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

[JessE]

kylebroflovski : So feminized seeds are CRAP! They are crap for the consumer, they're crap for nature, crap for cannabis.



all is resume here

Sounds about right mate, nice post

 

[GreenintheThumb]

This thread is now full of failure. I'm sorry I haven't had the time to come back until now.


Hempy said:
"Male-XY

Female-XX

Hermi-XXY

Now how many diffrent types of hermaphrodites are there in cannabis ?. "

>>>>the problem is you don't know that the "hermies" were XXY. You just assumed they were.


Nevil said:
"A very good question Hempy.
Would anyone care to list the different Hermie phenotypes?"

>>>No one knows the different types of intersex traits in cannabis. But I'll tell you this much: there's a big difference between using a 'late flowering hermie' and using hormone treatments to induce pollen from a properly stress tested female.


Nevil said:
"No One?
OK
Type 4. Parts of the plant are male and parts are female, often different branches.
N. "
>>>>> There's a difference between a monoecious individual and a hermaphrodite. Your 'type 4' is not a 'hermie'

Hempy
"Heres an up date on the s1 plants.

The plants look good but nothing like the f1 or f2s."

>>yes, tell us more about the differences you notice when you take a naturally outcrossing species and self it. Thank god the expert's here.


Rick
"imo

cannabis has no hemaphrodites only monoecious specimines in dioecious populations,,,"

>>>>>Wrong again Rick...wrong again. Monoecious hemp isn't ANYTHING like a late flower induced intersex drug cultivar. I told you to get off Ainsworth but you won't listen.


Hempy:
"Rick it is my humble opinon that this topic right across the boards is full of posts by people supporting this fem seed interprise yet the argument to go aginst nature and the natreal order of things is well not standing up.

The fact is rick like it or not a male is XY and a female is XX and a hermi is XXY.

You can dress a guy in a dress and make him look all girly but the reality is between his legs his all male.

What is not spoken about is the fact some females can express male traits and from what is that coused by rick well basicly stress and it couses a hermone made by the plant to then produce male parts now how much do you or any know about this very little.

What we do know is that once this happens it will carrie it into the next generation and can become worse now to try and correct this what do we use rick thats right a male why is that rick."

>>> Do you still not know the difference to using a hormone treatment and inducing a male phenotype on an XX female versus an intersexed individual who shows up due to stress or late flower (which AFAIK are related)?

More hempy:
"They are useing chemicals or even hormones found in nature to treat a female to turn it into a male now that has to be a strees factor on the female like it or not rick and just like a female produceing her own hormones to grow male parts it has to carrie it into the next generation.

Is this a positive no chance you guys act like you have all the answears but you dont all your doing is pulling research papper after research papper from google from any surce you can find relevent or not and hopeing you strike a quote that may back your belif.

The reality is rick a males The Y chromosome contains several significant genes:

•SRY (sex-determining region Y gene; causes maleness via testosterone),
•sperm fertility,
•Y-influenced growth control,
•chromodomain proteins,
•short stature.
•other significant, mutant genes associated with disease, e.g., colorblindness



Y chromosomal profiling can trace back paternal lineages into the past and has thus been proven a useful tool in genealogical and kinship testing. The individuality of the male-specific part of the Y chromosome can be optimally explored by the Y-STR haplotype analysis using a set of highly variable short tandem repeat markers approved by the forensic and scientific community.

Are you so blind in your belif rick to not even see the importance of a real male in the species of cannabis. "

>>>With quotes like that I'd assume you'd realize the difference between sex determination versus differentiation. So enlighten me Hempy, what ARE the importance of 'real males' in cannabis...

Nevil:
"Like nature, I consider that selfing is a useful tool as a response to unusual circumstances, but as a long term breeding strategy, it is inferior to the use of males.

In the legally approved (low THC) French hemp varieties, hermaphroditism is considered a useful trait, with populations approaching 100% herm. I suggest researching the Hemp breeding literature to find out more about this trait."

>>Do you think that's because you've confused the idea of male, hermie, intersex, and monoecious? I'd love to hear a reason that stands up.

