Fem seeds and there impact on the future of the species known as cannabis.

  • Thread starter Thread starter hempy
  • Start date Start date
yes,,,

Green bro,,,im sure we can talk about male adaptive genes without me needing to search throug papers:),,,please pretty please,,i post too many papers to keep track nowadays
 
ive just got walls of text nev,,,i cant find the exact paragaph where it simply explains how low Ne numbers effect sex-ratios,,,,i bet darwin could easly reference it,,il keep looking

its basicly a fittness thing,,,genes with higher fitness just pushout the genes with lower fitness untill there frequence is none existant
 
Last edited:
this is interesting,,

Slide8.jpg


slide08.gif
 
englishrick said:
nev im with you on this 1,,,ive seen sex ratios weirdly change due to enviroment!!,,,,il stand on a rooftop and shout it,,,but everyone laughes at me for this 1...no1 believes me,,,because that would mean admiting some inderviduals are woking on an X/autosome system and not an active Y
Click to expand...

errr no!!! modifiers on the autosome more likely rick..

and on a side note to British Hemp - you are full of shit! do you remember this post from yourself - under another id? you denied selling seeds under the id indifferent but come here with morals lets talk about your breeding practices etc etc etc

I like Shanti, but he has a burden to bear - the legacy of the bullshit Neville spewed.

Haze from Neville isn't Haze, it's something Australian, Neville told a tale of buying a seed collection from an old hippy in NYC and among those seeds were '1969 Haze Bros Haze seeds'. Well, he did buy a seed collection in NYC, and there may have been some Haze seeds in there (a large portion of the BOEL Haze shipments went to NYC) but the Hazes Neville released certainly weren't Haze, they are definitely high quality sativas of Thai/Colombian origins, but Haze they are not. Shanti has to maintain this legend because his company is largely built around Neville's work.

Then there are the stories about G13, NL and others that Neville dreamed up. Everyone I talk to says Neville was very skilled as a breeder but they also emphasize how full of shit he was.

Just waiting for hempy to turn up now and tear into me for daring to say a single word against his beloved Neville! Lol
Click to expand...

and as to your dig regarding people reading books and years of experience - you can have years of experience if its based on nothing than thats what it is years of experience relating to nothing.. SEX DETERMINATION IS GENETIC THE ENVIROMENT DOES NOT CHANGE THE SEX FFS

Kopite
 
like Shanti, but he has a burden to bear - the legacy of the bullshit Neville spewed.

Haze from Neville isn't Haze, it's something Australian, Neville told a tale of buying a seed collection from an old hippy in NYC and among those seeds were '1969 Haze Bros Haze seeds'. Well, he did buy a seed collection in NYC, and there may have been some Haze seeds in there (a large portion of the BOEL Haze shipments went to NYC) but the Hazes Neville released certainly weren't Haze, they are definitely high quality sativas of Thai/Colombian origins, but Haze they are not. Shanti has to maintain this legend because his company is largely built around Neville's work.

Then there are the stories about G13, NL and others that Neville dreamed up. Everyone I talk to says Neville was very skilled as a breeder but they also emphasize how full of shit he was.
Click to expand...
Some people are full of shit. Do you believe that I would give Sam the credit for giving me the Haze if it wasn't true? Anyway I beat Sam in The Cups with haze and NL. The stories regarding provenance are exactly as presented to me. Believe me, I could have come up with more romantic and ego flattering stories if I was that kind of guy.
N.
 
I'm so tired of hearing about SamS. It's like a broken record how he attacks Nevil. Mmmmm. At least Nevil is honourable enough to use his real name instead of hiding under several pseudonyms, unlike SamS.
 
Last edited:
DarwinsBulldog said:
a while back hempy was arguing that "you can't select for traits that aren't already in the genetics of a specimen" ie, you can't select for potency, or calyx colour if the strain doesn't already have individuals in its population that have that potency or colour already. here is something i wrote up last night about directional selection proving this is not the case. you can select for many things that may not already exist in any individual in a specific population of organisms. calyx colour and potency (depending on how high the average is already) can be made more intense or more potent, or less intense/less potent with selection. i hope this simple diagram helps put a few of these arguments to rest.

mud6pj.jpg


have a nice one guys :D
Click to expand...

hiya Darwin sorry for a late replie had other things on and had a bug so did not replie to a few sorry chim and any others i mist not being a dick just hard to think and post wen your not well.

