Breeding techniques

[it doesn't matter how many seeds you have, what is within them is the same.. ie the genetic codes within the grain is the same in all the seed be it from 1000 seeds or 100. the diversity within is the same ALL you have is more seeds!.]

no you wrong maybe you should look at how genes sometime aren't passed on at all not even as a recessive one. some times a plant has to copy a gene from the other parent not because it dominant or recessive but simply because its missing. you can have a loads of things that can change the genes in a population mutations ect. the bigger the population the greater the chance of this happening. if you not open pollinating then this can ad to diversity and help prevent bottlenecking. if you just re ad the gene then by open pollinating then its not going to help for long.

[bottlenecking is rel to the Ne and outcrossers. If you don't think as a crop cannabis has sims to corn in the way to breed them and grow then we are fucked!.]

this is you way of explaining how its relevant? seems more a way of saying sheep join the flock because i say so! look at it from my point of view you haven't explained anything. blind faith isn't my thing sorry. i don't believe in god ether because it's blind faith.

[hence for both hybrids are where its at!. hence many clones that you see are very inbred... they long to be outcrossed... only prob is some are carry too many recessives... (wonder why)]

and why is this? maybe because before people like Nevil started distributing cannabis seeds they were inbreed to hell. farmers who breed them weren't open pollinating. males were removed so the plants made more THC only strays that had grown from seeds from previous year and the od male were left to pollinate a entire population of 100's or even 1000's of related plant. ad this to the fact that entire populations of LR plant have been destroyed by the DEA and other similar organization and you will see its not to different to how man eradicates wild animals till the population is to small then try bringing it back from a pathetically small population and over breed them because of the value they have being so endangered.

[you ever had an inbred line and come across the stand out plant that has SI problems?]

i have had more then my sheer of problems with SI plants maybe you should take a look in my gallery on my profile there's a few in there. i don't see the relevance that has to corn which is also full of SI problem. even though i have been told it doesn't inbreed its a out crosser.:rolleyes: all things that inbreed will bottleneck. slight inbreeding can produce a special plant as well have you never seen one?


[more inbred = less diversity... 1:1 matng is pretty inbred wouldn't you agree?

i would but then a 1:1 mating is only 2 plants of a population and a single moment in time. what your failing to look at is the bigger picture where cannabis isn't corn. like i said a cannabis plant can be cloned and keeped around for decades and breed from with different plants time and time again. 1 single cannabis plant can breed and make seeds with easily a 100 different plant's in its life time can it not? can corn do this over such a long period? this would result in more diversity then you could get from a entire field of corn and the Ne would be a lot healthier than that of just open pollinating a field would it not? this is were small scale hobby breeders have a upper hand on simple open pollination with 1:1 mating. i don't disagree with what your saying. there's just more than one way to skin a rabbit as the saying goes. same result slower proses. and a pedigree if you want one of known parents something you cant do with open pollination's. this would slow down any bottlenecking more so then doing all the mating at the same time in one place do you not agree? it also allows for selection. the only problem is the conservative side of thing. something i see more people interested in there day since the eradication of old LR strain. now do you see how cannabis isn't the same as corn? the same results can come from cannabis over a longer time then you would get from a field of corn simple because it can be cloned and re grown. preservation is the medicine of bottlenecking. not pollinating everything in a big field.

out crossing like inbreeding it's a tool that shouldn't be abused imoa as it can also speed up bottlenecking the entire population not just a small population.;)
 
Last edited:
then personally I'd self that plant! but still have the seeds from the OP for the future!. and it could have many fathers not just one.

i hope i am not coming across as totally disagreeing with you Unclepeter or offensive. i am really enjoying your discussion and think we have similar beliefs on how breeding healthy population should be done just were going to different roots to a similar end. i could be wrong it dose happen. i agree on the importance of back ups (conservation). like i said a cannabis plant can have Meany different father used on mothers even using 1:1 breeding because its life cycle is a lot longer than corn and it can be breed meany times in its life time.
 
Last edited:
Ortega 3 was crossed with Ort 15 male. This would be from that line if it came from Ed.
N.

The Ortega clone used by Breeder Steve for LUI originally came from Ed...

Peace.

K.

