Creating True Breeding Strains By Vic High

3 Likes

God this one is fire ^^ I’m not good with these things but let me try a complementary one :grin:
7vmkk4

4 Likes

Lol exactly! :ok_hand:

2 Likes

So what you are saying is that the intersex mechanism isn’t desirable in your opinion, got it! My question is what is causing it then? Maybe one of the things Y chromosome is doing is inhibiting seed formation which is caused by the X suppressing parts of the Y and in doing so suppresses seed formation in the plant ie now is called a (male)? So maybe the mechanism driving this is from X suppression of the Y which disrupts seed formation and only forms pollen. Adequate suppression of the Y I think lowers the ethylene production in the plant thus male pollen is only formed? Low ethylene producing females are maybe the reason for the inter-sexed traits? I imagine higher ethylene and you have an inter-sexed male that produces seeds even though it started out with pollen sacs.

Has anyone given the male inter-sexed plant that produces seeds a review of how stable the females are? Anyone done this???

2 Likes

Yes the Jackpot might be found right away or no payout!

2 Likes

Yes very good info! Explains things and very practical, Amazing he had to go back and produce more of the monoecious stock. Still reading @Fuel Thank you!

2 Likes

I consider the term “intersex mechanism” with cannabis as an anthropomorphism. Let’s say that i’m a stubborn old fart; like with “narrow leaved drug” that sound like a prehistoric man describing a treat of the nature like he will describe a plane as an “ironed dragon flying and roaring”. The sativa/indica nomenclature, as we were used to farm it, permitted deeper abstractions that encompassed a lot more than just the leave’s shapes.

In your bunch of considerations, you’re blending a lot the concept of genetic potential, the concept of genetic expression and the concept of hormonal interactions. With morphoids-to-kill-on-sight of cannabis :rofl:, you have first to understand how it’s hierarchically cascading. The best being with your hands, and by example, with a landrace having a stabilized rate of expressed herms. But you can find clear leads in the readings i’m sharing in a losted part of OG.

I don’t understand the concept behind the chromosomal coordination between hemp/cannabis.

Yes and it’s documented since a while. I had already the unpleasant opportunity to taste it too, but why just don’t grow them. I know a commercial strain that produce them industrially if any, shoot me a message if it’s your poison to play with it lmao ^^

2 Likes

Yes, why not! Everyone is always saying no why? Yes any information and whatever would be greatly accepted. Hell @Fuel maybe I will pick up what is being laid down.

3 Likes

“Cannabis seeds were soaked at 10-15° C in extracts of dry inflorescences; the percentage of staminate plants was greatly reduced.”

Air 30°C/Soil 30° C: Maximum elongation, number of nodes, leaf abscission, and water consumption; earliest maturation; minimum leaf area; many staminate flowers.

Air 30o °C/Soil 15°C: Maximum stem weight; minimum plant weight; many staminate flowers.

Air 15° C/Soil 30° C: Maximum leaf size, stem diameter and weight; sex reversals from pistillate to staminate.

Air 15° C/Soil 15° C: Maximum leaf area and root water content; minimum water consumption; latest blooming; many pistillate flowers with sex reversals from pistillate to staminate.

During the flowering phase, the optimal temperature is 16° C (61° F) during the critical night period, and 28° C (80°F)during the photoperiod.

Additional K increases plant height, thickens the stem, and produces heavy, large, dark green leaves. The growth cycle is shortened by about one week, and the sex ratio is stabilized at about females 7:3 males.

Excessive Ca will stunt the early growth of cannabis, and causes terminal shoots to be weak and under-developed. Foliage is less abundant, and blackening occurs around the veins. The stems are fibrous and woody, with a hollow pith. The sex ratio changes to males 7:3 females.

Hope all you hermie growers got your grow in order before blaming genetics.

5 Likes

You can even find uneducated newbs that do all they can to trigger herms naturally, what a fcked world my friend.

It’s time for the next-gen saviors to spread all these new genetics created with a true understanding of what is cannabis, and without a hint of all these bad genetics born in the middle age of breeding.

It could be simply based on ethylene production.
Such as a male with high ethelene production could express as intersexed.
@Cactus
Didn’t you say something about localized ethylene production?

I am not sure everyone is understanding the message
I personally think @Cactus is on to something here.
And it is much more than using herms for breeding like some have suggested.
What if a seed line was produced where all seeds were an exact copy of the special clone mother?

2 Likes

Migrated for the peace of mind of sathaze lovers ^^ Walls of text are for OGers like water for pollen, let’s build the envy organically in the other thread and the repellent here lol

so @slain

Let me make a double expresso and to roll a JH blunt first ^^
Better, big fan of a 40% Colombian / 60 % Nigerian blend.