Nevil:
"I once selfed Haze male C. This was a true male. Mendelian theory dictates that:
XY x XY will give you 25% XX 50% XY and 25%YY
XX x YY should give you 100% males. None of the selfed HzC males did this, I tested.
I did get a 2 to 1 ratio of male to female offspring from selfed HzC seeds. My preliminary conclusion was that
YY was not viable."

>>How do you know it was a 'true male' your idea of 'true male' seems very different to your idea of 'true female'...And was YY just not viable? Did 25% of the seeds not germinate or did you just find a 2:1 of M:F. There's a difference.

Nevil:
"If a man, or a group of men were trying to corner the cannabis genetics market, What would be the best way to make sure that the existing gene pool dried up?"

>>>As far as I can tell the best way would be to ensure that proper breeding was illegal and carried out by uneducated idiots all over the globe. Mission success for the ignorant. I wish I had more time to get into this stuff. I'll try to watch this thread more closely.

 

[hempy]

selfing is selfing and i think natreal hormones produced by the plant to make even 5 pollen sacks that i used to then pollinate a clone of her would be the same result from a plant turned by hormones sprayed or worse chemicals.

Reality is people even sell s1 seeds made this way to and somas just one most wont even say how they make theres.

Fact most seam to miss here is why have they not all grown like there mum why have they not shown the vigor of the f1 or even f2s.

The plants all flowerd and matured well but 2 plants one ofter the other threw a few single male sacks close to maturity i picked them off flushed and harvested them.

The others went till maturity and saw 1 more plant throw a single male sack culled it.

The others nil and ones been ready for harvest for a few weeks now and i left her to over mature to see if any male pollen sacks would show nil did.

Regardles how they are made there are points most will not admit to and 1 is loss of vigor 2/ is they dont throw out copys of the mum as people are led to belive they show as much veration as the f2s would if a male was used.

I would never sell s1 made this way or even by chemicals or would i even hand them out to friends for free fuck that i would use a male as i have for decades and people have for 1000s of years.

fem seeds are 6 years on the market or less they have grown out many hermies and even males and people that cant breed or dont want to select males test there work use fem methods of seed production and do it becouse they dont give a fuck about there customers or the plant.

 

[Nevil]

Well I'm glad that you have come out to play Greeninthethumb, I was looking for someone to give labels to things, it's a start. So we have Type 4 "Monoecious Individual", would you care to have a crack at the other three mentioned and maybe flesh out the list a bit. For the sake of a good discussion, the list should include all categories of cannabis that are able to produce viable pollen and seed on the same plant, excluding males. Just as a matter of curiosity, would you agree that some females cannot be induced to produce pollen?
N.

 

[Namaskar]

What is written on pg 86 about the loss of vigor, health and fitness has more to do with bad breeding practices than with dealing fem seeds alone.I hope Shanti could give more explanation what he meant about this.

Namaste

 

[englishrick]

Rick
"imo

cannabis has no hemaphrodites only monoecious specimines in dioecious populations,,,"

>>>>>Wrong again Rick...wrong again. Monoecious hemp isn't ANYTHING like a late flower induced intersex drug cultivar. I told you to get off Ainsworth but you won't listen.

that didnt come from Ainsworth ,,,that came from Tom, Kopite and Raco

what are you saying bro??,,,,,

"Cannabis is Trioecious"???,,,and within cannabis populations there are hemaphrodites?


can we discuss "EVOLUTION VIA MONOECY"?

 

[Dr. Purpur]

would you agree that some females cannot be induced to produce pollen?
N.

What Ive noted in my tests over the last 2-3 years, is that Some females will produce large quantities of viable pollen with CS or GA3 application, yet others produce deformed looking wet trichome sticky non viable pollen. I suspected that they were the XX females.

 

[JessE]

What is written on pg 86 about the loss of vigor, health and fitness has more to do with bad breeding practices than with dealing fem seeds alone.

You say that, like there is a difference lol.

 

[GreenintheThumb]

selfing is selfing and i think natreal hormones produced by the plant to make even 5 pollen sacks that i used to then pollinate a clone of her would be the same result from a plant turned by hormones sprayed or worse chemicals.

