Feminized or Fem for breeding

Breeder's Lab
#42

You’re just wrong. S1 seeds can be male, if a male is reversed and self-pollinates the fertile female flowers; 25% will be non-viable YY crosses, 25% will be female and 50% will be male. F2 seeds can be feminized, if a female is reversed and pollinates other females of the F1 generation.

That being said, I do agree the distinctions are important and that people should know what they’re getting when they pop a seed pack. It’s also important for us all to be speaking the same language, and using made-up jargon that only applies to cannabis is a good way to not be doing that. That’s the point behind using scientific nomenclature.

6 Likes
#43

No, I’m not wrong. You’re just not following - which is fine - its a complex subject and we are all learning every day. Believe what you want. But you guys are confusing a very clear distinction between two very different methods of breeding.

If a male is reversed and pollinates (im guessing thats what you meant, not self pollinate) a female, depending whether the female was of the same generation (ie sister) or another line entirely will dictate whether its filial geneation or an f1 outcross. Either way they are not S1s. They wont be feminized though - from your own admission - so I don’t know why you chose that example.

Feminized F2s are just that, not S1.

But not here to argue. Just wanted to make the distinction that S1s and F2s are not the same.

1 Like
#44

Right now I am developing a line, at the moment at P3, hope to take it up to P5.

1 Like
#45

A male doesn’t need to be reversed to pollinate another female. That’s what males do. I’m not confusing anything - I meant a male self-pollinating its own female flowers after being reversed. It’s possible, it’s just not something that most people do. A male self-pollinating is a S1, assuming it’s the first self-pollinated generation. That’s why I chose that example. They’re not feminized, but they are the result of a self-pollination.

You’re correct that if a male pollinates a female, it will result in either a filial generation or an outcross depending on what strain that female is. That’s basic nomenclature. Technically, calling those outcrosses F1 is not correct unless the parents were both from inbred lines - it’s only a true F1 hybrid if both parents breed true. Most strains don’t breed true, so most outcrosses are F2 polyhybrids even if they’re called F1s by the cannabis industry. The cannabis industry is marketing to stoned people, and wants to keep a complex subject simple. :wink: That’s also why male self-pollinations don’t exist to the cannabis industry, because they’re pointlessly complicated to use in actual growing, and thus why S1s are considered to be always feminized - to the point where people like you get it confused with meaning feminized in the first place, apparently.

You’re right, they’re not. You’re wrong about why they’re not. That being said, I’m not going to keep banging my head into this brick wall; even if I manage to correct your nomenclature, there’s a million others who don’t know what they’re talking about who will just continue spreading genetic misinformation because they don’t know any better. So yeah, we can agree to disagree. :slight_smile: Have a good one. :peace_symbol:

Good luck with the pheno hunting. :stuck_out_tongue: That’s a lot of parents to work through all the combinations of, but if you actually manage to isolate and breed for what you want from it that’d be awesome! You’re shooting for a 2:1 or 3:1 CBD:THC, right? I hope it’s possible to get that with some stability, I’ve heard that CBD varieties are actually due to a recessive trait in the first place so it can be tougher. Then again, someone bred Freakshow, so clearly stabilizing recessives can be done. :wink:

2 Likes
#46

Oh shit, did I use the wrong character again? I meant G3 and to G5.

#47

I’ve heard Breeder Steve from spice of life talk about taking a selection to S3 and then crossing a regular, related male into that S3 to reinvigorate it. Than release as a regular line, with no mention of the work on in. It’s an old breeders tech you don’t hear about much.

2 Likes
#48

I think these abbreviations are a bit obsolete when applied to modern cannabis. It takes two P1s to make a true F1 and who does that anymore? And when you cross seeds you’ve received into each other, do you take into account the filial generations done before receiving them?

1 Like
#49

I think its seed chucking ftw nowadays

1 Like
#50

Can you grow 2 different F1 females? yes
Can you reverse one of them and cross it to the other? yes
Is it an F2? yes
Is it an S1? no
Is it an outcross? no

There you go, feminized F2s that are not S1s.

3 Likes
#51

[quote=“Cormoran, post:45, topic:72324”]
A male doesn’t need to be reversed to pollinate another female. That’s what males do. I’m not confusing anything - I meant a male self-pollinating its own female flowers after being reversed. It’s possible, it’s just not something that most people do. A male self-pollinating is a S1, assuming it’s the first self-pollinated generation. That’s why I chose that example. They’re not feminized, but they are the result of a self-pollination.

We can agree to disagree - but you never disproved my point - and only (condescendingly) responded with some impractical made up example of a selfed male pollinating itself.