It’s normal that it appear fancy, because the subject is a bit shitty to expose actually. And to keep it on the surface even more.

First, the concept of stability that is important to handle in all its spectrum to best speak about heterozygosity VS homozygosity.

Let’s be blunt again, and split the stability in two domains.

1] The genetical stability

This case have to be really understood as a kind of (bankable) graal but also as a reward of a given effort and sacrifice in term of time. It don’t happen within a season,

And I firmly think that it’s in this case that speaking about homozygosity can make the more sense. It’s not mandatory, there is various “cheats” to create a mirage at this level.

It’s also for me a standard but also a demand that is missing now, and that is compromising indirectly the modern genpool. Indirectly because the era where you can last with 4-5 strains in the catalog perfectly mastered is no more seen as valuable. Supermarket shelves with tons of variations of the same thing and large catalogs are more popular today. To have the impression to have more choice.

What it mean in the other side of the mirror : breeders are restrained by laws everywhere. Even in cool places full of grey area. So the management of the space is always a problematic.

Maintaining 4 strains at high standard is do-able anywhere. If they are truly unique strains, it’s a maximum of 8 motherplants to keep. Which let enough spare space to improve the new prototypes of the lines, or to replace them by new stuff.

Maintaining 20 strains is a total different game, even in using a single male for all females (sic). Offering stabilized lines in this context require a financial firepower that is not in the league of the vast majority of breeders. Even with a structured and efficient network of partners, which is a total pain in the ass to make it work at decent standard. Specially with stoners ^^

In term of market it’s stupid anyway. We are flooded by little breeders that piss strains like the wind and jump from a hype to another. Instead focusing on a what they love the most and specialize their skills. If we were saturated by dedicated little breeders with small catalog, oh god … i will find the weed of 90’s so shitty in comparison lol I digress.

2] The perceived stability

It’s when i consider that the term homozygosity is used for all and nothing, and i blame it. This is not related to shitty breeders VS good breeders, it’s related to the main task force of the global genpool since ages : small growers and small breeders that feed the global genetic since the very begin. Beside some pushy marketing and the usual fake “we”, and grow op facilities presented as breeding facilities lol … It mean humble and risky context most of the time. You can’t hit&run when you’re involved in breeding, and you work with a risky living material that can vanish in front of various problems … with what you have. And it’s near to nothing compared to the industry of hemp by example, it’s all the beauty of cannabis breeding for me on this subject. We are a nation of miraculous pirates lol

So now that the context is set with a hint of pragmatism, the perceived stability is what most of growers are waiting for : predictable outcome. And it don’t necessary mean a predictable genetic material, it’s all the difference to understand.

The first logical approach is the use of heterosis, then F1, with refined material. It’s the base. You can produce a F1 that look like clone but that segregate like shit like a firework directly in F2. It don’t happend if your line is strictly homozygous, you have to drift it to generate segregations.

Offering high standard of stability is possible this way in using heterozygous material. Just in being enough informed on the strains used to blend them smartly. But don’t dream, i’m not talking about one shot work.

BX programs also enter in this vein, and at some extend selfing (sic), and a large panel of others “programs”.

So the concept is not so mutual, it mostly rely on the use of the output and how will be perceived the standard at the end of the chain.

I told you it’s a shitty subject. And i dodged the case where only one trait is homozygous (very more frequent than an entire line) ^^, because yes … it’s not binary. But more like this bug rolling his ball of shit everywhere, it’s a journey where each meter is a victory lol

I agree with your perception of most of elite cuts : they are before everything weed to sell, and clones to propagate in mass. Just like for any common grower that find a fire motherplant to keep. As stupid than this.
Let’s call it quantitative breeding (it’s abusive but fuck it). You launch a shit ton of seeds until you find “the One”.

If recreating an elite cut is a madness if you don’t want to spend you life at it, making it a strain is not an exploit either. It’s time to debunk it for good. Most of classics are build this way. And since too much times now, we rely on them in loop, no matter the renaming game behind.

But it can’t be done without dedication and sacrifice, to reach a high standard. It require also to have enough wounds in breeding to be structured and avoid any wishful thinking. The only one main problem, you nailed it : no traceability on the cut and its context. The force of breeding is seeing the peers of the phenotype you use and to understand it this way, not so to have it. How many people with fine cuts that are unable to output anything competitive with it ? It’s not magic, and during this time when nothing is coming from your little underground space dedicated to it … the bills have to be paid.

You have the problematic of egos on top of it also, and generally the more the breeder rely on one single cut … the more the ego is like a planet to compensate this insecurity ^^ I digress.