Darwin look mate potancy is there or its not you cant inhance potancy unless you add it and to do that you need to x a line that is potent to add to the non potent line so if your not adding to a line by x it to other lines then you cant increase its potancy how can you.

All you can hope to do is remove and inhance things you like in that given line that is what breeding is fine tuning in short.

Like if you have a line that is potent yet has a unique affect but is prone to powder mildue and you have a line that is resistent to pm but like the high from the other the goal in that x would be to x them togeather to breed a plant that has the high you like but also has the resistance to pm so you would need to select remove the high of the pm resistant plant and inforce the high from the other side but keep the pm resistance in the hybrid.

So in short you first need to add then remove to achive your goal sounds easy on papper but reality is it could take some one a life time to achive this to were there happy.
 
So no one is going to pop seeds and show me the 70% female ratio?

Rick, like the rest of the world I don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

Low Ne will NOT change sex ratios in cannabis.
 
GreenintheThumb said:
So no one is going to pop seeds and show me the 70% female ratio?

Rick, like the rest of the world I don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

Low Ne will NOT change sex ratios in cannabis.
Click to expand...

ill pop in 100 tomorrow and let u know the results , though im fairly sure they will be as you say 50 50 mf at best 60 40 ,

im well aware small numbers of some strains can produce larger female % , or male , but it all evens out when you put out the numbers required to assess it properly ...

ill be back in mmm 8 weeks or so to let u know greeninthethumb .
 
my aussie bush (generic term for outdoor sativa in aus)has close to %100 females,
i havent seen a male in years which i think is due to its hermi tendances
very late in flower, around the 18-20 week mark

this strain of bush has been in my family for well over 80 years because of this
once upon a time it paid the bills, these days people snear at it for its lack of bag appeal
oh well more for me and my mates :)
 
Last edited:
hempy said:
hiya Darwin sorry for a late replie had other things on and had a bug so did not replie to a few sorry chim and any others i mist not being a dick just hard to think and post wen your not well.

Darwin look mate potancy is there or its not you cant inhance potancy unless you add it and to do that you need to x a line that is potent to add to the non potent line so if your not adding to a line by x it to other lines then you cant increase its potancy how can you.

All you can hope to do is remove and inhance things you like in that given line that is what breeding is fine tuning in short.

Like if you have a line that is potent yet has a unique affect but is prone to powder mildue and you have a line that is resistent to pm but like the high from the other the goal in that x would be to x them togeather to breed a plant that has the high you like but also has the resistance to pm so you would need to select remove the high of the pm resistant plant and inforce the high from the other side but keep the pm resistance in the hybrid.

So in short you first need to add then remove to achive your goal sounds easy on papper but reality is it could take some one a life time to achive this to were there happy.
Click to expand...

G'day hempy, if we believe in evolution then all cannabis genetics today are likely descended from one original mutant plant thousands of years ago that was the first ever cannabis plant and the first ever strain of cannabis. I doubt this strain would have been very potent at all so if all strains today are descended from this original strain then it must be possible for a strain to increase potency by itself. I realise this may take thousands of years to occur, by chance, through natural selection and inumerable other processes such as environmental changes -the creation of a landrace i guess. But then if you add in some artificial selection by humans selectively breeding for potency or other traits then who knows how much you could speed up these changes to the genome. Look at what humans have achieved with dog breeding.

I can totally see what you are saying though hempy, i grew some Pure Power Plant (hybrid of African landrace strains) recently and i can imagine that it could easily take thousands of years of selective breeding to transform this strain of average potency and boring, uninteresting high, into something worth getting excited about, lol.
 
all i said was ,,,[in population genetics],,,,,,,,,,, "when a populations sex-ratio changes, Ne is usaly the first trigger",,

many of us have made feminized seeds,,,what are we debating?
 