Well, it's not the same thing. In one instance you are selecting for intersex traits. IMO plants that show intersex traits due to some perceived stress should be culled. And selecting late flowering intersex individuals is not the same at all to using a stress tested female and inducing a male phenotype through hormone treatments.

Reality is people even sell s1 seeds made this way to and somas just one most wont even say how they make theres.

You're right, no one should sell S1 seeds. It's just lazyness and ignorace that would lead to these sales. However, making selfs and evaluationg can be a very important part of a great breeding methodology.

 

[GreenintheThumb]

Well I'm glad that you have come out to play Greeninthethumb, I was looking for someone to give labels to things, it's a start. So we have Type 4 "Monoecious Individual", would you care to have a crack at the other three mentioned and maybe flesh out the list a bit. For the sake of a good discussion, the list should include all categories of cannabis that are able to produce viable pollen and seed on the same plant, excluding males. Just as a matter of curiosity, would you agree that some females cannot be induced to produce pollen?
N.

Okay, I'll do what I can to flesh out this idea.

In my mind there are monoecious populations of hemp. Most of them are monoecious these days. These are different to hermies because the male and female flowers are on different branches. Monoecious populations have incomplete flowers and hermies have complete flowers.

IME- you don't find too many hermies. Maybe at 2-3% of the population of most 'good' modern hybrids. And you never find monoecious populations in drug cultivars.

Now what is a bigger issue is what I term intersex individuals. These are plants that will pop a few male pods due to some perceived stress. Maybe a light, moisture, temperature, nutrient, or just keeping them on the vine past the correct harvest date. You find WAY more of these types in drug populations than true hermies IME.

Now the true nature of how this is playing out on the genome is a mystery. There needs to be real deal research to tease apart what's really going on. But what I'm thinking is that the sex determination genes are on the Y. Most plants are XX or XY. Perhaps the sex differentiation genes are on the autosomes but can be activated in many individuals by the perceived stresses I mentioned earlier.

IMO- a true XX can be induced to produce pollen and the progeny of this cross is perfectly acceptable. It's when "breeders" are using the naturally intersex plants as parents that we as cannabis consumers run into problems.

 

[kylebroflovski]

i was reading a bit about epigenetics recently and it seems the answer may lie there:

Posted by L33T
"EPIGENETICS AND INHERITANCE

We used to think that a new embryo's epigenome was completely erased and rebuilt from scratch. But this isn't completely true. Some epigenetic tags remain in place as genetic information passes from generation to generation, a process called epigenetic inheritance.

Epigenetic inheritance is an unconventional finding. It goes against the idea that inheritance happens only through the DNA code that passes from parent to offspring. It means that a parent's experiences, in the form of epigenetic tags, can be passed down to future generations.

As unconventional as it may be, there is little doubt that epigenetic inheritance is real. In fact, it explains some strange patterns of inheritance geneticists have been puzzling over for decades.

AWESOME point!!! Great link. Thanks for bringing this point up. More food for thought.
_~ KB

PS-Thanks for the medal Cmdr.Jesse. Salute! Snap!

 

[englishrick]

lol

remember my epigenetics thread Green

i sorta got laughed at

i think "epigenetic silencing" is an intresting concept too

 

[Morphote]

EPIGENETICS 101

 

[krk]

IMO- a true XX can be induced to produce pollen and the progeny of this cross is perfectly acceptable. It's when "breeders" are using the naturally intersex plants as parents that we as cannabis consumers run into problems.

I've been saying that all the time... but the army is against me.


In holland there is a grow op on every block, so anyone who thinks they could get near 100% pollenation from there own pollen would need to be running one hell of a clean enviroment, clean cloths and everything incomming hepa filtered.. Mistakes are frequent in the fem seed bizz and breeders rush to produce fems. Each parent needs to be tested for its subseptability for "herming" under stressfull conditions that growers incounter.

Soon there will be a new seed out there and it will be one that produces sterile offspring. Then the true evil breeders will present themselves, with seed that will have both sterile Males and females so the breeder can protect there assets...

This is the beginning right here...below.. did anyone read it?
Sciencedaily Reports.....


