Breeding techniques

[brock1]

great post nuteburn i wish Nevil was back

Nether caste ye youre pearles before swyne Nevil.
Lets hope Nevil comes back with a bag full of pearls soon.

Peace

i couldn't agree more nuteburn Nevil was a great part of this forum. i miss his posts already. i learned a lot from him in such a sort time and wish he was here to learn more.

thanks for taking the time to do your post its appreciated mate.

 

[Bambi]

What is it now? 4.5 billion? and the Universe is 8-12 billion? Consider the source of the information. Soon the Universe will be trillions of years old. Yeah I think the bears are already related.
Want to hear some more crazy shit? My Grandfather escaped the Armenian Holocaust at the age of 6. He lived at the base of Mount Ararat. His mom (My great Grandmother) was religious, and recieved instruction to leave the country, She took two little boys and walked across the continent and got on a ship for the US. 6 months later most everyone else was dead. Even women and children.
Grandfather told Me the story about Noahs Ark is true, and that people from our village had been on it before. It was only acessable after extended droughts of 15 years or more, and covered by snow and ice at all times.

Interesting alright, noahs ark yes its true aye, and history seems to keep on repeating itself over and over, we might need another ark im thinking'

&were is Nevil these days,?
He will turn up again soon no doubt and say - Better late than nevil at all folks"

 

[MJPassion]

I'm all for people making their own seeds and doing breeding projects but there are way too many people who aren't doing this with sensible motives which would be to have fun, learn about our plant, have more seeds to grow and share with friends and preserve the genes so you have them in future. They do it for ego reasons, to make names for themselves, to make themselves feel like big shots.

Damn bh, I see a few people doing this sort of thing now just for that very purpose I bolded. It sucks to see these egos crapping in the gene pool with their inferior selection skills to only turn around and SELL that inferior product to the masses called Medical Patients who rely on a good crop every time.

BTW Nev and all you good heads, thanks for the reading and chance to learn from some of the best people in the community (as I see it).

 

[suburban]

Well I stared at my Hazes palms. They all have white whiskers so it's hard to tell. Also looked at some good autos I have. Whiskers too. Am I hunting for snipe?

Sounds like you need to consult a palm reader...

 

[MJPassion]

That sounds like a hell of a party. Shame I can't enter the US due to my drug conviction.

And how stupid is that when the president smokes dope? (or did in his younger days)

Sorry for the side track but I'm still reading (on pg51) and couldn't help myself.

 

[budding grower]

British Hempire is right.... most pollen chuckers are ego breeders feeding off the less educated and selling 10 seeds for outrageous prices.... real peeps give thousands of seeds away for nothing cuz they're in it for the love not the money.... real peeps are in it to help other peeps with chronic or even terminal medical conditions... not to brag about Ferrarris like that prick Rez... he wouldn't last five minutes anywhere but online... the hype behind his self imposed limited releases is hilarious to anyone who started growing indoors before the 21st century....

 

[MJPassion]

I just don't trust the American Justice system.

...If you won't cut a deal you are kept in horrific conditions...

...If I lived in the US, I'd be trying to get out. They haven't got good things planned for you non conformists. 600 FEMA concentration camps that they admit to

I dont think many Americans trust this justice system. And rightfully so; It's probably the most corrupt in the world.

I'd love ta get the funk out but I also believe there aren't many other places to go either. All governments are corrupt, IMHO. What you gain in one country is lost in another. What we need is a giant island (a de-governed aussi-land comes to mind) where people can truly be as free as kings to express their thoughts through actions considered illegal the world over; like cultivating cannabis for whatever reason you happen to come up with.

There sure is a lot of reading in this thread. Thankfully the shit slinging has slowed significantly for the last few pages.

 

[Donald Mallard]

British Hempire is right.... most pollen chuckers are ego breeders feeding off the less educated and selling 10 seeds for outrageous prices.... real peeps give thousands of seeds away for nothing cuz they're in it for the love not the money.... real peeps are in it to help other peeps with chronic or even terminal medical conditions... not to brag about Ferrarris like that prick Rez... he wouldn't last five minutes anywhere but online... the hype behind his self imposed limited releases is hilarious to anyone who started growing indoors before the 21st century....

If things were legal it wouldnt happen ,, just taking advantage of loop holes there budding grower ...

