One breeder here and two strains I looked at on Strainly did just that. I don’t understand the logic behind this crossing. Could someone enlighten me on this, please?
4 Likes
With the vast majority of crosses it doesn’t really matter what generation each plant is in, because nearly everything nowadays is a polyhybrid.
Filial generations mean nothing if there was no original P1 and P2.
Not to infer anything on the potential quality of the bud in question…
6 Likes
Assuming the F5 and F2 had a common parent, what would be the advantage? When I read that one person did it, it could be an idiosyncrasy of that breeder. Everyone does things that only they do. I get that. I’ll need to look back at Strainly and see if the 2 strains I saw there were from a single breeder or not.
3 Likes
Special plants pop up all along the way.
My guess is they double back to isolate a particular trait, or possibly to re-invigorate the line.
Breeder’s prerogative.
22 Likes
Sound like a simple BX, nothing uncommon.
I will not expand the comment more because i don’t known if we are talking about parallel lines, an unique lines, and more generally what is the breeding plan behind.
I disagree with this evaluation. A lot of catalogs are builded with “one shot hybrids” and “hit & run” outcrosses. When it’s not double fems, to hack the fems of another shitty catalog of subproducts …
When i encounter someone than push the segregation of his selection over the F4, he automatically win my respect for the efforts involved. No matter if the weed is fire or not, at some point we are talking about genetic material and not about “seeds to smoke”.
Start to go buy a Jack Herer from Sannie, then go throw shit on Sensi Seeds on the fly with good reasons in hands, in lungs and in the sap. The “original” don’t often make better stuff for cheaper. And i’m not speaking about the simple skunk#1 wich is the Cheese and other well known references proving than any standard can be outperformed with hard work.
I understand your anger, but to spread it without a cold head and accuracy can harm you more than anything else.
stay green
10 Likes
Anger?
I guess I did over-generalize, and my statement doesn’t take into account all the lines that do fit a P1 designation. And my post operates under the belief that the F2xF5 will produce a batch of seeds that are sold as a unique strain, even though that might not be the case. Maybe theyre continuing to work the line before they release it.
We dont have enough information to determine the intentions of the breeder, or the quality of their decision, without knowing if the parental lines were truebreeding or polyhybrid in the first place.
1 Like
It was the strategic error of Simon when he was forced to reboot his lab (shit happend, i don’t judge that) but have continued to release the “new Chronic” under the same reference. So not as a new strain/new line.
He have losted a lot of his (hard earned and deserved) fame in this operation back in the days.
I think it’s honest to don’t sell a backcross under the reference of a pure inbred line, now i still don’t known about what and who we are talking about lol
The “truebreeding” term doesn’t exist in my native language, and have no technical equivalent too.
But a poly-hybrid can be dominant over a very wide panel of lines, this is not so Manichean in practice. The white widow being the most worldly known example of that imho
3 Likes
@99PerCent, that would make sense. I was reading this GrowFAQ:
The writer, @SubCool, confused the living hell out of me. He stated this:
These statement leads me to believe that the F2 doesn’t need to involve an original parent, just a breeding of 2 F1 offspring. This makes a lot of sense to me. Wouldn’t the breeding using the original parents be an IBL? Shouldn’t the designation be IBL F2 for a second generation using an original parent?
It also leads me to believe that an F2 is less consistent (homozygous) in it’s growth than an F1. In this thread, @Subcool states that an F1 will be more consistent than an F2:
@Subcool’s post contains a list of references, which leads me to believe he is correct in his statements:
I am going to need to get deeper into “Marijuana Botany” on this subject. 
3 Likes
Let me exercise my understanding and see how wrong I am…
Two OF THE SAME IBL (P1) bred together equals P2, which ends up being the same as P1 due as it is true breeding.
Two DIFFERENT P1 (P1a x P1b) equals F1 Hybrid (P1ab), which would contain mixed traits of the two P1 and display heterosis, or hybrid vigor.
Two of the same F1 (P1ab x P1ab) bred together equals F2 (P1ab x P1ab) and is one step closer in higher frequency of the selected traits.
Two different F1 Hybrids crossed equals F2 Cross, or H1 (polyhybrid) as more accurately defined by @Sebring. This will have a broader mix of traits: (P1a x P1b) x (P1a x P1c) = H1
Two different H1 crossed:
[(P1a x P1b)(P1a x P1c)] x [(P1b x P1c)(P1c x P1d)]= H2
Lots of variation and would be considered an F3 by many.
Two same H1 [(P1ab x P1ac)x(P1ab x P1ac)] crossed begins the inbreeding process which can result in a new IBL over many generations.
Am I understanding this right or do I look like a dumbass now?
5 Likes
Two OF THE SAME IBL (P1) bred together equals P2, which ends up being the same as P1 due as it is true breeding.
P1 mean the initial parent, the starting point. The two patients zero.