Now let’s talk true one minute, the “method that most of us use for selection” is generally close to rolling dices and self-convincing that it will work. Until the first crash ^^ You can search far and deep, you will never find a complete method published by a successfully breeder. It’s always evasive and generalist, and enough fucked to send newbs eating a chain of walls for the most vicious ones.

I’m in the same boat, and only interested by the genetic potential of the seeds that i want to personalize.

But we are again talking about a standard. And if 20 years ago i was able to use the genetic obtained directly, it’s no longer the case. I’ve to screen everything i enter now, no matter the source.

I just disagree with “less work”, breeding is intensive even with the best materials. The difference between a shitty standard and a high standard is more a question of time spent, then extra cost to use the line. It look maybe picky, but on a decade’s scale it matter a lot and represent a substantial number of digits.

Maybe you done it involuntarily but i find the image quite good. Pollen donor, pollen receiver … it’s more binary that it appear. And when you extend to the alleles, it’s even more binary ^^

I use epistatic strategies, but on the more known and advanced projects where i’ve linked most of the desirable and undesirable traits. It’s quite rare, and exceptionnal also for me because the very high level of risk taken and the load of backup lines it mean. I rather prefer to play with genetical shocks structured around my knowledge of classics, to be transparent.

Herm screening and epigenetics leverages are not epistatic strategies. Technically, maybe, but i’m not this semi-god that see the code while i’m operating a “herm prone” environnement. I just know what trigger the most the line and use it to clean the mess. nothing to have with what i quoted just in the previous paragraph. It’s more a farmer thing. You want a mildiew resistant strain ? Hell, grow it near a vineyard and extract the resistant phenos. No need to wrap it with leverage you don’t use to shine. Practicing is not vulgar, simplicity isn’t a shame.

The plants don’t really combine their abilities in fact, it’s not really an enrichment. They kind of brute force their potential (with loss each pairing) to find something that work to massively dominate a given ground. It’s like a Rubik’s cube more. Sometimes it’s the mess, sometimes all faces have an unique colors … the difference is your training in the sequences to make it colored the way you want without spending a life at it in trying randomly.

And sometimes, it just don’t want to work like you say. Bad horses exist. It’s why regular dominance tests are important in my opinion, at least for your synaptic library. It’s never wasted, there is always one moment when you will be glad to remember it. Or to use a database for it ^^

With the intention to make something, and i like it by default. Just don’t be another one that think one shot is enough. Sometimes a line take multiple generations to start to speak loud … and it’s not a miracle or a fantastic exploit to improve a generation from the previous. You just need enough seeds and the will to work a line enough times. If you fear to be bored, you just don’t have the right horse. It’s very simple. We have all at one point daily smokes that we can bring on a deserted island …

I will try to remember for Aussies then, good tip ^^

I don’t like it because my goal is to have a predictable regular form, but still a valuable experimental process genetically. I’ve to be honest, i think it’s a waste of time both in the process and in the conclusion built. Except if it’s to produce fems. That are my nemesis since the very first on sales lol

I salute the efforts under the neuronal sabotage ^^ One more time i find it too long and too expensive, but i think that you was not in the right state to expose fully the context, to best handle the strategy exposed lol

4 Likes

6 Likes

1 Like
3 Likes

Let’s commit another breeding meme to follow the vibe ^^

3 Likes
1 Like

Aye aye, couldn’t have said that better (even if I’m against nations) :black_flag:

I sometimes like to compare this with the strategy employed by crop seeds corporations to lock farmers away from the ability to reproduce seeds themselves and ameliorate the strain for their terroir. Thus becoming dependent on these corporations to always get consistent crops from seeds. I’m aware there are other ways to do so in the broader crop seeds market though. But “our” modern seed market isn’t much different in some regards.

2 Likes

Yeah I hear you there, it’s all about the new popular cut; not my cup of tea though because as you say it’s a pita to keep all those mothers alive, and it’s also from my personal perspective boring, I don’t think I ever keep many varieties without tweaking them in some direction, it’s a compulsive habit lol. Also down here there isn’t the same availability of cuts; so it’s mostly seed that is the starting point, which suits me tbh as I don’t have to dedicate space to an ever increasing number of mothers/fathers etc. for this reason I tend to not use the backcross to the same female approach. Also I kinda think that keeping cuts is a different planet to the way I’d like to keep things, if that makes sense?

Do most of these type of old school breeders keep their mothers and just produce seed from them? It seems like a lazy way to do it to me; but I guess it’s all just different approaches🤷‍♂️. I just keep thousands of seeds in backup for every generation so I can step backwards if I screw something up.