 

[MJPassion]

And is there such a thing as a 'true' female that would not reverse no matter how much stress or chemical treatments you applied?

I've seen one female plant that was grown for several years under some pretty stressful conditions, indoors, that never threw nanners. As far as I know the grower never used chemicals on it in an attempt to stress it either so can't say anything about that aspect. The plant, after 4-5 years was then used as a P1 mother to produce some damn fine seeds.

 

[GMT]

There are not only plants, but strains that will not throw bananas, even when exposed to horrific stresses, however a female that will not reverse under chemical treatments would have flaws within its dna, and should not be used for breeding imo.

 

[blackberry]

There are not only plants, but strains that will not throw bananas, even when exposed to horrific stresses, however a female that will not reverse under chemical treatments would have flaws within its dna, and should not be used for breeding imo.

you mean nl5 and cheese are two plants that it's no good for breeding?

 

[GMT]

only if they wont reverse under chemical treatments.
If thats true, then yes, if it isnt then no.

 

[GreenintheThumb]

Cheese reverses. I bet if Nevil had more time and cared he could have gotten NL5 to reverse as well...

 

[MJPassion]

I finally finished reading the thread. PHEW! That took all day and half of last night!

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.

Outcrossing ADDS genetic material. It in no way bottlenecks it.

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.

A cannabis plant, in it's natural state, is a dioecious annual. That means it needs a father and mother plant (theoretically) to produce seed AND it dies every year, like corn. The ONLY way cannabis would live longer than corn, in a given season, is if it were cloned (asexually reproduction).

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.

or tumors.
I gotta agree with this one Joshua.
I've never heard of a "mutation" that did any species any good. Mutations are considered detrimental to the survival of a species.

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

ANY bear can mate with ANY other bear just as ANY cat can mate with ANY other cat, save for physical limitations, just like ANY cannabis can be mated with ANY other cannabis. ALL DOGS evolved (were selected for) by bottle-necking of the WOLFs genetics.


Joshuahazen: Im not positive but I believe there is a better term to be used, other than "mutation", to describe what a plant carries over in a cross. How about genetic recombination or something similar. As you mentioned mutations are a negative effect and contribute largely to undesirable characteristics.

Terminology is very important for clarification purposes, IMO. Thanks for the understanding.

It isn't a new species for the same reason there's only one species of cannabis. You can cross an indica to a sativa therefore they're the same species. If a grizzly can produce offspring with the groalar bear it isn't a different species...

I gotta disagree with this Gitt. Cannabis has been divided into at least 2 "species" but more than likely 3 is preferred.
Wiki lists 3 cannabis "species"
Cannabis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think the term you want is "KIND". Bears are a KIND with several "species" around the globe. Dog is a "KIND" All species being derived from the wolf "canis lupus".

Wikipedia! Most plants and animals are broken down into their scientific classifications according to Kingdom, Division, Class, Order, Genus, then finally species. Such a simple tool to use to stifle debates/arguments.

 

[GMT]

Mutation is a word that due to cultural references now has negative connatations. If we replaced the word for mutation to alteration, then we can discuss it without that instinctive reaction. The problem also exists that an individuals religious beliefs can impair their willingness to accept what I'm about to say. But evolution is real. Not all natural alterations are negative ones. Some are, some aren't. And spontaneous alterations do occur, they normally have very small impacts on what is visible from one generation to the next, but over time they add up. Now I accept that if someone wants to believe in a god, that's their business, and if they want to believe that everything exists due to his work, so be it. But please try to accept that his work is done through evolution if they are your beliefs, and that things don't exist today in the way that they always have done. These changes are not the result of cows breeding with elephants, and the genes for trunk are converted to neck in giraffes, its not the same genes that are responsible for everything being used for different things, new genes are born out of random chaotic rewrites and some through errors in the copying process. Some are not beneficial, and again, some are advantageous. The location of these alterations is whats important as to whether or not they are passed on. They must be present in the parent cells to the haploid cells, and diploid cells elsewhere in the body that "alter" will not be passed onto offspring.

 

[GreenintheThumb]

All bears can mate but they can't all interbreed. There's different species of bears, Ursus arctos vs Ursus maritimus for instance.

Here's some beneficial mutations from everyone's favorite wikipedia

Beneficial mutations

Although most mutations that change protein sequences are neutral or harmful, some mutations have a positive effect on an organism. In this case, the mutation may enable the mutant organism to withstand particular environmental stresses better than wild-type organisms, or reproduce more quickly. In these cases a mutation will tend to become more common in a population through natural selection.

