How could a poly breed true? And how are you defining true breeding?
2 Likes
brother im not sure, they are F1 the seeds are only regular seeds from Rollex Og Kush to Devil Harvest Seeds, i will to poly Males x Females, what do you see brother, mi carnal huerote.
@RarePheno is simply hardest for my i will try with Breeder Grow Bible and it looks so lovely but is a lot of information to read i going slow but i dont stop to read that book.
Mi currentlu estatus is this one but all the harvest has seeds into theyr flowers
@MiG THANKS BROTHER i will try with Afghan Kush 100% Indica x Jarrilla Sinaloense 100% Sativa, that will be my frist Cross
i hope will be
Afgan Male x Jarrilla Sinaloense Female
then
Jarilla Male x Afgan Female
i think this will be direrent reaction cross.
3 Likes
Jarilla de Sinaloa is alsow called Cola Borrego SinaolenseâŠ
1 Like
at what generation do you loose the majority of variance you gain with the F2 Generation?
1 Like
@MiG Nice Budy Cola de Borrego Sinaloense is Better name than Jarrilla
@whadop i dont have idea, i have seeds provenience from
Kritical Mass Regular Male cross Kritical Mass Feminized
and other Cross
Kritical Mass Regular Male cross Amnezia Mass Femized, i understand that this seeds has tons of varietys just for that reazon i will to know more about Breedering Seeds i love it to much
1 Like
I will be harsh but itâs with a big love. Because itâs a fckng good type of question that i want to see again everywhere. high5 whadop.
- Each time that you read an absolute rule about cannabis breeding, itâs simply BS. No matter from where it come. Life is not an algorythm or an equation with a single unknown factor. When you start to produce seeds and to use them, you quickly understand that the life is a flow and not an arithmetic operation like computers.
So, to all âmarketing-destroyedâ people that allready feel that something is weird when practice come :
- all males must be [put anything you want inside] : BS
- a good female is [put anything you want inside] : BS
- all F2 have the same variations : BS
- a F1 in heterosis is homogenous and stable by default : BS
- all early specimens are [put anything you want inside] : BS
- all late specimens are [put anything you want inside] : BS
- âŠ
I will tell you the truth right now. In industry, with dead materials, absolutism is able to exist. If you warm a titanium nail, you will always get titanium oxyde. If you use a titanium coil to vape, you will get oxyde. If you burn a car with titanium âskeletonâ, you will get oxyde.
With life it canât be absolute or there will be no life anywhere. Simply. The chaos is the life and vice versa. And when youâre a âwannabeâ, itâs the first thing to digest, accept and deal with. I call it âentering in the flowâ in a place where Jah donât planned you. When you start, to study taoism is maybe more usefull that any tutorial around.
I will add that to known yourself and to respect your inner fate to be specialized in a certain type of âfootprintâ in breeding is the biggest battle that you will have to win during years of practice. Because until you do this inside job, you will just suffer and bleed. There is no easy way : BS.
The bad new is that you canât avoid it, to reach the peace and to known how to swim without losing all your energy within 3 meters. You have to virtually die a fews times in breeding to lose your human nature, then start to be a part of this flow. Swim and you will die. Get a boat and Jah will destroy it. Expect and you will only get disappointment. The life that is in front of you have a big picture. If youâre able to read the story of this big picture to include yourself inside, you will quickly get decent results, even if youâre breeding in an half sqm in MIR station or in the worst condition that youâre able to imagine. Life care only about life. A dead equation have no chance to get results, an alive breeder have all his chance. There is no maths outside the statistics of your specimens and theyr average.
And fck, one time for good, talent in breeding is just someone that have understanded himself. All successfull breeders that iâve encounter in my life have a single common point : theyr methods work only in theyr hands. You can take a blank newbie that you form to your methods during twos intensive years, he will be dependent on you for life and will be unable to drive his own projects. And in fact thatâs the worst gift that you can share with a wannabe, because itâs just a trap. He will never swim in your flow, no matter how hard you try and how many sacrifices you do. Thatâs the beauty of the paradox of life, youâre totally free to deal with you genetic fate. Just like your specimens.