Potency most definitely can increase due to environment. British hemp seeds that when grown in Britain produced high CBD low THC chemotypes produced much higher THC levels when grown in the Sudan.

Murari et al. (1983) grew a range of Cannabis fiber cultivars in three climatic zones of Italy and found higher THC levels in those plants grown in the drier "continental" (versus "maritime") climate. Hakim et al. (1986) report that CBD-rich English Cannabis devoid of THC produced significant amounts of THC and less CBD, when grown in the Sudan. This trend was accentuated in their next generation of plants.
Click to expand...

http://cannabis-science.com/papers/Chemical Ecology of Cannabis.pdf
 
Murari et al. (1983) grew a range of Cannabis fiber cultivars in three climatic zones of Italy and found higher THC levels in those plants grown in the drier "continental" (versus "maritime") climate. Hakim et al. (1986) report that CBD-rich English Cannabis devoid of THC produced significant amounts of THC and less CBD, when grown in the Sudan. This trend was accentuated in their next generation of plants
Click to expand...

This line of thinking went out the window when De Meijer nad Mandollino used Molecular techniques and GC/MS to PROVE that CBD and THC levels are determined via genetic, not environmental effects.

Sorry British Hempire- Evidence FAIL.

Incidentally, D. Pate was involved with some research at Hortifarm in which UV lights were used to supplement the natural light in a greenhouse environemnt and THC and CBD levels were monitored on clones against controls. No increase in THC was seen, nor was there a shift in THC/CBD ratio.

-Chimera
 
Last edited:
i hope to not detract from this fem thread as i seldom use them however, i would like to comment that this is my third outdoor season in a row where males have seriously outnumbered females probably at a 2-1 ratio. is there any reason why this would occur? it also seems that the only strains in recent history with greater than 50% female ratios are those where the breeder is offering a fem version of that strain, another scary thought. peace-biteme
 
Chimera said:
This line of thinking went out the window when De Meijer nad Mandollino used Molecular techniques and GC/MS to PROVE that CBD and THC levels are determined via genetic, not environmental effects.

Sorry British Hempire- Evidence FAIL.

Incidentally, D. Pate was involved with some research at Hortifarm in which UV lights were used to supplement the natural light in a greenhouse environemnt and THC and CBD levels were monitored on clones against controls. No increase in THC was seen, nor was there a shift in THC/CBD ratio.

-Chimera
Click to expand...

No, first of all the use of a seawater extract Sea-Crop or sea solids showed the increase of several phytobutrients & vitamins in several vegetables, but also the essential oil content & DW increased in some other plants like Cannabis, so probably it has also influence on the ratio & content of THC/CBD.

http://www.terragenics.com/

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=166058

The UV-light which is used by David Pate is in no comparison with sunlight at 11000 feet in the mountains somewhere in Mexico.The use of experimental plasma light already showed promising results.Plasma light contains UV A,B,C.

picture.php


Namaste :)
 
Namaskar said:
No, first of all the use of a seawater extract Sea-Crop or sea solids showed the increase of several phytobutrients & vitamins in several vegetables, but also the essential oil content & DW increased in some other plants like Cannabis, so probably it has also influence on the ratio & content of THC/CBD.

http://www.terragenics.com/

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=166058

The UV-light which is used by David Pate is in no comparison with sunlight at 11000 feet in the mountains somewhere in Mexico.The use of experimental plasma light already showed promising results.Plasma light contains UV A,B,C.

Namaste :)
Click to expand...


That's incredibly weak evidence to support your argument Namaskar... in fact I don't even see anything other than speculation, which I should perhaps remind you is not evidence?

It also does NOT counter the FACT that cannabinoid ratios are determined by genetic factors, NOT environmental ones.

http://www.genetics.org/cgi/content/short/163/1/335


Eitherway that is not the topic of this thread.

-Chimera
 
Well Mr Greenie, what can I say.....I am the lucky one getting the 70-80% your not.....better learn what your problem is:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top