For example, a specific 32 base pair deletion in human CCR5 (CCR5-Δ32) confers HIV resistance to homozygotes and delays AIDS onset in heterozygotes.[42] The CCR5 mutation is more common in those of European descent. One possible explanation of the etiology of the relatively high frequency of CCR5-Δ32 in the European population is that it conferred resistance to the bubonic plague in mid-14th century Europe. People with this mutation were more likely to survive infection; thus its frequency in the population increased.[43] This theory could explain why this mutation is not found in southern Africa, where the bubonic plague never reached. A newer theory suggests that the selective pressure on the CCR5 Delta 32 mutation was caused by smallpox instead of the bubonic plague.[44]

Another example, is Sickle cell disease which is a blood disorder in which the body produces an abnormal type of the oxygen-carrying substance hemoglobin in the red blood cells. One-third of all indigenous inhabitants of Sub-Saharan Africa carry the gene,[45] because in areas where malaria is common, there is a survival value in carrying only a single sickle-cell gene (sickle cell trait).[46] Those with only one of the two alleles of the sickle-cell disease are more resistant to malaria, since the infestation of the malaria plasmodium is halted by the sickling of the cells which it infests.

 

[joshuahazen]

or tumors.
I gotta agree with this one Joshua.
I've never heard of a "mutation" that did any species any good. Mutations are considered detrimental to the survival of a species.


ANY bear can mate with ANY other bear just as ANY cat can mate with ANY other cat, save for physical limitations, just like ANY cannabis can be mated with ANY other cannabis. ALL DOGS evolved (were selected for) by bottle-necking of the WOLFs genetics.


Joshuahazen: Im not positive but I believe there is a better term to be used, other than "mutation", to describe what a plant carries over in a cross. How about genetic recombination or something similar. As you mentioned mutations are a negative effect and contribute largely to undesirable characteristics.

Terminology is very important for clarification purposes, IMO. Thanks for the understanding.



I gotta disagree with this Gitt. Cannabis has been divided into at least 2 "species" but more than likely 3 is preferred.
Wiki lists 3 cannabis "species"
Cannabis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think the term you want is "KIND". Bears are a KIND with several "species" around the globe. Dog is a "KIND" All species being derived from the wolf "canis lupus".

Wikipedia! Most plants and animals are broken down into their scientific classifications according to Kingdom, Division, Class, Order, Genus, then finally species. Such a simple tool to use to stifle debates/arguments.

I do believe that in very rare cases spontaneous mutations can be beneficial, however, I also believe that the primary driving force behind evolution is the more elusive, positive mutations that occur from genetic recombination. I believe that recombination regularly gives rise to new genetic material, and that more diverse recombinations compound and increase this effect.

The more diverse the DNA to be recombined, the more natural mutations will occur. I believe that it is these natural mutations that result from the recombination of DNA, that are primarily responsible for Evolution.

Hybrid Vigor is a product of this function of DNA.

Technically, Sativa, Indica, and Ruderalis are subspecies of Sativa,

For example : Cannabis Sativa Sativa, Cannabis Sativa Indica, Cannabis Sativa Ruderalis. are the technical classifications I think.

In classification you forgot one, Family. Family is between Order and Genus, and Ursidae is a class of Family.

That is why I said that Linnaeus would have said that many of these Ursid Hybrids constitute a new species, and possibly in some cases even a new Genus.

But then Linnaeus believed, as I do, that evolution is primarily driven by hybridization.

Mainstream theory has shied away from and even rejected this theory for almost a century, mostly because of the false science that was so prevalent 70 years ago known as Eugenics. As we learn more about genetics, mainstream science is gradually coming around, as scientists, through science, are gradually uncovering, and will eventually embrace, the truth.

 

[GMT]

When put into practice in a human population against the will of the people, eugenics is certainly evil. But has the concept itself really been proven to be false? If so, then why would anyone select for a "good mother and father plant"? Surely any 2 plants would be good parents if eugenics was not a useful breeding tool.