Extend this reflex to any fake âruleâ that is supposed to be applyed to everything the same way. Always think twice by the extrems when you read something that present you the life as a protocol.
Are you seriously think, with all your soul, that you will have to deal the same way a F2 of twos landraces, a F2 of twos 3way, a F2 of a commercial strain ?
Off course not, and youâre all allready known it in your fiber in fact. Because yourself, youâre a F1 in another flow bred by a selection.
Thatâs the philosophy, to deal with a chaos not with rules that trap you but with tools that permit you to adapt faster and stronger each time that you use them.
- Breeding tools are breeding tools. Not rules, not god laws and not the keys to an easy success. But it exist a gold rule on tools : the more you have tools, the more you can adapt to each situation.
A couple of decades have proved that artificial ones only produce shit on long term, âwannabe lazzy monsanto geneticiansâ will cry loud about that because i hit theyr shortcut. I donât blame the use of thyosulfate, CS, GA3 ⊠they are tools. I blame the lazzy idiots that donât feel responsible about what they throw outside theyr lab or not, like uneducated childrens that discover fire. So i will not arg so much on it, facts are here to play the polemic without me.
And yes, i use chems and alt methods sometimes when i need it to decypher a genetic pattern. But not to produce shit faster than light and to explain to fresh growers that it is a method of breeding itself.
But i extend the principle to real breeding tools. Iâm mad each time that people write critics on them. Breeder X is bad because he use only the tool Y, Breeder A is my god because he use only the tool B etc ⊠this is just easy thinking for the mass.
First, i make a loop on the concept of lifeâs flow and inner knownledge to acquire. Somes breeders outperform the potential of theyr respective tools. Donât dream stoners, itâs not because they was lucky or because itâs simple. Itâs because these tools offered to them the failures that was the most easy to digest, and by extension to understand, for them and only for them. If i switch twos specialized guys, the both will only produce mids instead theyr usual pearls.
I have no talent or special feeling myself like these types of guys, iâm just stubborn as hell and never give up. So i use everything i can to maintain the flow and to can continue to read the book of my genpool. If i can fix with a backcrossing program a mistake that i have done three inbred generations before, i just do it over to lose years. I donât give a fck, i will not use a flat tire on snow just because my ego ask it. I choose my programs only in thinking about my lifespan and the time i can give to my lines, not because âitâs the best methodâ.
And finally on a blind test on dryed flowers, no one will be able to known what method is used. People will elect the best one simply. Iâm not talking about cheated cups off course, where you âbinge smokeâ samples like a bulimic stoner, but more about private clubs that take it very seriously. The last one iâve been introduced used blood analysis of judges, not chromato rates that mean nothing. Who trust ? A 50 years old guy that is unable to debate on breeding and that have the same clothes that your own sons, or someone that is ready to give his blood each week to evaluate the momentum of one bud ? Iâve made my choice and since i fear no one (open invitation).
Thatâs another world when youâre very proud to be beated to death to have overestimated the potency and the whole quality of your last hybrid. You return at work without any anger, on a next level. Each time.
If you donât have it near your labâ, create one. IT IS the best breeding tool on long term that exist on earth, and your worst enemy in breeding is really your closer friends.
Inbreeding, backcrossing, selfing, whatever ⊠everything is good at the moment youâre on the podium. For real, not in your head.
- Mendelian laws are a powerfull help to use. But only if you understand well the context when they was writed. If you donât give a fck about who is Mendel, his life, his philosophy and how the fuck he thinked to work like that ⊠just avoid it from your culture. Specially if youâre not specially interrested to set long term inbred lines. Mastering mendelâs laws extrapolation will not give you the garantee to have a competitive weed.
Now the cannabis breeding is a context itself. We all hunt the recessive grail, no matter what youâre doing with your plants. Itâs why to stabilize is always more important for us that increasing the average. We can debate on it off course, but it will not change the context. We breed mainly in pure recessive sub groups, and no, âtrue breedingâ mean nothing. Speaking more about a contextual dominance is more close to the truth of the practice.