Some pics from Steve:

SOL Ortega3 clone
Ortega3cola.jpg


SOL Ortegadry
Ortegadry6d7.jpg
 
One thing to remember, for those who are worried about bottlenecking. Generally speaking, if you have a hybrid cross from two separate landraces, a single speciman from that hybrid is going to have a larger and more heterozygous gene pool, than a given sample of 10,000 plants from either of the original landraces. When we are dealing with polyhybrids, the genepool is that much larger. That is why all this talk of "bottlenecking" is essentially academic.

These folks who are trying to treat hybrids as though they are purebreds, are being tragically mislead. A Hybrid, is not a purebred, they act in fundementally different ways. And should be bred in fundementally different ways. The truth is a hybrid can be turned a purebred, and this can be done through inbreeding, in as little as 6 generations, or as many as hundreds of generations. This transformation is achieved by limiting or narrowing the genepool, or "bottlenecking" as some people here would like to call it.

Landraces for the most part are purebreds, and they have become as such through hundreds and even thousands of years of inbreeding, and believe it or not, most of these populations started with limited and very small initial samples.

Take the entire human race for example, the prevelant theory in Paleoanthropology right now is that the entire human race descended from a single female.

In nature, the most common and perhaps the only way new species are created is through hybridization, and the first populations created from these initial pairings are generally very small. That is OK, because, generally speaking, a single specimen from these initial hybrid samples will have a larger genepool than the sample of either parent population in its entirety.
 
Last edited:
One thing to remember, for those who are worried about bottlenecking. Generally speaking, if you have a hybrid cross from two separate landraces, a single speciman from that hybrid is going to have a larger and more heterozygous gene pool, than a given sample of 10,000 plants from either of the original landraces.

You obviously do not understand genetics. This is 100% untrue and downright laughable.


When we are dealing with polyhybrids, the genepool is that much larger. That is why all this talk of "bottlenecking" is essentially academic.

Nah brother it's academic because it's over your head :D


These folks who are trying to treat hybrids as though they are purebreds, are being tragically mislead. A Hybrid, is not a purebred, they act in fundementally different ways. And should be bred in fundementally different ways. The truth is a hybrid can be turned a purebred, and this can be done through inbreeding, in as little as 6 generations, or as many as hundreds of generations. This transformation is achieved by limiting or narrowing the genepool, or "bottlenecking" as some people here would like to call it.

Glad we got an expert here ;) Remember guys no matter what you can't turn a hybrid into a purebred in 5 generations. And sometimes it might take hundreds of generations :eek:

Landraces for the most part are purebreds, and they have become as such through hundreds and even thousands of years of inbreeding, and believe it or not, most of these populations started with limited and very small initial samples.

You don't even understand what a landrace is. They don't breed true. They're heterogeneous populations grown in fields.

Take the entire human race for example, the prevelant theory in Paleoanthropology right now is that the entire human race descended from a single female.

Not even ganna bother with this one...

In nature, the most common and perhaps the only way new species are created is through hybridization, and the first populations created from these initial pairings are generally very small. That is OK, because, generally speaking, a single specimen from these initial hybrid samples will have a larger genepool than the sample of either parent population in its entirety.

In nature new species are created because of separation, reproduction barriers, adaptive radiation, or mutation. Please stop posting like you know what you're talking about.
 
You obviously do not understand genetics. This is 100% untrue and downright laughable.

As usual you criticize an opinion that does not match yours, without explanation.

It is true. If you are going to say it is laughable, then I would suggest you explain yourself. But then I have never seen you explain any of your positions because you are obviously more interested talking shit.





Nah brother it's academic because it's over your head :D
LOL, good one.

"Bottlenecking" as you are fond of calling it, is what we are trying to accomplish in breeding, when we want to create a new breed from hybrid stock. It is not always bad. On the contrary when it is done with a specific agricultural or other goal in mind, is a very good thing, and it is how "purebreeds" are created.


Glad we got an expert here ;) Remember guys no matter what you can't turn a hybrid into a purebred in 5 generations. And sometimes it might take hundreds of generations :eek:
that was a generalization, in nature it could take hundreds of generations, but in breeding, with a little luck, traits can be fixed within just a few generations.

You don't even understand what a landrace is. They don't breed true. They're heterogeneous populations grown in fields.

I do understand a what a landrace is. As usual you are taking what I have said out of context. for example: Lets take two landraces, one from Afghanistan and the other from Africa, now while they may not breed true the way say, a variety of domestic corn breeds true, they do have a broad set of traits, which fundementally defines them as a "race". If you take a hybrid cross from these two landraces, and compare them to the original parents, we could most certainly say that, as compared to the hybrid, they are "truebreeding". So I think it is you who does not fully understand what a landrace is, in fact, it seems, you do not even understand what a race is.