Well we just gotta make it happen bro, sooner or later the current approach is going to result in everything being variations on the same cookies crap and that’s just boring to my way of thinking. Maybe I’m in the minority here a a idk.

Failure is just part of it imho: it’s the same thing with all crop breeding, many IBL lines are developed only to be found to not produce F1’s that are good enough for release, even with the largest and most sophisticated breeding operations. You have to be willing to abandon something that just isn’t working and try something else and if you can’t, chances are you’ll probably produce a whole lot of shit imho

Nothing decent is ever one shot work, anything unique and quality is a mountain of work and lots of fails for the occasional win. 30 years of it has taught me this much lol.

True, I have a sneaking suspicion that this method of ‘breeding’ will have a limited run before we will need to search for new genetics to move forward with, hardly anyone develops a new strain from base principles anymore, and truth be known a lot of the genetics we rely on in modern strains were probably not the result of serious breeding efforts so much as a ‘suck it and see’ approach. Or good + good = good. Hey I’ve been guilty of this myself and sometimes you hit the jackpot so I’m not knocking it, but it’s probably part of the reason we have such a mess with poly hybrids now.

Yeah that’s a bit random and uncontrollable for my slightly OCD brain, I at least like to come up with a plan to define the traits of interest that I’m gunning for and make notes across the generations, else it’s just fishing and hoping for something good to turn up and that might be never.

We like to think we are somehow ‘different’ with weed, but we are not really ; the same methods and approach used in other plants also apply for weed. There are breeding approaches we can adopt besides random chance, given the room dedication and resources. Personally I favour the ‘modified bulk method’, but accept that I don’t have the ability to use thousands of plants to do it properly, but it can be scaled down to a hundred or so plants and still work. But it’s a lot of work for many years for sure.

Only sometimes though , it’s probably rare that alleles are confined to a single locus, making it a lot more complicated to fix a trait, which is why numbers are important I guess. There is always a certain amount of throwing the cards in the air, seeing how they land and selecting those that have the trait you are looking for, with traits sometimes not even turning up in the first generation and sometimes not at all no matter how many plants you grow.

You disappoint me lol, idk I have done most of my stuff outdoors and rarely self so I’ve not really seen a high percentage of hermies, it could just be the plants I chose to use, and it might also be that they hermie more indoors, but fkd if I’m growing 18 foot plants in a tent; way too much work for my liking lol.

Now this is something I have worked on because I lived in one of the wettest places on the planet for many years, but it’s really just survival of the fittest, those that don’t rot survive to pass on their genes. Initially I thought it was all about the density of the flowers but then I realised some super dense plants seemed to tolerate being constantly wet without rotting so there is definitely something else involved.

An internationalist pirate, awesome me too lol. :pirate_flag:

5 Likes

In thinking about most of the fames, the legends, the dramas, the strange stories arounds cuts/strains/seeds, the factual links between all strains, the real context of the industry, even OG lol … the analogy is maybe not as stoned that it appear :grin:

It’s very relevant, even if personally i put more the fems in this context. Since the start i consider it as a “Monsantesque shame” of our own (global) community. Behind the “vegan grow”, the quest for “authenticity” and all the hipster veil … they eat fems by kilogrammers. It’s time to charge the canons, to revive Libertalia and to break paper ships ^^

Protecting a (natural) F1 with skills isn’t a thing i will blame personally. I’ve in head way too much persons prone to amnesia and very ungrateful behaviors, it’s a legit defensive strategy. Some are even presented like christic figures, to have factually fucked deeply the scene they come from lol. And considering the fem’s success and volumes, not so much a problematic obviously for motherplant’s hunters.

For the real genetic material anyway, this is no longer a public market since a good decade in my opinion. For the best and the worst as usual. I fucking digress.

Yes, it’s a pain to maintain, and stressful. You have to watch these motherplants constantly and to renew them constantly too to keep them in their best shape. Most of strains losted for diluted versions was just too much aging plants that breeders don’t considered as an annual but as an immortal tree.

I’ve pushed more far, just for the fun of it and to renew the pressure/pleasure. I’ve replaced my veg space by seeds. Literally. And actually … i fucking love it, finally. Hesitation and waste of time with average specimens become an unnecessary luxury, it produce a more focusing context and avoid any temptation to shortcut the wanted standard. But it require reactivity and to take breeding decisions on the fly in term of selection, still a hard old fashioned school.

