’t received a clear answer on. I’ll use my own experiences to illustrate it further. I have about 30 continuous years of experience and observation with primarily equatorials and equatorial hybrids so I have observed a great deal in that time.
One thing I am skeptical of is the accuracy of genetic mapping such a phylos. Many cultivars have only one entry. For example. 1 entry from A5 haze. Depending on the story that one believes. That plant is a combination of between 3-5 equatorials from around the world and 2 BLD’s. I have grown out thousands combined and due to the genetic plasticity there will not be one the same. There will be specimens that don’t have a single terpene, cannabinoid or visual marker in common. Yet share the exact same parents.
One example is an NL2 type that came up in a Bandaid haze 2.0 run. I have grown out around 250 NL’s from 80’s early 90’s stock over about 4 breeders and 7 accessions. I had never found a single ‘pure’ NL the was more accurate than what I found in an almost entirely equatorial domina
nt line. So would these then appear right next to each other having the same parents and opposites in all ways?
Another example. These are both effectively NL5 f3. In over ~100 testers of each The one on the left will produce consistent NL plants…variation, but every single plants visually, effect and profile stretch, flowering window will be NL. The one on the right will in every way be equatorial haze in all of the same respects. Occasionally on outlier will creep to it’s deeper origin, but there will not be across over due to careful selection at each s-gen.
Sharing the same parents and having not been outcrossed how would these 2 appear in genetic mapping? My anticipation is that in either of these examples the cultivars I am using as examples are not going to land right on top of each other.
At my current level of understanding this type of mapping is of little practical use unless there are hundreds or thousands of data points for every type. I don’t have training, but I have decades of hands on experience. Enough to know that I could create nearly any opposing end of the spectrum with the same seed over 3-6 generations.
Thank you in advance for any insights on this subject 
Phlyos took a shotgun approach to their genetic mapping instead of whole genome sequencing. They couldn’t identify an S1 nor a cross as being related to the original mom.
Was reading an older thread at icmag where dubbi (ACE) contributed. Afair he stated that when Phylos “mapped” one of his strains their result wasn’t accurate. As in not showing some strains that went into the making of his recent strain. He tried to discuss it with them but they weren’t open to that…
(English isn’t my native language, so please excuse any mistakes)
Yeah! So there are a couple things they did that I think prevent them from accomplishing what they wanted.
As mentioned by @HolyAngel they took a shotgun approach. Its essentially sequencing random stretches of DNA and then trying to piece them together like a puzzle. The quality of your results then depend on how long your sequence reads are and how accurate. Generally, in DNA sequencing, the longer the sequence you use the more likely you are to have to sequencing errors, but the easier it is to put together or assemble.
They couldn’t match anything back probably because of read length, shorter reads make matches harder because less information. Its the difference between a 10 piece puzzle for a 3 year old vs a 2000 piece puzzle.
I’m not sure what their sequencing targets were, if it was nuclear DNA, mitochondrial DNA or chloroplast DNA but each one would also have its own pros and cons in terms of identifying relatives.
I think their effort was good, and I support what they are doing. But I don’t think they realized quite what they were getting into with Cannabis. It is a great starting point though, and as more data gets generated in the future it will only help
Yeah. They basically took the plant sample. Extracted the DNA, pulled out an entirely random ~1% long fragment of it, and then used that to compare to other random 1% samples. Can’t imagine why things are fucked up 
Does this mean the matches they did come up with happened to align along the 1% (i.e., are relatively solid), but there’s huge holes due to the miniscule sampling?
Edit: trying to understand if I can rely on the matches as potential indicators of real relatives.