On hybridisation driving evolution, all I need say is look to madagascar, australia, etc. Its the separation and therefore prevention of hybridisation that drives the development of new and separate lines of animals/plants through repeated spontaneous mutations (sorry alterations) being compounded over lengthy periods of time. In reaching the final product kangaroo, (accepting that there will have been many failed species along the way, and accepting that kangaroos are not the final product but merely the current stage of evolution that they exhibit) The gene sequences will have altered, been added to, and have a number of genes missing from, the animal that they evolved from. Yes its true that hybridising separate lines of plants/animals will in some cases bring about the existence of a 3rd line, but in order for the 2 lines to exist in the first place, the original line from which they sprang must in some individuals have suffered from / gained an advantage from / experienced a random mutation in, one or more of the genes that create them.

 

[MJPassion]

Great discussion guys. And thanks for NOT jumpin my shit for commenting on some of your thoughts.

Now back to cannabis breeding and collecting my thoughts on the subject.

I think I mentioned it before but I am of the opinion that if you are attempting to stabilize a "strain" there has to be some form of linebreeding (F2-F?) from a group of individuals in order to select and lock down a couple specific traits.

Once the traits you are searching for are locked down into a couple different lines, then the recombination of those, for lack of better words, sister lines can begin. At this point I'm not sure whether an open blow pollination between the 2 lines would help or harm your selection process. If not keeping the parents then I believe OP would be advantageous to the breeder as opposed to doing the progeny testing and keeping the father/s. Though, I would get rid of any potential mothers/fathers that were obviously flawed. Would that be considered "selection"? I think so.

 

[joshuahazen]

When put into practice in a human population against the will of the people, eugenics is certainly evil. But has the concept itself really been proven to be false? If so, then why would anyone select for a "good mother and father plant"? Surely any 2 plants would be good parents if eugenics was not a useful breeding tool.

On hybridisation driving evolution, all I need say is look to madagascar, australia, etc. Its the separation and therefore prevention of hybridisation that drives the development of new and separate lines of animals/plants through repeated spontaneous mutations (sorry alterations) being compounded over lengthy periods of time. In reaching the final product kangaroo, (accepting that there will have been many failed species along the way, and accepting that kangaroos are not the final product but merely the current stage of evolution that they exhibit) The gene sequences will have altered, been added to, and have a number of genes missing from, the animal that they evolved from. Yes its true that hybridising separate lines of plants/animals will in some cases bring about the existence of a 3rd line, but in order for the 2 lines to exist in the first place, the original line from which they sprang must in some individuals have suffered from / gained an advantage from / experienced a random mutation in, one or more of the genes that create them.

Don't get me wrong there is much legitimate science behind Eugenics. And many of the precepts behind Eugenics are valid.
One of the initial fundemental postulates of eugenics is that comingling of the races would result in the unravelling of society, and the deterioration of the human race.
I say Eugenics is false science because it is about the selective prevention or encouragement of births for social, racial, or political ends.

Eugenics started with a presumption and then sought to prove that presumption through selective research, ignoring any contradictory research.
This is the opposite of science. The modern fields like genetics archeoanthropology and evolutionary biology rose in part out of this quagmire and as a result still embrace some of the biases originally profligated by the Eugenics movement. Gradually though, science is prevailing, and rejecting these initial biases, as the evidence mounts invalidating them.

When we understand the political and societal motivations that gave rise to these sciences we can start to understand the irrational resistance to the idea that hybridization plays a fundamental role in evolution.


I am referring to hybridization primarily between subspecies. Occasionally we might see a huge evolutionary jump with hybridization between 2 different species, but this is a rare occurance, a freak of circumstance if you will. What we see happening all the time in nature however is hybridization between subspecies through the natural phenomenon of seperation, and adaptive radiation.

For example let us take a population of Kangaroos because that is the one you used. Let us say that one successful line of kangaroos radiates outwards, and then as it does, eventually through seperation, it becomes several distinct lines, these seperate lines evolve independently of one another changing subtly and becoming distinct and seperate. Now let us suppose that one of these lines becomes very successful, more successful than the others, and as such we see another outward adaptive radiation in this new subspecies. It radiates outwards and as it does it comes into contact with some of the other lines, that it originally separated from. Now as it does, it intermingles with these lines, creating new subsets of hybrids, which in turn give rise to new beneficial mutations, which ultimately create new and even more successful sets of subspecies through hybrid vigor, in turn leading to more outward adaptive radiation, and the cycle begins all over again.

This is known as The Hybrid Swarm Theory.