Hybridize a Jack Herer female with a Black Widow male (original commercial versions, not reworked), the WW will always dominate the strain and the further segregations will always lead to this way. Mendelâs law have nothing to have with it. Is the WW âtrue breedingâ or âbreeding true my assâ ?
So why when you do the same but with a MK ultra female, it never happend ? Because one more time, absolute rules fooled you to think that every specimens of every strains are the same.
- âSo, if the MK Ultra eat the WW that eated the Jack Herer, we can consider that this strain is âDominantâ like you said ?â
Hybridize it to a Skywalker male and cry your mother to donât understand anything this way. âContextually dominantâ is what iâve said, nothing more and nothing less. You will always find a specimen that will eat your so called âbreed trueâ strain.
Mendelian laws are well explained all over the internet, and itâs not my role to explain them in details. But, instead all fake tutorials that i read on it, i can explain you how it work in practice. And i can give the garantee that itâs very easy to verify no matter your level and within twos generations.
Itâs what you will read mostly from fake specialists borned in one night about mendel laws and punnet square :
I have a strain A and a strain B. I want to hybridize them then work them inbred.
So, you will get in F1 3xA for 1xB ⊠blablabla
Itâs of course a total BS that lead nowhere in practice. Mendelâs law are not scripts for selection. Only dreamers believe that.
For real you will deal with that :
And as you see, itâs a bit more messy that these naive magic tables and mendelianâs scripts.
If you think in term of specimens, i can promise you that you will quickly consider directly that breeding is BS. Because you will cry all your tears to make your crop as clear that the punnet square you initially planned. Jah will beat your ass this way to unselect you.
In practice the individual variations are an interpretation of the breeder himself, his manner to integrate the flow of the genotype that heâs working. You have to accept first that youâre a part of the breeding program, as specimen.
Second, you have to accept that the flow of gens that you have to face is working against you. Turn the equation in all ways and BS that you want, we will select always the best dioecious weed in recessive groups. No matter the average quality of the line, the age of the captain or if the weed was gived to you by alien because youâre the best lol
So you understand now that to breed fully recessive somes quality sub-groups is a bit more tricky that applying individually the mendelian ratios on unsorted specimens.
The reality is that with years you will face numerous generations wich are unable to be sorted without isolating different couples to force a true segregation. Because your context is recessive cannabis and good weed. Not punnet square that are more adapted to wide outdoor crops borned from open polenizations.
Why do you think that selfing and backcrossing are today the main way to survive to the market ? Why do you think that today so called elite cuts replaced IBLs of yesterday ? Ask yourself, take your time.
Apply the mendelian laws to your own selections, not your specimens. And you will always learn how to improve your skills. Do the reverse and each generation will show you a different pattern to learn again from scratch, until you will give up. Killing sheeps will not give you a better whool, to segregate them will.
I known itâs hard to read, sorry for that.
15 Likes
theres been legendary strains come from bagseed (princess/c99) so you donât need a million sqf or cuts you just need that one magic bean !!
4 Likes
En eso de las âbag seedsâ hay tambiĂ©n mucha leyendaâŠpara no reconocer que se ha usado un clon, o por añadirle âleyendaâ a una variedad no muy original, por ejemploâŠ
3 Likes
Its not âmagicâ like the ig breeders would have you believe. Its a plant, weâve been at this for years. And crossing âthisâ to âthatâ isnât breeding, nor does it take talent. Chuck em and select for vigour, scent, growth, and uniformity, rinse repeat.
1 Like
Bravo. Thanks for your take on it.
Newbie here. 10 yrs indoor grow experience, some of that time was used for seed production.
What I understood from your post was the most critical factor in stabilizing a strain is knowing the recessive tendencies from each parent.
Since that involves experience with each particular strain, do you know of a source that publishes their findings or have one yourself?
2 Likes
None that Iâm aware of. A very small percentage of âbreedersâ even do that to begin with. The idea is to try and identify recessive traits based on a statistical measurement of the Mendelian genetics. By that I mean that in order to see a recessive trait in the cross, you have to make your hybrid (1st generation) and then do a familial cross of those seeds (2nd generation). After that, you need to grow enough plants to make the statistical evaluation. On average, youâd expect to see a recessive trait expressed in 1 out of 4 plants. That means that you need to grow way more than 4 plants, because from any 4 seeds you might see 2 showing recessive traits, or you might see 0. So you need to grow enough plants to provide adequate statistics so that you can even identify which traits are recessive.
