This is not a well established procedure. And we are not swimming in an ocean of rock stable strains made this way.
The C99 is an unique equation involving specific P1s, specific manner to select the BX offspring and the specific profile of the operator (taste/will/methodology).
Yes, the Sweet Tooth #3 and the C99 are twos BX programs. But that’s the only thing they have in common.
No.
A BX program doesn’t necessary start with P1 than are in F1.
A BX program doesn’t necessary involve a female as the backcross reference.
A BX program simply imply to cross a generation with the previous generation.
Yes, you will have seeds.
No, a (BX1 x P1) is not the same thing that a (S1 x P1). The constraint of selection are totally different.
→ Reversing a female and let her produce seeds from his own pollen.
It’s not a selection. A selection imply a combo of identified traits, I’ve already said that selecting an entire phenotype is not humanly possible.
To self a specimen permit also an additional layer of information : to qualify the individual answer of a phenotype. Actually, it’s initially a method used for that.
If the S1 are not enough satisfying, why wasting time and money to operate a BX1. You will just dilute more your reference.
And prey. Strongly, because each time you’re increasing exponentially the problematic you’re supposed to stabilize/fix.
BX and Selfing a specimen have in common the concept. Nothing else.
Better : It depend 100% on the operator and on his methods of selection.
Worse : It depend 100% on the operator and on his methods of selection.
No. A very personal input is exposing in depth my love for a BX.
Because to inject the elite’s clones in the discussion permit to avoid the “isolated island” syndrome. A lot of people have already put in practice since a while the questions you’re just starting to explore. With success, or not. Available strains have the last word.
No, the strict reverse.