Breeding techniques

step away

Johnny if your smoking SHIT...Step away from the toilet. Don't smoke that crap...lol

Just jokin friend...Ns

P.S. I have a full pack of Shit seeds, and have heard much good about it. Be well...Ns
 
thanks for the correction ,,
you didnt notice the word ward though hehe ...

can we get back to it ?? the thread that is ...
 
The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 10 characters.
 
Last edited:
The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 10 characters.
 
Last edited:
The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 10 characters.
 
Last edited:
hempy said:
Rick 90 is it now that leaves 410 correct yep we dont know it all do we.
Click to expand...

something like that,,,:)

it makes no difference ither way,,,,the weed stays the same just like your opinion,,,,its not like anything im gona say will change ither,,

"knowing it all",,,,,,who knows more,,,me or you?,,,,,,im inclined to say you.
 
Last edited:
The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 10 characters.
 
Last edited:
i reckin ill say the same rick ...
darn fool ive been wasting my time reading books ,
when all i needed was luck coupled with a bit of hands on ,,
after all where has science ever gotten us ,,

too bad ,, i thought i was getting somewhere ...
ahh well ,, live and learn ...
 
Donald Mallard said:
after all where has science ever gotten us ,,

.
Click to expand...

When in doubt, play the science card....lmao!

1223266209-28703-444.jpg
 
hempy bro,,,i am reading every paper you are citing,,

what i dont understand is ,,,why,,why when it comes to population-genetics do you adimantly believe cannabis is not aplicable,,,what about the basics like [Ne],,is Ne not aplicable to canna?,,,what about genetic load,,,,

is it all a conspiricy theory?

what am i supposed to think when you just laugh at "genetic load" or the word homozygous?,,its just daft.
 
It is a matter of combining them all, experience, knowledge, science and dam hard work, and lets not forget actually having the stones to get amongst it. This is one of the reasons i have mucho respect for you don mate, you are a true friend.
I learn valid and applicable knowledge from constructive discussions, i learn about the character of folks during arguements. i would rather the first option and so would many. One doesnt have to automaticaly counter argue to join a discussion and valuably add to it. it saddens me to see all this potential wasted on bickering and bs, lets get the knowledge flowing from all angles and lets get along.
Much respect
Moonunit
 
The genetic makeup of the parent plant determines the potency and other individual traits.
Click to expand...
sorry if you think this is trolling but what about traits that are expressed co-dominantly or ones which are polygenic.
 
@ Josh

I believe his unique style of breeding is particularly relevent to our unique plant, and where we are historically with our plant.
Click to expand...

I keep looking back at that and the fact Burbank recognised ancestral (distant relatives) when merged nicked in a great way... personally I think he was onto something.. but we'd need to talk recombinants (I think that might push some over the edge!)
 
Unclepeter said:
Theres no trade secret Josh, why if you breed a gynoecious line or a gynoecious F1 hybrid does it have to be 1:1 just like with M/F matings!! it doesn't the answer lies in what you have written use more than 1. The same rule applies or at least should keep the numbers up... I find you far from dim Josh...
Click to expand...

Thanks Unclepeter, I appreciate that. And I am glad we aren't keeping secrets when it comes to techniques.

But honestly, I am wondering how to open pollinate with feminized seed, How many should we use? lets say we use 10. do you think 10 would be an adequate number, or would we need more than that?
 
Last edited:
The number required is dependent on the goals of your program and the state of the lines you're working. There's no singular answer to such a general question.

How do you OP with gynoecious lines? You reverse all your ladies and mix their pollen in equal parts. It's the same exact way you OP anything else you just have to go the extra step to induce phenotypes that give pollen...
 
But there is one fundemental difference.

With an Open Pollenation of femanized plants, inevitably, all the plants are going to wind up with selfed pollen in ratio to the amount of females used.

This is a serious problem, that will cause inbreeding problems down the line.

What is the advantage of open pollinating over say, using bags and pollenating each female with pollen from another female on each branch with a bag.

If you did this with 10 females for example, you would have 90 1:1 matings, this would allow you to empirically track your matings, you would know exactly what you had, and you would eliminate the prospect of having 10% of you stock being selfed seed, with absolutely know way of determining which of your seed was selfed and which wasn't.
 
Last edited:
GreenintheThumb said:
How do you OP with gynoecious lines? You reverse all your ladies and mix their pollen in equal parts. It's the same exact way you OP anything else you just have to go the extra step to induce phenotypes that give pollen...
Click to expand...

A better route to perform an OP of a gynocious line would be to induce pollen on 1/2 of the individuals in the population and allow these to pollenate the other 1/2 of plants- this eliminates the degree of self-fertilization seen in monoecious/gynoecious hybrid populations developed for hemp-seed production.

A more preferable route, however, would be to OP a line that has not yet been made gynoecious to preserve and maintain the line for future development via standard male:female matings. Clones from this OP grow-out can be collected and subjected to a degree of screening for traits of interest, and the chosen genetic contributor plants can be the basis for a first round of recurrent selection, for the traits of interest, in the gynoecious breeding scheme.

Keep in mind, most gynoecious lines are either 1:1 matings or the result of self fertilization events, and all you are doing with OP is preserving the bottleneck. At that point it's a bit late to be thinking about preservation via OP... those who do this are putting the cart before the horse so to speak- the point of an OP is to preserve alleles for future rounds of selection, so attempting this preservation strategy after a SIGNIFICANT bottleneck, completely misses the whole point of the strategy of preservation.

-Chimera
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top