Learn something new every day! I didn’t know the autoflowering gene was recessive. Good to know, even though I will most likely never include autoflower in any breeding project. It’s come a long way from being “Russian ditch weed” though.
Any other known recessives?
The ECSD structure, the enormous calyx of the Cheese, the cloning performance of the Critical Bilbo … etc etc ^^
Some “signature” of specimens are exceptionnal in regard of theyr inherent pedigree, because they are generally a specific domino of traits that are not dependent of a specific work behind. By that i mean “stabilized” and more resistant to an outcross.
I think than i’m guessing what you are asking specifically, and imho you will find your answers more in the labs with specific markers and genome mappings. I’m personnaly not in this vein, i’m loving too much the empiric approach of the farmer lol
You’re rude with the ruderalis hybrids lovers ^^ Reikox work on it and as far as i’ve saw, he want to do it the better he can.
It’s the type of discussion to keep for cups, when nuggets are on the table. I say that sincerely.
No disrespect intended toward @ReikoX. While I hold the opinion that I do and have no intentions to experiment with autoflowers, I do respect other people’s work in bringing autflowers to the level they are at now. I’ve argued with @fishdude about it many times, just for the sake of arguing mainly, but in the end the fact remains that Mephisto and other great breeders have done some spectacular work in the autoflower field.
Autos aren’t my thing though.
Oops posted where I shouldn’t have, sorry.
Autos are not for everyone. They are a niche, and very few people grow autos exclusively. They are great for a corner in veg or an early/late outdoor harvest. The point was, simply, that it is a classic recessive trait.
An inbred line is specifically a lineage that is effectively homozygous across all loci. You may be able to obtain this in an F6 or F7 if you are selfing a line (so S6 or S7). In regular sex plants this takes 20 generations or more of full sibling crosses.
An open pollinated line may breed true for certain traits, but is more like a heterozygous population of individuals where genes are in Harvey-Weinberg equilibrium (assuming appropriately sized breeding population). OPs can rarely be considered true inbreds, though they may breed true for type characters.
What DJ short is alluding to is inbreeding depression. Cannabis is an out crossing species. Therefore it is prone to inbreeding depression in highly inbred lines which accumulate deleterious alleles. It may be possible to have highly vigorous and productive inbred lines if you avoid accumulating deleterious alleles. To do this you need very high numbers of lines being tested as most inbred lines will accumulate negative traits (this points to the reason why inbred lines are developed for production of hybrids, thereby restoring heterosis and hybrid vigor in F1 hybrid plants).
Also, with no disrespect to the man, DJ Short has some interesting breeding ideas in his book that I would list as old timer lore, not breeding science. So read it with a grain of salt.
Nice input.
But i don’t specially agree than creating an inbred line must end 100% homozygous in all loci ^^ Specially when you have to spend so much money in sequencing at each step, to confirm them in the breeding plan. I respect the point of view and your very high level of incomes but it can be also to only stabilize rightly the main alleles concerned by an humble goal. Like, basically, to obtain a “blue/euphoric” weed in an empiric and cheap way.
That is the literal definition:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/biochemistry-genetics-and-molecular-biology/inbred-strainYou don’t need to sequence each generation. Homozygosity increases mathematically.
Uploading…
*from Walter Fehr’s Principals of Cultivar Development vol.1
It’s very more clear like that, your ruderalis grow op is impressive. To evaluate the cost of the breeding involved in it just in DNA samples was just … pharaonic. But not impossible at all, if banks and big investors follow your project. Dronkers don’t do that for Hempflax, so i was curious.
Thanks for the definition, but it was more the 100% that was itching me. And your guaranteed to win, maybe it’s the effect of the translation but at first glance it look like magical ^^
No big deal, it’s just than as an human, i’m a factor of trouble by definition in the breeding plan than can’t be quantified. I’m able to read statistical equation, but i known also what is a coefficient. It’s the “leverage of something”, just like notes in school or CX with aerodynamism.
So yes, i doubt than just selfing over and over the GG4 will give me the only working homozygous version of the globe, even within 10 generations. And eventually, make me one of the most rich breeder of the game ^^ GG4 or whatever trendy cut, off course. But to obtain something than no one want to grow in S6, yes i’m sure on it ^^
I will read this book this night with attention btw: Principles of Cultivar Development: Theory and Technique, Walter Fehr, Iowa State University, 1991
Walter Fehr look specialized in soy bean. If i’m enough lucky, i will integrate it in the WIP Breeding references, the preface sound very less like a snake oil.
This one look promising also, i will give it a shot too (it’s not the same than the scans shared by GrowingHigher, another one): Hybridization of Crop Plants, Walter Fehr & Henry H. Adley, 1980
Maybe in these books i will find the snake oil to write the history of cannabis, like have done DJ Short for decades with his blueberry. Or not ^^
I just picked up Selection Methods In Plant Breeding and I feel like it’s wayyyy over my head, but I’m going to keep reading it until it starts making sense.