Not even ganna bother with this one...

Yeah, you don't want to address it, because it a very prevalent and relevant theory with ramifications that do not fit into your limited, rhetorical, convoluted viewpoint of genetics and breeding.

The truth hurts when you are living a lie.

In nature new species are created because of separation, reproduction barriers, adaptive radiation, or mutation. Please stop posting like you know what you're talking about.

These are all aspects of evolution, and do not contradict my basic assertion.

What you just said would be like
if I said that cars are built on assembly lines and you were trying to refute me and tell me I don't know what I am talking about by saying:

"Cars are built through workforce populations, management deliniation, and corporate mandate."

Nice buzzwords, but I think you may be confusing yourself with them as much as you are trying to confuse everyone else.

Such is the nature of rhetoric.
 
i have a ... er ... goal

help my thinking please:

Goal: "to produce plants that smell of gingerbread and have accompanying uber potency"

the accomplishment preceded the goal through crossing with available plants at the time. i now wish to forensically see how the result was realized by the plants i crossed.

what got me thinking on this was a report that an old HzC5 plant exhibited the gingerbread smell and was uber potent too. my cross was a NH/Mango X La Nina which has the same trait.

i was thinking that HzC was the father of NH and further a NH father was mated to 122 to make NH/M. i took a father from NH/M and pollinated La Nina. the father's line goes back to the HzC male as the generator of this gingerbread smell was my thinking.

where did the gingerbread smell come from if not from HzC?
 
Last edited:
One thing to remember, for those who are worried about bottlenecking. Generally speaking, if you have a hybrid cross from two separate landraces, a single speciman from that hybrid is going to have a larger and more heterozygous gene pool, than a given sample of 10,000 plants from either of the original landraces. When we are dealing with polyhybrids, the genepool is that much larger. That is why all this talk of "bottlenecking" is essentially academic.

I told you what was wrong with it. The hybrid will have a SMALLER pool with much LESS diversity. It's the landraces that are heterogeneous and the resulting F1 population is the one that's more homogeneous and a MUCH smaller level of diversity. You don't understand basic genetics, you make statements that are 100% untrue and damn near the polar opposite of reality. Then you want to waste more of my time making me argue with your bullshit.

If you can't understand how a 1:1 F1 hybrid has less diversity than two population of 10,000 landraces, well? You're an idiot and you've got a lot of learning to do. Go crack a book instead of questioning Allard's credentials. And certainly don't act like you have the answers or that you're anything approaching an expert in this field.

Sorry the buzzwords bothered you but it's how new species occur in nature and it's got jack all to do with your "hybridization" theory. Name a new species that was created in nature through hybridization: THERE ARE NONE. Again your assertion that that's how most (yeah for some reason you said most, way to pull that one out of your ass too) new species are formed is laughable. A new species is one that can't mate with the population that it separated from. But somehow hybridization is how they form? You have a juvenile understanding of these concepts and act like you have answers. Why don't you go find some insight in a GASP academic text. Or you just going to wait around for Nevil's cleverly titled books?
 
You are the one who is arguing with me.

many species can mate with other species. take the lion and the tiger for example.

They were mated to one another in captivity, and what do we have now.

Ligers.

A new species

I can promise you that the f1 hybrid will be more diverse than either parent, although it will appear homogeneous in its first generation.
If you go into the f2 generation you will see it is not homogeneous at all, and there will be huge diversity as compared to either parent population. by f3 you could easily have 10,000 specimans from just a few plants or many, depending on how you select them, and trust me they would be more diverse than either sample of 10,000 from the given parent population.
 
Last edited:
I always thought that people didn't want diversity when they bought a packet of seeds. The general impression that I got from 1000s of customers was that they expected uniformity with a high average standard and at least one spectacular plant per packet of seeds. Few are prepared to sort through several packets of seeds to find a keeper.
Generally it was about helping people smoke the best and make money. If people sought help with other goals I helped them. But there weren't many of them.
As opposed to 25-30 years ago, the world is now full of potent strains and exotic varieties and all breeders are going their own unique direction. It'll be a long time before diversity dies out.
I don't really care about any strain, no matter how diverse it is unless it's good to smoke.
N.
 