But you’re just describing in the example a F(n+1). If you’re in F2, then you end with F3.
F2, F3, F4 etc … is just the other manner to say IBL with more accuracy (with the number of the generation).
But it don’t avoid the battle between the twos P1 and theyr respective ancestors in the successive offspring.
Two DIFFERENT P1 (P1a x P1b) equals F1 Hybrid (P1ab), which would contain mixed traits of the two P1 and display heterosis, or hybrid vigor.
Exactly.
Two different F1 Hybrids crossed equals F2 Cross
No, they are F1 and have the heterosis btw.
Two different H1 crossed [(P1a x P1b)(P1a x P1c)] x [(P1b x P1c)(P1c x P1d)]= H2
No. F1a x F1b = F1ab, not F3.
Two same H1 [(P1ab x P1ac)x(P1ab x P1ac)] crossed begins the inbreeding process which can result in a new IBL over many generations.
You are just describing a F2 with useless complications, but yes.
4 Likes
Back crossing to previous generational seed stock is a common way to reinvigorate the line as stated by @99PerCent .
5 Likes
So pretty much every time you cross something for the first time it will have heterosis? That goes against what I had previously thought of as fundamental fact. Oh well, if you are right then that “fundamental fact” is getting tossed in the garbage. Viva knowledge!
But I think a lot of confusion comes from there not being a distinction between hybrid and polyhybrid. It seems necessary to distinguish between them for the sake of clarity. I’m sure that you disagree and I would love to hear it explained.
From what you are saying it makes me think that the F1 hybrids become P1 the moment you cross them. Is that true?
I’m confused on this. (F1ab x F1ac) crossed with (F1bc x F1cd) is not an F2, or in @Sebring’s notation H2? This seems like an example of clarity becoming very important. For example:
P1a x P1b = F1
F1a x F1b = F1ab
F1ab x F1cd = F1abcd
F1a x F1a = F2a
F1ab x F1ab = F2ab
So if I’m not mistaken (I am most likely mistaken:frowning2:) then it appears that F1abcd has several magnitudes more variation than F2a, and F2ab has more variation than F1. So simply saying that F1 or F2 has less variation is not correct as either can have more or less variation, depending. Does using the term H1, H2 and so on to define a polyhybrid make sense in this case, for the sake of clarity? Or is that just completely wrong?
Damn this is confusing and I think I might be overthinking it.
2 Likes
Compromises can occur when choices are made.
Hence the difference between a breeder and a pollen chucker.
5 Likes
You hooked me Mc, can’t throw in germination the seeds bag lol GJ ^^
So pretty much every time you cross something for the first time it will have heterosis? That goes against what I had previously thought of as fundamental fact. Oh well, if you are right then that “fundamental fact” is getting tossed in the garbage. Viva knowledge!
We can discuss more in details these fundamental laws you’re talking about, but in a way yes from the abstraction to the farmer it exist the life. And life is chaos ^^ I don’t known how to say it the best, how i feel it. It’s more a sport, a training of yourself for faster adaptation.
I will say yes for your question, but because i understand what you mean now. But I will say take care about this sentence, she can push you in hell like a beautiful succubus. I will try to enter more en depth but it’s freaking hard with my simple english. I can’t play with nuancies.
For this exact consideration only, you have now to think about the distance of each blood in question (in term of quality). Then consider now than the heterosis can have different level of torque. Just like a blender on which you have different speed. If it turn very slow, the blend will be gross. If it turn very fast, you will have an homogeneous paste.
So you have the strain AB and the strain CD, lets dance you make your cross and get your F1 ABCD. You store it in a corner and keep in mind than you want to find a high potency donor (don’t think about that, you’re lazzy and no IBL lol, more simple for the example, for the moment).
You finally found the strain EE a day, then you relaunch the project and make another F1 ABCDEE. Let’s say to be more close to a real reality (lol) than you lost in the process the “BC”. In fact you don’t lose it, it’s just hided. Latent.
So you end with a ADEE. But you like this hint of B and this hint of C than the heterosis have flushed.
So you will try to make this heterosis less agressive and naturally you will search a BCEE strain to cross with your ABCD. Kind of backcross right ? ^^ Yes but will end in a F1, the heterosis still here with the EE in blood.
But if you take a BCEE and a ABCD than come from the same breeder and created near the same period, the EE blood will not weight enough to produce a decent heterosis and we will more talk about a “barely” BX more than a true hybrid.
And finally the case where i feel you want to come : IBLs.
After many fails to outcross your weak but delicious ABCD, you finally decide to split it in twos lines and to take the hard way.
One than you will work on potency like crazy (killing everything not “stronger” than your ABCD F1 reference female) and one than you maintain and stabilize as it with the minimum lose on taste/odor/whatever.
So the ABCD#1(maintain) and the ABCD#2(potency).