It’s on special for $9.99 until August 17, normal price $279.
Where is it for sale for 9.99?
I am not sure what you are saying here. I think I am loosing something in the language.
That Fehr book is the same book I scanned.
Follow the link I posted and look at the top of the page.
You can either click on that link and then go back to the page I linked or just enter the coupon code PROTOCOLS18
Nice indirect find in fact ^^ I will sample the very inspiring portion of the preview than i just read, which is initially a warning on the book :
It’s very frustrating sometimes to can’t write spontaneously the English like i read it ^^ My bad.
edit :
I’ve put the comment in the wrong link ^^ Fixed, thanks.
Now that’s a well versed answer 
By the game of the “likes”, sometimes you discover afterward … one year later a fucking awesome new paradigm to consider in breeding, that simplify your notation like crazy … stoners.
Quantitative variation (“major genes”) VS Qualitative variation (polygens) is simplifying like crazy my previous approach to consider : linked traits, intermediary traits, “structural” traits, latent traits … this manner to consider the code in twos main groups is the fucking solution i was waiting for this year for the sweet tooth #3. Big fight, i got the very first true segregation in F7. Nightmare. Considering this new layer of notation, i was in fact in possession of the answer since the start of this fucking painfull selection lol 1 year losted on this line because i’ve not made the link between the Note 1.1 and the portion of the problematic breeding plan i was working on … i swear by the empiric approach in breeding but sometimes a simple theoretical discussion is worth 12 months of experience ^^
Have fun with your males !
So what’s your notation looking like now?
Dont let the bro scientists con u. U cant true breed weed fer more n 1 err 2 obvious traits beyond F3. All else is guessin. Luther Burbank gets respect but his approach dont work well past a couple traits.
Mendel math dont work past that less u got genomic sequencin n dna testin of 100000s of seeds. Punnet squares r bogus if u dont know gene linkages n epigenetic triggers of ea plant. NE1 sez otherways is lyin er braggin er both.
The specific notation itself don’t change must (alphanumeric/traits-goals worked), it’s more the procedure in fact. It will be hard to explain, let’s try.
Before, it was for me all about the individual shapes and their sub-group in the genotype. So the specific place (range?) of the phenotypes hunted inside the whole variation. So at this point there is no specific priority outside the quest in a way.
After, splitting majors and polygens don’t change the methodism involved (mine or whatever) but the paradigm on long term. And it’s why it’s very interresting imho, it’s an (deep) additionnal failsafe for complicated lines (based on BX like the ST#3 or a NL, well any work involving “fully” recessive injections.
Initially i was considering the Blueberry sap as a detail and the SPG as the real recessive deal to manage. But with this new consideration in term of dominance on long cycles (over twos decades now for this one), i was obviously taking these twos strains for their opposite : the BB is the real recessive material (to deal with like you do in a BX, over to don’t deal anything) and the SPG is the real polygen factor (in the final hybrid i mean).
Since 7 final generations, i was driving the car upside down lol It gave me a critical male in F3 than have totally changed the potency (for better, thx the SPG rush) but who have pushed the line to re-structure suddenly the specimens in F7 around an “ignored” BB basis. This weird new bubblegum scents was not innocent finally.
This error have pushed the line in a way i like (racing weed), but when the BX have finally spended all its genetical ressources … it’s not the SPG who pop up. You can’t stabilize or fix a polygen expression, so i got the BB instead full throttle in the face (unwanted at this stage). And it was the price to have ignored her until the F7.
Very fast conclusion :
Bateson, over all critics emitted, is right : first entered, first who get out. No matter the intensity of the genetic and it’s place in the genpool. When you starve your line, at one point she will respect the Bateson tables even if you think than you have washed the sap from the hybrid : first entered, first out. It open new considerations for the cuts of the blackmarket also.
So, in reversing the previous mental attitude … everything work like a charm right now in selection ^^. I’m no longer considering the initial shape of the ST#3 as a major expression of the SPG over the BB, even if it’s dominant as fuck in hybrids, but as a (weak because BX) polygenic expression only who possess a BB backbone. The problematic is than the BB is fucking dominant one time than the BX is over in term of resistance, i understand much more now why the #1, the #2 and the #3 over an IBL. I respect the release as fuck, but the strategy was a trap at long term.
For now i will not do something very exotic bro , i will split the sap considering than the BB is reversing the dominance by lack of additionnal injection (continuity in the BX if you want). We have talked about that allready about bringing back a recessive shape in a main line in reversing artificially the dominance, the context is perfect to show when to use this tool i think.
Dont let the bro scientists con u. U cant true breed weed fer more n 1 err 2 obvious traits beyond F3. All else is guessin. Luther Burbank gets respect but his approach dont work well past a couple traits.
“Never let lazzy people teach you how you should work, at the end they are all craving money to live.” ^^
My grand father after a bottle of wine.
I will grow them if they are given to me for free for sure =) nothing wrong with extra yield.
Sweet Cream Auto is stellar in aroma and potency.