I always thought that people didn't want diversity when they bought a packet of seeds. The general impression that I got from 1000s of customers was that they expected uniformity with a high average standard and at least one spectacular plant per packet of seeds. Few are prepared to sort through several packets of seeds to find a keeper.
Generally it was about helping people smoke the best and make money. If people sought help with other goals I helped them. But there weren't many of them.
As opposed to 25-30 years ago, the world is now full of potent strains and exotic varieties and all breeders are going their own unique direction. It'll be a long time before diversity dies out.
I don't really care about any strain, no matter how diverse it is unless it's good to smoke.
N.

that was how it was just a few years ago as well. now people are scared shitless about bottlenecking. mostly due to how Shani's strains are compared to greenhouse and other comparisons of retailers that breed regular versions compared to plant that have been selfed of the same strain. in most cases its just the fact there selfed fems from so called clone only strains. its opened a lot of people eye and there all wanting to know why the regular versions is better. as you can imagine 9 time out of 10 it leads straight to the fact there simple breed by a room of clones and one hermied through what even means the so called breeder prefers to make it hermie. as you can imagine its not really breeding just making seeds. i am sure i could get a load of 3 year old to do the same thing. but thats been the norm now for some time now. a lot of seed company's just buy a packet of seeds find a half decent female. then take cuts spray them with SN or whatever or leave some to over flower and hermie themselves. that's the standard of make seeds. from 1 plant they keeped or were given they will start seed production of whats meant to be a superior strains.:rolleyes: a lot of people just don't know the difference between breeding and making seeds with a name known to all. the difference from a f1 from original parents and the shit self's some people are selling is crazy. sometimes not even breed from a f1 seed stock in a lot of cases f3 or f4 + generations inbreed before being selfed. that's one of the biggest reasons people would rather look for that special female then buy these looking for a specal plant. you can imagine how inbreed a selfed f3 or f4 would be compared to a f1 when your looking for a special mother plant to keep around to clone. if the standard was higher then most wouldn't be to bothered but people can see the difference from heavily inbreeding from the seeds they buy now. also its coming common to buy packs of so called clone only and not even getting 1 female that doesn't hermie. so people that weren't bothered now are after spending good money for a poorly breed packet of mostly male or hermie seeds. last year i have heard of 2 company's that have had to apologize and give refunds for this and recall all there seeds of the affected strains. breeders are just wanting to make money to quick. it seems they don't even have the time to grow a few seeds out before selling them to the public. cali connections was the last one and i read of 1 person growing 3 packets out with good germination rates and only getting 1 female with no possibility of selection at all these were regular badly inbreed seeds. they were refunded. is that really enough for setting someone back from there meds that long when there growing legal? there's a lot off people making money from legal sick growers. now people care more about how there plant's were breed not just what strain there plants are. you can imagine how this can affect you if you growing legal. allowed a certain number of plant and have to grow 3 lots of seeds at different times for 1 plant. that's your medicine and your not getting it because some so called breeder messed up and cost you £300 and promises you a refund but what about the time you haven't got your medication? that's one of the main reasons people are more interested about how there plants are breed because they have been riped by bad un's at there own expense. its not always about how good a srain is its about how bad the breeder made the seeds of them.
 
Last edited:
I always thought that people didn't want diversity when they bought a packet of seeds. The general impression that I got from 1000s of customers was that they expected uniformity with a high average standard and at least one spectacular plant per packet of seeds. Few are prepared to sort through several packets of seeds to find a keeper.
Generally it was about helping people smoke the best and make money. If people sought help with other goals I helped them. But there weren't many of them.
As opposed to 25-30 years ago, the world is now full of potent strains and exotic varieties and all breeders are going their own unique direction. It'll be a long time before diversity dies out.
I don't really care about any strain, no matter how diverse it is unless it's good to smoke.
N.


That's true, and historically the problem with hybrids, relative to an agricultural base that relies on monoculture cropping, is that hybrids are typically too diverse. Our industry for the most part does not have that problem however, because we can turn to clones for our monoculture.

In fact Nevil, I would postulate, that, far from dying out, as more people become involved with breeding, and as our plant becomes increasingly accepted by society, diversity will actually increase.
 
You are the one who is arguing with me.

many species can mate with other species. take the lion and the tiger for example.

They were mated to one another in captivity, and what do we have now.

Ligers.

A new species

What'd you forget I said in nature?