After let’s say the F6 (because you like it, i don’t have any rationnal reason to say F6 lol) and constant efforts, you finally got your potent ABCD#2 and maintained your ABCD#1 well. The #2 look like shit and taste nothing, but she send you to orbit. You win. It’s time to make the #12.
The offspring is F1 ? No, it’s a F7. But you have a kind of heterosis like an F1. Don’t hit the wall with your head, and jump on some papers about cow breeding for milk production. They are easy to digest and they explain you well what is a 3way or a 4way methodology.
From what you are saying it makes me think that the F1 hybrids become P1 the moment you cross them. Is that true?
No matter what, your initial couple are the P1 of the line. If you change the line, you change the P1. If you change your P1, you’re changing your line. It’s just a notation to don’t mix specimens and to spot fast by the name which one have maded a line, it don’t involve any method or technic at all.
[(P1ab x P1ac)x(P1ab x P1ac)]
I got it now where you want to go. My previous answer on it was out of context, so lets complexity a bit the answer ^^
P1a x P1b = F1 -> F1ab
F1a x F1b = F1ab -> yep
F1ab x F1cd = F1abcd -> yup
F1a x F1a = F2a -> F2aa (^^ i known, but it’s very important)
F1ab x F1ab = F2ab -> F1aabb (same)
Good luck to select the twos last ones without a good background on each side ^^ It mean a good number of rounds or enough generation before to map the segregation at work. We are talking about a type of work i respect a lot, being personnally mainly in favor of true 3way/4way final hybrids. But i don’t dislike perpetual F1 too than are literrally exploding of gens, rich at the point to mutate by the heterosis sometimes. Fine BX project too chiselled like a jeweler … well in fact i like works than mean “years of focus” ^^
it appears that F1abcd has several magnitudes more variation than F2a
It’s when i generally fight with the Punett chessboard lovers. You can’t known at this point, but i will explain me this time because you have started a very nice discussion and than my seeds are not soaking yet lol good sign ^^
If A is a very dominant line used as cement, and if BCD is a blend of weak recessive elite cuts … you driving to a wall at high speed. I can write a dozen of pages like that with one unique case per line. And it’s what Punett’s lovers never understand generally, at one moment the background of what you are hybridizing have more importance than pure logical deductions. Never forget at any moment Darwin and than life is chaos, battle and generally unexpected combinations than explain an environment. Not the reverse.
F2a, and F2ab has more variation than F1
Yes, but because the heterosis play as a cement and in a way as a recombination agent. But you can encounter unstables F1 or lines than are stable and appear like clones until the F4 … the background one more time;
So simply saying that F1 or F2 has less variation is not correct as either can have more or less variation, depending.
I can’t say it in a better way than you.
Does using the term H1, H2 and so on to define a polyhybrid make sense in this case, for the sake of clarity?
In all honesty, for me no. Because i think than it add a layer of useless complexity on an allready complex notation and abstraction. But it’s not wrong in the strategy, it’s an addition. Being myself juggling all year long with polyhybrids, i have no utility to add it in my notation.
I respect all personal methodologies if they give constant results. The sacred truth in the bud to be accurate. If it sound good for you and than you feel than you can obtain fire weed in thinking your notation this way … just go ahead for a stress test in action. In anyway, if you start the game you’re at the very begin of a lot more methodological stress tests ^^
I want to finish on the :
F1a x F1a = F2a -> F2aa (^^ i known, but it’s very important)
F1ab x F1ab = F2ab -> F1aabb (same)
Why i’m using “stack” in my notation, it’s because it matter when you use a database. I will try to simplify at maximum an example to give you an idea of the thing.
A x A : AA, warning AA is not 2A.
With each cross under the belt you will quickly understand than you can’t stack what you’re selecting, even with a backcross program. There is only one place for twos and you want than the weaker/baddest give his place to the best.
To note AA instead A permit to evaluate how much you must insist to print something but also what you are losing for it.
I’m sure you get it ;o)
8 Likes
To everyone reading this thread: Open wide and step up to the fire hydrant of knowledge!
Thanks for the great information @Fuel! Of course I still have questions 
That must be extremely frustrating. And seemingly unavoidable?
2 Likes
At the begin you have tendencies to make mistake and waste of times by “too much faith”, a lot. It quickly decrease and you’re more smart after, respecting more who you are and on what you’re really competitive. It don’t avoid to waste your time on desperate lines sometimes, my last time was just the last year lol
We stay stupid stoners at the basis, sometimes you like something useless and play with it for nothing ^^
7 Likes
Vintage discussion that shows how time flies, world changes but certain things don’t…
https://cannabisworld.com/index.php?topic=3759.0;all
Ds
PS : I do miss VH presence… He was an ass but also a great read (most of the time)…
6 Likes
Best example I can think of is white rhino. I’d do it bc I was trying to breed each for a purpose. Make up for what the other is lacking if it’s flower time etc.