But thatâs the simple case of mapping a trait to 1 allele only. In actuality, certain traits expressed in the phenotype may depend on more than that. And then youâre really in for a ride.
These days, most breeders arenât taking any kind of scientific approach like that. It requires too much work, and there isnât much of a payoff in doing it when 50 other breeders slam together two cup winners and sell 10x as much. Time to market is slow for breeding, and fast for pollen chucking. And so I fear that breeding is being limited to people who have a passion for a certain strain or phenotype, while pollen chucking has become the standard for people who what to run a business.
To me, itâs all fine. Every way of producing seeds has its place. If you find something you REALLY like, then itâs the time to learn how to do this kind of ârealâ breeding. Without a high level of attachment to the phenotype, you will not find the time it takes to preserve it to be worth it.
In my opinion, make new things all the time. Chuck pollen around like itâs going out of style. Grow your new hybrids and use them to make more hybrids. And the moment you blaze that one joint where you feel like, âdamn, Iâll remember smoking this for the rest of my lifeâ, then go back to your seeds from that population and get to work preserving it.
3 Likes
lol
Now that is exactly where my head is at.
Trying to get back to July 4th '72 and the Jamaican that had me cheering faces in the clouds.
Still I joined OG today with the hopes of landing quality low odor sativa genetics down the line and add my humble offerings to the community here. Maybe not in quality seed atm but I have a few yrs. indoor growing under my belt plus 40 odd yrs organic food growing-grains, cover crops, vegetables, other medicinals, etcâŠ
2 Likes
Iâm not sure to understand your request to be honest, but i guess than youâre speaking about a big database than is tracking the genetic value of strains.
Iâve never saw it anywhere for our plant. With the DNAâs tests vulgarization and projects around, maybe one day it will born i guess. But i can bet an Oz than it will be very expensive to access and mainly designed for USA professionnals. Not sure on the success of this type of initiative too ⊠it mean an exhaustive documentation of a lot of specimens, per line and per generation. I donât think than any investor will pay a warehouse than produce nothing but photos and breeding analysis for a database also ^^ Long term is not trendy bro.
This is a right sentence, i mean a practical one than offer results.
In depth, and in the search of the maximal control possible, itâs more about the geneticâs relations of the specimens with each others, and the position of the traits youâre working in this equilibrium. (i stay only in stabilization, not evolution or epuration or any other work).
Itâs wise to consider than by definition we are all selecting the recessive phenotypes. The âmost potentâ, the âmost tastyâ ⊠we are seeking exceptional specimens with rare patterns and shapes. Initially.
From this starting point, what will make the difference between a grower and a breeder is the manner to handle this ârecessivityâ. So yes, i loop on your sentence, itâs a critical point to known where you can go with these exceptional specimens.
But to map the âplaceâ and the priority of this trait worked in the whole equation is as important than knowing the initial specimen producing this expression. There is always a price to pay, specifically in IBLs.
To keep it practical and simplified, you need this combo for a decent control :
- a minimal background on the line to be able to map the equilibriums and their ratio, on the traits youâre working ofc.
- the importance of this trait in the line over âno priorâ traits, so to known the context necessary for this traits to be enough recessive to the point to disapear. And that, only to donât destroy it.
Synthetic version, ask you always this : âIâve found a freaking potent specimen in this line. Why the whole line is not that potent ? What is the leverage present in the weakest specimen which can counteract this beneficial state ?â
You will naturally find a way in keeping the skeleton of this question. Accuracy in breeding is just the different layers of this question.
Thats the only stable phenomenon you can get yes. 25% of pure recessive specimens, no matter the generation or the work. Even in a stabilized line. Now the quality of work will streamline this and make it very difficult to spot with the best practices. This 25% can end only in slight variation of taste, an extra couple of days to clone etc ⊠and not necessary with fully segregated specimens from the dominant group.