I can promise you that the f1 hybrid will be more diverse than either parent, although it will appear homogeneous in its first generation.
If you go into the f2 generation you will see it is not homogeneous at all, and there will be huge diversity as compared to either parent population. by f3 you could easily have 10,000 specimans from just a few plants or many, depending on how you select them, and trust me they would be more diverse than either sample of 10,000 from the given parent population.

Josh, you don't create diversity; you maintain it. A 1:1 F1 mating will undoubtably fix many alleles and have a vastly different dispersion of allele frequencies than either parent population.

You've got a lot to learn when it comes to population genetics.
 
A hunter recently shot a specimen from a previously undiscovered species of wild bear in the north of the Victorian Province of Canada. DNA analysis proved that it was a hybrid cross between a grizzly bear and a polar bear.
The fossil record shows time and again that new species seem to appear spontaneously and there is mounting evidence that because hybridization is common when populations invade new environments and potentially elevates rates of response to selection, it predisposes colonizing populations to rapid adaptive diversification under disruptive or divergent selection.
This new theory of adaptive evolution is generally referred to as The Hybrid Swarm Theory of Adaptive Radiation. Generally speaking ecological conditions conducive to hybridization are also conducive to adaptive radiation. When populations that have diversified because seperation are brought back together because of environmental factors, migration etc, hybrids are produced and the positive mutation resulting from these hybrid crosses are the central driving force of evolution.

Luther burbank postulated this over a hundred years ago, and scientists are just now discovering the truth of what he has said all along.

Anyway for the agriculturist working with hybrids, it does not take a genius to see that this is in fact the case. You would be blind not to see it, why don't you take your head out of your books for a second and take a look around you, you will see for yourself what should be obvious.

Spontaneous mutation is not a source for evolution, in fact when it occurs it is only responsible for birth defects, we see cell mutation all the time in the human body, in the medical field. Generally, it is referred to as cancer.
 
A hunter recently shot a specimen from a previously undiscovered species of wild bear in the north of the Victorian Province of Canada. DNA analysis proved that it was a hybrid cross between a grizzly bear and a polar bear.

Nice try but it isn't a new species.

"This is only the second time that a grolar bear has been encountered in the wild and confirmed, but even with its rarity, it is more distinctive than expected. DNA tests released by the N.W.T. Environment and Natural Resources Department reveal that this was actually a second-generation grolar bear—meaning one of its parents (its mother) was already a polar-grizzly hybrid. The father was a purebred grizzly, the tests found."

If it was a new species the purebred grizzly father couldn't have produced offspring with the groalar bear mother.

Spontaneous mutation is not a source for evolution, in fact when it occurs it is only responsible for birth defects, we see cell mutation all the time in the human body, in the medical field. Generally, it is referred to as cancer.

And we're done here. I think you're crazy. If spontaneous mutation isn't a source for evolution how were there different organisms to hybridize in the first place? You've got a strange worldview.
 
Last edited:
that was how it was just a few years ago as well. now people are scared shitless about bottlenecking. mostly due to how Shani's strains are compared to greenhouse and other comparisons of retailers that breed regular versions compared to plant that have been selfed of the same strain. in most cases its just the fact there selfed fems from so called clone only strains. its opened a lot of people eye and there all wanting to know why the regular versions is better. as you can imagine 9 time out of 10 it leads straight to the fact there simple breed by a room of clones and one hermied through what even means the so called breeder prefers to make it hermie. as you can imagine its not really breeding just making seeds. i am sure i could get a load of 3 year old to do the same thing. but thats been the norm now for some time now. a lot of seed company's just buy a packet of seeds find a half decent female. then take cuts spray them with SN or whatever or leave some to over flower and hermie themselves. that's the standard of make seeds. from 1 plant they keeped or were given they will start seed production of whats meant to be a superior strains.:rolleyes: a lot of people just don't know the difference between breeding and making seeds with a name known to all. the difference from a f1 from original parents and the shit self's some people are selling is crazy. sometimes not even breed from a f1 seed stock in a lot of cases f3 or f4 + generations inbreed before being selfed. that's one of the biggest reasons people would rather look for that special female then buy these looking for a specal plant. you can imagine how inbreed a selfed f3 or f4 would be compared to a f1 when your looking for a special mother plant to keep around to clone. if the standard was higher then most wouldn't be to bothered but people can see the difference from heavily inbreeding from the seeds they buy now. also its coming common to buy packs of so called clone only and not even getting 1 female that doesn't hermie. so people that weren't bothered now are after spending good money for a poorly breed packet of mostly male or hermie seeds. last year i have heard of 2 company's that have had to apologize and give refunds for this and recall all there seeds of the affected strains. breeders are just wanting to make money to quick. it seems they don't even have the time to grow a few seeds out before selling them to the public. cali connections was the last one and i read of 1 person growing 3 packets out with good germination rates and only getting 1 female with no possibility of selection at all these were regular badly inbreed seeds. they were refunded. is that really enough for setting someone back from there meds that long when there growing legal? there's a lot off people making money from legal sick growers. now people care more about how there plant's were breed not just what strain there plants are. you can imagine how this can affect you if you growing legal. allowed a certain number of plant and have to grow 3 lots of seeds at different times for 1 plant. that's your medicine and your not getting it because some so called breeder messed up and cost you £300 and promises you a refund but what about the time you haven't got your medication? that's one of the main reasons people are more interested about how there plants are breed because they have been riped by bad un's at there own expense. its not always about how good a srain is its about how bad the breeder made the seeds of them.