Take care to don’t avoid efficient tools just by principle. I use BX if i need to, no hesitation. It doesn’t have the same implication at long term than a reversal have. Sometimes also you have to keep a reference around to be sure to outperform the previous generation, because it become tight. No need to set a constant nursery for this. Cannabis don’t specially dislike temporary short ghetto solution with enough love, it stay a sturdy and versatile plant. Keeping around a cannabonsai is not a big deal, at the moment you understand fully (on the vegetal mechanisms) why it’s a bad idea to keep it more than 6 months.

Breeding is generating a cascading number of problem to face, a complete toolbox is required. In case of.
But on the principle i’m more than understanding you, it’s now a daily routine for me. A bet with some friends too ^^

It’s a dangerous shortcut, most of these clones have a story and a true ballistic. It’s why they still alive today in almost everything. I’m not talking about the grow op cuts, but true breeding cuts that are traded for 5 digits. Sometimes even more, the aridity of skills and the quest for the “easiness/quicksilver” have drastically changed the game in the backstages.

Stoners were a lot more demanding also, throwing a random chunk in the market was a suicide. Time have changed, as the perceived value for the price.

Now on a pragmatic point of view … it’s just a cut entering in production. When nothing around can compete this motherplant (sometimes during decades), it’s a bit foolish to don’t get your reward. At least a time.

Ahoy to this ^^ It’s at the base of the wall that you don’t realize that you’re representing a minority, but that you’re most of the time alone. It’s why i like also breeding chit chat, it’s the opportunity to generate maybe new sailors with a map that lead somewhere. And avoiding/preventing the usual bullshitting that push wannabe to crash fast and hard. It’s a dry game, the rate of loses is very high.

You’re partially right. 75% of the work is to fail. 25% is to know why. Until you’re reaching a cruising speed with decent lines, and it become more an artistic marathon after.

But no, you don’t drive an IBL to the failure. It’s an unique lesson to learn, you never do it again trust me. It’s why it’s important to never randomize your moves and always know what you’re doing and why. It’s the principle of mapping a genotype.

At the start it’s all about degraded progeny, then step by step … it become a standard you don’t want to sacrify.
Unfortunately, the disparition of the taste for factual competition promoted self-hype more than i’m able to guess. I’m more and more surprised. It’s a bad thing imho.

And yes, i abandoned the idea to work with cookie stuff the day i was forced to do it ^^ It’s sane. It’s segregation. And the combo of your personal segregations create a true signature in your weeds. As well as to be an unconditional fan of everything cookie, don’t get me wrong on it. USA is obviously waiting for the ultimate cookie, and everybody know that it will not come from Berner. A slot is to take. Like many others.

We are talking here about an half century momentum, if you still have doubts on the legitimacy of dedication and specialization … you’re in front of a philosophic problematic and it’s not my ground at all ^^

Doubts are useless, challenging the said standards is more rewarding at long term.

It’s simple to know if you hit the jackpot : the price of your safety increase drastically so much that you have to make decent bucks to cover your asses.

On poly-hybrid “witch hunt”, i just don’t buy this argument that i find too much spreaded lightly. It’s for me a very bad way to analyze the situation. The disparition of R&D is a problem, the random chunk is a problem, not the poly-hybrids.

Factually it doesn’t have any sense for me, you can drive a poly far in stabilization and output a true new genetic material. It’s the very wrong culprit to burn.

Both approach are legit, and i got the proof of it many time. The only difference is the planification, someone structured can plan and evaluate the time needed for something. An artist not.

But there is no hierarchy in term of weed. Just repeatability and duration in the game.

Modern youth is dumb on this point, they don’t understand that both approach are complementary. If they stop to play role-games and to jump at the throat of each others one minute, they will realize that they are fighting with their best allies to change the whole game. Let’s say again that it’s an opinion, but i really think it.

I’m often disappointing, it’s the particularity to have nothing to sell door-to-door like an encyclopedia seller ^^
I’m searching herms, i generating them, i scratch deep to declare them. And more today than ever.

I can open a Patreon if you want to know all little secrets lol But no, rotting buds and mildiew/fungi attacks are two different resistances. As the leverage that trigger them. You’re right on the density by the way.

Let’s call it botanical varieties if you need it. I don’t mind.

Your open pollination is not a time machine at all. You can’t know what phenotype+phenotype = success or what phenotype+phenotype = failure. It’s a bland round and a Russian roulette strategy. You’e falling in the wishful thinking buddy here. But i don’t mind about it, whats wrong with this. Nothing for me.

But presenting an open pollination as a methodology is way more pushy for my taste, and i can’t ignore it in considering the popularity of this way to avoid any responsibility in the process. Also when i see valuable materials handled with the insane risks that represent this absence of strategy, it make me mad.

It’s not a judgement, just another voice on what you’re claiming that i find important to share.

3 Likes