Curious what the genetic difference is between reversing a female and using the pollen to make an s1 versus a plant hermi’ing and pollinating itself? These would both be considered s1’s from a dioecious self pollination? Does anyone know of any studies or papers beyond anecdotal evidence?
People revile using “hermi” genetics, and avoid the latter, but seek out the former and some say reversing males and females is a huge component of future breeding.
I recommended a friend use hermi pollen on some genetics he wanted to save, better to save the genes and have them be slightly worse for wear than lose it all together. but got a lot of replies never to use herm pollen.
Whats the dif?
The main difference about which people are concerned is carrying forward the genetic predisposition toward hermaphrodism.
A reverse plant is (ideally) a stable representation that requires chemical intervention to “herm”; a plant that does it by itself passes that tendency on to future generations, significantly increasing the odds of a herm ruining your grow.
I actually agree with this, but it becomes critically important that the line is stabilized further/restabilized by culling herms in future grows from that seed, and never breeding with a herm in the future f gens.
Most likely, a high percentage of the offspring will be hermaphrodite
I’ve also heard many express complete aversion to using seeds from hermaphrodites. I’ve always wondered though; how prevalent is the intersex trait in the offspring? Is it guaranteed? 1 in 5? 2:5? Worse?
When you S1, your next generation will have A lot of recessive genes. Recessive genes gets active when both sides of the DNA got em, so how does herms come into the picture? Well, herm is a polygenic trait, this is a trait which is caused by multiple genes. These type of traits give you an range of severety. So crossing two plants with high herm traits lead to a more severe herm rate in the next generation and on the other side of the spectrum, crossing two herm free plants lead to less severe herm rates.
So what happends when you get an S1 from a herm is that the next generation will have a higher rate of herms, following the equation I described before.
Hope this helps you understand why this is NOT something you should do. Even though you get a plant that doesn’t herm, this plant will have loads of recessive herm genes that just wait to be activated in following generations.
This is dependent on several factors, but it’s hard to say.
If there was an environmental stress that caused the switch, then the chance of it showing up later is less if that stress is removed in subsequent grows.
If, however, the plant has a genetic predisposition, the chances are the same as any recessive gene showing up in the offspring, which I believe is 1:4 or 25%
As @LonelyOC pointed out, that ratio gets worse in future generations.
Got a link to a journal article that discusses hermaphroditism as a polygenic trait? As a dioecious species, isn’t all drug cannabis capable of becoming herm due to a range of reasons, from natural expression to stress expression. I guess I am wondering if the herm expression is determined by more factors than “herms gonna herm” and if i stress my plants into herm, is it different than using a chemical to have it express the opposite sex organs?
As I said, herm is on a range… It’s not a on/off switch, like either it does or it doesn’t. This is why people often have a hard time to wrap their mind around hermaphroditic expressions. It can go from throwing bananas in one armpit of the female plant to completely stop growing new stigmas and go full male. Plants can herm from stress to just grow it by itself. As you see, it’s a full range/spectrum of the trait. This is how polygenic works.
When you use STS, the chemical will BLOCK the hormone Ethylene. This is the main hormone which is produced when you switch to 12/12.
When this hormone is blocked or if the plant got an natural ethylene deficiency. Male parts will emerge.
This is also something that can be wierd to wrap your head around, because animals are born with genetic makeup of genitals. But plants doesn’t work that way, plants is born with the genetic makeup of both genitals. What a cannabis “female” genetics does, is having data that’s triggering hormone production. It does have a lot of other data aswell, but that’s out of the scope of this discussion.
Females and “in-between” are mostly built with autosomal traits, that’s the inherent characteristic of cannabis. It’s why the more YY in the line, the more dioecious. They just brute force the genotype with everything missing.
Yes, this is true, but I think you is misunderstanding the data. The actual chromosomal data in “Y” is less then the actual chromosomal data in “X”. So saying that Y have a full range of the chromsomal data is not true and it doesn’t even reflect what’s actually happening with the splitting of dioecious evolution.
A better way to frame it, is that the data in the “Y” have a larger impact on the progeny, then the “X”. But it doesn’t mean that plants without the data is inferior in any way.
For my part I’m not enough arrogant to declare what you’re understanding or not, i just consider that you defend your chapel and it’s legit in my book. The truth still in the blunt, one day maybe we will pass some around the table to figure out.