Brock, is it too much to ask for more than one paragraph? :). Its quite difficult to read your post.
 
Here's my strategy. First my goals are 90-100 day autos. Where I live helicopter pressure is intense. If you grow normal plants you have to hide them so well you get no Sun, no yield. Why not breed for speed when they're not looking at all. I've already got this.
Next goal is to breed Ducksfoot into two lines. One a 90-100 day auto Duck. Next line a normal strain Duck but dark purple or black. That way it doesn't look like weed when it's vegging and turns dark when flowering. Very hard to see. Here's my dark purple strain pollinated with Ducksfoot in this thread.
http://www.mrnice.nl/forum/86593-post105.html
The way I'm going to go about this is to use large numbers in very small 3oz. or so cups. These may be too small, experimentation is needed. I have tried this as an experiment with 60 day auto flowering plants and it worked just fine. Bonsai technique like joshuahazen's breeding thread and viciously kill all that don't fit the profile. I'm going to have study Luther Burbank and make piles of wood. I like joshuahazen's breeding technique but I'm still undecided about limiting to one male. Have to think about that. For my purposes might be better to have more. You can't backtrack with autos. No clones. Might be best to keep most of the males and limit the female population.
There is a way to make clones of plants chemically. krk posted about it. You treat seeds with the chemical ETHYL METHANESULFONATE (CAS 62-50-0)"Haploid plants produced by centromere-mediated genome elimination". The pollen from the males when combined with the female you wish to keep contribute nothing to the offspring. The female is an instant IBL. I really want some of this chemical. You could test your pollen's with Ducksfoot. Any that came up Duck would be the correct pollen. Anything else the treatment would be ineffective.
I don't have much space but I can put 72-32oz. cups in a 4'x4' area. I have to whittle down the numbers when they get bigger. Looking at what Luther did really fired me up. Shows what one Man can do.
Any suggestions?
 
Nice try but it isn't a new species.

"This is only the second time that a grolar bear has been encountered in the wild and confirmed, but even with its rarity, it is more distinctive than expected. DNA tests released by the N.W.T. Environment and Natural Resources Department reveal that this was actually a second-generation grolar bear—meaning one of its parents (its mother) was already a polar-grizzly hybrid. The father was a purebred grizzly, the tests found."

If it was a new species the purebred grizzly father couldn't have produced offspring with the groalar bear mother.

OK if it is not a new species, than what is it? a polar bear, or a Grizzly bear?
Unlike a mule it is a new species, because it is capable of reproducing itself.



And we're done here. I think you're crazy. If spontaneous mutation isn't a source for evolution how were there different organisms to hybridize in the first place? You've got a strange worldview.

Sorry, I meant, that spontaneous mutation isn't the most common source for evolution, because most often spontaneous mutation leads to defects, which actually impede survival

The most common source for evolution is the positive mutation that occurs from hybridization, or, the natural mutation that occurs from the successful recombination of divergent DNA.
 
Evolution;
Descent with modification resulting from selection . The primary elements of biological evolution are (1) mutations of individual genes that supply the raw materials . (2) segregation and recombination following sexual reproduction to produce novel multilocus genetypes , and (3) selection preserving t hose genotypes that are better fit in the habitats they come to occupy ...
 
Back
Top