Nobody does this (anymore), because a) thats how you get herm lines by pollinating the same plant b) noone is trying to find different expressions of how a male expresses its traits in (mostly) male progeny. So whether you right or wrong (your half wrong), its a useless moot point - unless you want herm lines.

Now spreading misinformation is telling people (noobs that run across this thread) that F2 and S1s are the same and conflating the two, when in practical terms - S1s are selfed females, have XX and will 99% of the time not have male plants. F2s (f3s etc) are filial inbred, have Y chromosome and will have male plants. Now if you want to mentally masturbate to figure out a way that’s not always the case (like the reversed male example) - go right ahead…but its a waste of time and confusing to those who haven’t been around this plant as long as I have.

Technically, calling those outcrosses F1 is not correct unless the parents were both from inbred lines - it’s only a true F1 hybrid if both parents breed true. Most strains don’t breed true, so most outcrosses are F2 polyhybrids even if they’re called F1s by the cannabis industry.

This is just real bad info because its half true. Yes you are (half) correct that true f1 hybrid come from inbred lines…but the key is they are UNRELATED. Thats the key. F1 polyhybrid x f1 polyhybrid (unrelated) is just another f1 polyhybrid…not f2. With respect (because we are all continuously learning), I think you need to relearn what these terms actually mean. If the donor was related to the receiver, then it would be f2. Filial inbreeding (f2, f3) means just that - filial brother to sister. If its not brother to sister, then its either a outcross or backcross.

#52

Show me proof.

F1 female x F1 unrelated female = Feminized F1 outcross - Not F2.

Its not filial inbreeding to a second generation.

#53

I am not surprised to hear this from Breeder Steve. It is not a bad idea if you have a very large selection capability, and he definitely has that :joy:. For someone messing around at home, it might not work out so well though, since you can rapidly lock in negative traits. It might be ok in some instances if you can get an elite that selfs well, and then spend a lot of time making selections between generations.

2 Likes
#54

You already “proved” it to yourself here. They’re not unrelated, they’re siblings. No different than crossing a female to a different male of the same generation. Filial derives from “family”:
image

F = filial generation. Siblings are filial, and two females from the same parents are sisters. If you cross them, it is a 2nd filial generation… ie F2. It’s not a proof, it’s the definition.

7 Likes
#55

Definitely would take time and careful selection between generations. :grin:

1 Like
#56

It wasn’t specified that they were siblings, only that they were different. I took different to mean unrelated. Yes - If you selfed a sister to another sister, it would be feminized F2 - but thats not what was specified. Also, thats not what I was saying - my argument again - S1 and F2 are not the same thing and its bad info to present them as the same.

#57

Everybody should know that professional botanists and horticulturalist who have years of experience with nomenclature and plant breeding are having a hard time agreeing on how to label cannabis and all of its variations. The cannabis culture being underground for so long created its own terminology that really doesn’t fit well in pre existing definitions of plant breeding.
It’s been mentioned but a true f1 is much more rare now a days then people realize.
Im currently breeding a high elevation Indian landrace to a Pakistani chitral kush , this would poss qualify as a f1 breeding.
When you cross sour diesal to og kush you have a poly hybrid not a f1 and most of what is being bred is poly hybrid x poly hybrid into a oblivion of bottlenecked genetics.

4 Likes
#58

Alright, I am only pointing out the feminization is not the thing distinguishes F2 from S1. I don’t disagree that S1 is not the same thing as F2. It is a subset of the things that can be called F2, and in monoecious plant breeding is often not even distinguished at all.

That doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be distinguished as S from F. It is important specifically because cannabis is not monoecious. But at the same time, it’s not correct to view S1 and F2 as having no connection in plant breeding.

2 Likes
#59

Just got very interesting very fast

2 Likes
#60

I thought the F2 was from a clone female. That’s how I’ve always done my Crossing is from clones. And I don’t know anything about this so I’m just talking. I am very interesting in this. I do my own Crossing it’s been a minute I am working on some of left-hand stuff.

#61

Cool conversation here.

It seems to me that this speaks to the OP first question about not using fems for breeding. Maybe there is some misunderstanding happening when talking about using selfed plants vs feminized (as this convo illustrates, it’s clearly easy to do).

Continually selfing plants would quickly bottleneck the genetics, right? And in general should be avoided as a breeding practice. But, breeding w fem plants; not selfed, would not be as likely to bottleneck the genetics as S2, S3, etc…

Personally, I’m still in the camp that for the maximum amount of diversity and vigor, male genes do provide something of value. I see that value as providing more true males and true females, and less herm-prone in betweens.

3 Likes