I usually launch batch of 50 to 100 seeds per 8*8 âusableâ surface (all included), to be totally frank. But i disagree.
Itâs a matter of method, not a matter of specimen you work at a time. You can launch 1000 specimens and end nowhere if you donât have any track of the specimens for the further generations.
I will personnally more bet on someone than work 100 specimens, by batches of 3 seeds, but which note everything on every single specimen than someone than launch 1000 specimens to extract only a single phenotype.
Now on maths itâs more frightening than you appear to think. 4 specimens absolutely not garantee anything. And itâs the same with 10 or even more with IBLs. You can end with a batch of four dominant specimens, four recessive specimens, four âmixedâ, one of each ⊠itâs why to keep a track of what youâre doing and what youâre getting is so important. It differenciate for me a blind quantitative breeding from true control.
No please, i mean come on ! lol Thatâs not scientific at all, itâs totally in the vein of the empiricism of a farmer.
With the actual tools available, a scientific approach will be totally turned on DNA sequencing, chromatography and IA recognition. But to set an efficient protocol and algorithms, you need to hack the methodologies of a wide panel of ganja farmers. Because each one is unconsciously specialized. I donât think it will happen during my life ^^
Youâre harsh but i agree. Now, thatâs also what people want. Itâs a complex polemic i think.
This market need fools more than ever imho
At first glance i was thinking than you was promoting the pheno hunt and iâve finded it paradoxal. But iâve realized finally what you mean and i totally agree : if youâre not feeling the urge to maintain a line for years, itâs just not worth it.
Iâm trying to go back in 90âs when iâve discovered Amsterdam. It all start not with a seed like say someone, but with a goal. Best vibes for your projects.
2 Likes
Thanks for the reply and your perspective. Iâve had some success through the years maintaining certain strains of my favorite vegetables, what you say leads me to believe I may not be so fortunate with our favorite plant. So for me that means clones if I want to keep a specific strain around.
I only have two small tents for my playground. Iâll keep chuckinâ the pollen to keep me in seed as life experiences have taught me âThe Man giveth, but the Man can also taketh away.â
2 Likes
True. Itâs a dance.
Keeping a reference around to can compare is a safe idea for sure. But with a good tracking in hand, not a necessity also.
It will mostly depend on your background on the line. If its the first time you work on, better to be safe for sure. If itâs an IBL than you known like you children, you donât even need a single motherplant. Itâs all relative.
2 Likes
I didnât mean to discourage you. I think there are many viable approaches to preservation. If you really like something and just want to keep it around, probably your best bet is to implement a simpler breeding plan that includes open pollenation.
For example if you wanted to keep your OG Kush strain around for a while, then just grow as many OG Kush seeds as you can, and let the best ones pollinate each other. Then you can use seeds from all of the mother plants you liked to smoke and use them for the next round. It will be a slow process of phenotype convergence, but it isnât difficult.
You will have lots of seeds and at that point from each generation. If you think that your next generation is not as good as plants from the previous generation, then back up to the last generation and try again. As long as you are using genetics from multiple males and females, then eventually the consistency and frequency of the traits you enjoy will improve.
The only time you really need to worry is if you want to start selling your seeds. IMO, the point of stabilizing is so that when you charge money for 10 seeds, a reasonable percentage of those are good plants. If the frequency of getting the âgoodâ phenotype from your seeds is low, then people will not be happy to only find 1 or 2 in a pack of 10. And so to get to that point of stability, you have to put in more effort and use other methods, of which there are many. Cloning will be your best friend, and thereâs selfing, test crosses and back crossing to name a few.
But familial breeding with open pollination can be quite simple and effective. It is a slow, low maintenance process to preserve genetics. It will take quite some time for your seed generation to have similar phenotypes, and you will kill quite a few junky plants along the way. But if you make a misstep and get bad results, you will have plenty of seeds to go back a step and try to correct it.
2 Likes
Not at all, just want to know other ways to keep âTHEâ strain around once I find it.
Great thread!
1 Like
I donât know how old this thread is, but itâs very informative.
Iâm keeping it live so I can re read it again and again so it sticks. Once I feel confident Iâm gonna start my male selection, and have a go at breeding.
1 Like