IMO you only need to look as far as the purebreed dogs to see the potential negatives of "bottlenecking of quality" methodology.. just compare the vet bills of a purebred vs a mutt. Why? because when we select heavily for the traits we want inside a small already bottlenecked population linked alleles also come along for the ride many of which are deleterious. I am not sure how much of an issue this is once they are outcrossed again as much of this becomes hidden via heterosis.
I am just really confused why Nevil is apparently against using multiple parents in each generation leading up to the final commercial release. If I grow out Nevil's "typical seedlot" of say 50 AfgTxOrt15 I will very likely find at least three individuals females which have primary traits I am looking for;
-better botrytis resistance (both due to differing structure than regular population and differing outdoor harvest date than rest of population)
-high yielding
All three of these are very similar in these traits but each has a fairly unique effects profile compared to the other.. one similar to sour diesel, one very heavy and hashy and another just different but hard to describe.
I am missing how it is not to a breeders advantage to include all of these individuals in the early stages of an inbreeding program?? As mentioned previously I understand Nevil's reason's behind a commercial release but I believe using multiple parents leading up to the commercial release would be more likely to end in a final 1:1 "bottleneck of quality" than using multiple 1:1 matings in the development phase?? Seems like a win win to me.
Also for the many of us not interested in commercial releases using multiple parents per generation leaves some diversity to hedge against climate/pest issues while at the same time providing some jar diversity in the end product.
If someone can tell me how multi gene traits like flavour, potency and effect are not better carried into the next generation by three parents than one I would like to hear it.
Hi Ortega,
Happy New year.
I am a breeder of dogs and I disagree with you. Unfortunately most breeders of pure breeds don't know what they are doing. But if you have the knowledge and insight to find the best breeders, and you carefully research the breed you are interested in, and you study the pedigrees, with most breeds you will be able to find a breeder(and therefore a dog) that not only will guarantee his pups against genetic defects but will in fact also(more importantly) provide you with a pup that won't have any health problems. I have been breeding my dogs for many years, I have bred many dogs in that time and none of them have had any congenital defects or problems. This is because I researched my pedigrees very carefully, when I started, I only inbred to 2nd or 3rd generation, I made sure that my foundational dogs, were both from champion lines, that had no common ancestors in their pedigree, and I made sure that I established several lines within my kennel starting from the original crosses between foundational Sire and Dam.
I believe the AKC and other kennel clubs around the world are a shining example of why and how "bottlenecking of quality" works. So 90% of the dogs and the kennels they came from are inferior and inbred, but 10% are really good. And the point is: look at the exceptional diversity that can be found in the various breeds of dogs.
Isn't it remarkable? It simply blows my mind. The breeds are simply amazing. Mutts are amazing too, and they are a product of the pure breeds that they stem from.
And that 90% of kennels that are selling shitty purebreeds? Well, if they practiced proper breeding techniques, and they selected their Dams and Sires appropriatly, they would have good dogs as well. But breeding properly, is not simple, it is complicated, and just knowing the info is not enough, you must have good instincts as well, an intuitive knowledge of what constitutes perfect form and character within the given breed you have chosen to work with. Most breeders just don't have either, and as such, probably shouldn't be breeding at all.
What I love about the little information Nevil has disclosed so far in this thread, is that it would allow you to breed weed, as if it were livestock, ie dogs.
And this is truly remarkable, it is like a major piece of the puzzle that I was missing. This concept of progeny testing, 1:1 breeding etc.
You state above:
"I am missing how it is not to a breeders advantage to include all of these individuals in the early stages of an inbreeding program??"
In a 1:1 breeding program you most certainly could include all 3 of those individuals, but you would have to do it in 3 separate breeding cycles, and if you think about it it would be much better to do it that way, even though it would be more difficult and time consuming, because you would know exactly what you ,have and
you would have 3 seperate lines.
Now you could start inbreeding those lines separately and independently for several generations, and eventually to prevent negative inbreeding, you could could, after several generations cross those separate lines together, and start fixing traits, and with proper selection, you need never worry about piling up negative alleles. This is what line breeding is all about.
I am seeing now that it is certainly no coincidence that Nevil's strains are the best, the highest quality, and have fewer genetic problems than anything in Holland, or anywhere for that matter.
Keep in mind, negative traits are inherited just like positive traits, and
the 1:1 progeny tested pairings that Nevil is enlightening us too, will serve to help us eliminate Negative Traits, just as effectively as it will help us select for Positive Traits.
I for one am on the edge of my seat with anticipation, waiting for the next priceless piece of information that Nevil is going to divulge for our benefit.
