Phylos Bioscience:
Currently the way the cannabis industry uses the term F1 hybrid is wrong. An F1 hybrid (or filial 1 hybrid) is the first filial generation of offspring of distinctly different parental inbred types. Cross-pollination involving two true-breeding, or homozygous, parents, result in an F1 generation that are homozygous and consistent in seed form. There are very few, if any, true F1 hybrids in cannabis because every modern variety is heterozygous (highly variable). The Phylos genotype test can detect the level of homozygosity or âtrue breedingâ status in a particular genotype. So far there are no completely homozygous varieties out of the thousands of unique genotypes we have tested on the galaxy. Who will be the first to develop two individual and distinct homozygous varieties and cross breed them in cannabis has yet to be seen.
Original post was from Their IG & FB pages.
My proposal, which is up for discussion, is as follows.
Iâd love to see alternative proposals!
One that was offered was âLB1â to designate line bred, although I believe that âPâ still makes more sense as it can stand for polyhybrid or population hybrid, both are accurate for what is being done. âHâ is another, probably better, option with it standing for hybrid in regard to cannabis breeding.
Based on the fact that they(phylos) havenât found complete homozygosity at the genetic level, in the varieties theyâve tested?
If you tested all Sumatran tigers for example, of course they would not be completely homozygous at the genetic level. Does that make them a polyhybrid species?
Iâve grow more than a handfull of varieties that displayed homozygosity in actual practical experimentation. So I find these claims confusing.
Homozygous in this sense applies to the limited variability of the tiger populationâs genetic pool when compared to the genetic pool of leopards. They are capable of breeding together, but are distinct, as are their hybrid offspring, which would be distinct compared to either parent. To have a polyhybrid youâd need to breed the tiger-leopard to a lion-cougar.
Appearing homogeneous doesnât qualify it as a homozygous gene pool, testing of itâs DNA would be required. Without DNA testing, youâd need to run thousands of seeds with no noticeable variations. If two phenos exist for a line, even if theyâre just slightly different then itâs not homozygous.
^Edited to be accurate^ Homogeneous is used to describe a kind of mixture which is uniform in composition. Whereas homozygous is a term used to describe the genotype of a organism in case of a particular gene, when that organism has identical or same alleles(or copies) of the gene present on both(for diploid) or more (for polyploid) homologous chromosomes.
Oh, ok interesting. Well, hey, Iâm just a farmer not a botanist. So Iâm way over my head.
I had no idea the basis to qualify as a homozygous plant cultivar was so strict.
Yep, the scientists are pretty strict. Thereâs a reason though. By being strict they guarantee a consistent and concise definition of a thing. In doing so they can trust that something being called an F1 is a truly unique genetic creation unlike either parent, while exactly 50% of each. That something called a BC is exactly 75% of the back crossed parent and that something called an IBL is an inbred back crossed line that will be 99.9% exactly like the back crossed parent.
As it is now, all the original parent genetics for modern strains have either been contaminated with imported non pure hybrid strains or they went extinct in the last 100 years.
Itâs still possible to create homozygous strains, but it requires 20 generations of inbreeding, which no one is really doing, or if they have theyâve never submitted it for testing. All of the well known, or purchaseable strains have been tested and only 4 were even close.
With legalization a lot of terms and wives tales will fall apart.
Thereâs a study currently showing that there arenât that many varieties of cannabis, that slightly contradicts the dozens of ig hype artists claims of having an orange dreamscicle or whatever.
when itâs really just expressing some heavy limonene in 1out of 10 plants or seeds popped.
From my work with tomatoes it doesnât necessarily take 22 generations to get a definitive true breeding variety. It mostly depends on what traits your trying to isolate and their rarity in the gene pool, as well as dominant and recessive interaction.
On the flip side, a rare trait occuring recessively could take a hundred generations to tag down.
âWeiblen et al (2015) created a 96.875% homozygous skunk #1 population and a 96.875% homozygous Carmen population.â
Iâm still searching for the other ones, and I emailed phylos to see if they would reveal more.
On a side note, homozygous doesnât have to occur for every single gene in the plant, it just has to be homozygous for the traits you are breeding for, but it does mean that the specific trait you are targeting be identical across for all associated diploid genes.
@Scissor-Hanz, Iâm a biologist and I know how to explain most things in a way youâll understand and youâll probably learn some genetics in the process!
The basis of all of this is the individual chromosomes. Cannabis has 20 chromosomes paired off to make 10 pairs, including the sex chromosome of either XX or XY, which when combined makes up the entire genetic code for the plant. Alleles are the areas on a chromosome that have genes coding for a specific trait. The same gene code across an allele make the plant homozygous for that trait, and if the gene code is different itâs heterozygous.
At the level of genetics that most cannabis breeders work at the most they can determine is if a population of plants is homogeneous, or uniform in itâs phenotypes for a trait. Uniformity only requires that the population be very similar.
So Essentially what your saying is the first offspring from the inital cross are a P1 until they are crossed to make an F1 ?
EXAMPLE :
Key Lime Pie x Alien Rift = Jawa Pie , An inital Cross a âP1â If im correct ?
Then if you took those Jawa Pie seeds and did
Jawa Pie x Jawa Pie = Jawa Pie F1 Correct use of the F1 ? and son on and so forth
JawaPie F1 x Jawa Pie F1 = Jawa Pie F2 and would continue on ?
This is a real strain from Ocean Grown genetics just as an example Called Malibu Pie , 2 F1 Phenoâs of the Jawa pie mixed , One that was very disctint that the breeder liked the Dubbed the âMaibuâ
It would actually be:
Key Lime Pie x Alien Rift = Jawa Pie , An inital Cross is a âP1â
Then if you took those Jawa Pie seeds and did
Jawa Pie x Jawa Pie = Jawa Pie P2 and son on and so forth
JawaPie P2 x Jawa Pie P2 = Jawa Pie P3 and would continue on.
*Keeping in mind that âPâ is just my proposal. Which Iâm actually thinking about changing, because some geneticists use âPâ to designate the parent plant. Maybe âHâ would be better, as I canât think of anything in genetics that uses just âHâ as a designation. H could stand for Hybrid
Which would make it like this:
Key Lime Pie x Alien Rift = Jawa Pie H1
Jawa Pie x Jawa Pie = Jawa Pie H2
JawaPie H2 x Jawa Pie H2 = Jawa Pie H3
Oh excellent, I appreciate it much. Very lucky to have you here. Iâll probably be bombarding you with questions from now on. I completely follow you, thank you for your explanation
My confusion is that observation of uniformity seems to be effective enough to inbreed lines capable of showing f-1 hybrid vigor in their progeny, without going to f-20 and beyond and then confirming through a geneticist?
âŚIâm wrong to assume there is room for slight genetic variation within a population?
-Thanks for the reply, and I appreciate the skillful use of laymanâs terms for us dopers.
The one thing I know to be true is that cannabis growers and breeders are going to have their breeding work fully integrated into and recognized by the traditional academics. So far the academics have let growers have their own domain and have allowed growers to set their own rules. The two worlds are going to either collide or gently merge, If we, the growers and breeders, have already evolved our definitions to allow them to merge then everything will be better for us. If we refuse to merge then the collision will be bad for us, as weâd be facing down hundreds of years of scientists and every text book about genetics on the planet.
So Iâm way over my head.