A reliable method for producing plants that carry genetic material from only one of their parents has been discovered by plant biologists at UC Davis. The technique, to be published March 25 in the journal Nature, could dramatically speed up the breeding of crop plants for desirable traits.

The discovery came out of a chance observation in the lab that could easily have been written off as an error.

"We were doing completely 'blue skies' research, and we discovered something that is immediately useful," said Simon Chan, assistant professor of plant biology at UC Davis and co-author on the paper.

Like most organisms that reproduce through sex, plants have paired chromosomes, with each parent contributing one chromosome to each pair. Plants and animals with paired chromosomes are called diploid. Their eggs and sperm are haploid, containing only one chromosome from each pair.

Plant breeders want to produce plants that are homozygous -- that carry the same trait on both chromosomes. When such plants are bred, they will pass the trait, such as pest resistance, fruit flavor or drought tolerance, to all of their offspring. But to achieve this, plants usually have to be inbred for several generations to make a plant that will "breed true."
The idea of making a haploid plant with chromosomes from only one parent has been around for decades, Chan said. Haploid plants are immediately homozygous, because they contain only one version of every gene. This produces true-breeding lines instantly, cutting out generations of inbreeding.

Existing techniques to make haploid plants are complicated, require expensive tissue culture and finicky growing conditions for different varieties, and only work with some crop species or varieties. The new method discovered by Chan and postdoctoral scholar Ravi Maruthachalam should work in any plant and does not require tissue culture.

Ravi and Chan were studying a protein called CENH3 in the laboratory plant Arabidopsis thaliana. CENH3 belongs to a group of proteins called histones, which package DNA into chromosomes. Among the histones, CENH3 is found only in the centromere, the part of the chromosome that controls how it is passed to the next generation.

When cells divide, microscopic fibers spread from each end of the cell and attach at the centromeres, then pull the chromosomes apart into new cells. That makes CENH3 essential for life.
Ravi had prepared a modified version of CENH3 tagged with a fluorescent protein, and was trying to breed the genetically modified plants with regular Arabidopsis. According to theory, the cross should have produced offspring containing one mutant gene (from the mother) and one normal gene (from the father). Instead, he got only plants with the normal gene.
"At first we threw them away," Chan said. Then it happened again.
Ravi, who has a master's degree in plant breeding, looked at the plants again and realized that the offspring had only five chromosomes instead of 10, and all from the same parent.
The plants appear to have gone through a process called genome elimination, Chan said. When plants from two different but related species are bred, chromosomes from one of the parents are sometimes eliminated.
Genome elimination is already used to make haploid plants in a few species such as maize and barley. But the new method should be much more widely applicable, Ravi said, because unlike the process for maize and barley, its molecular basis is firmly understood.
"We should be able to create haploid-inducing lines in any crop plant," Ravi said. Once the haploid-inducing lines are created, the technique is easy to use and requires no tissue culture -- breeders could start with seeds. The method would also be useful for scientists trying to study genes in plants, by making it faster to breed genetically pure lines.

After eliminating half the chromosomes, Chan and Ravi had to stimulate the plants to double their remaining chromosomes so that they would have the correct diploid number. Plants with the haploid number of chromosomes are sterile.

The research also casts some interesting light on how species form in plants. CENH3 plays the same crucial role in cell division in all plants and animals. Usually, such important genes are highly conserved -- their DNA is very similar from yeast to whales. But instead, CENH3 is among the fastest-evolving sequences in the genome.

"It may be that centromere differences create barriers to breeding between species," Chan said. Ravi and Chan plan to test this idea by crossing closely-related species.

The work was supported by a grant from the Hellman Family Foundation.

Source:http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0324142012.htm

 

[Nevil]

Well I'm a little dissapointed Greeninthethumb. Where's the meat?
All you've done is substitute the word intersex for Hermie and then proceeded to tell us that you don't know how it works! If your saying that there are distinct differences between Hermaphroditic and Intersex plants and you give us some criteria to measure this by, say differences in how these two types are inherited then we are making progress, but all you have done is divide a category of plants that we call Hermies into groups, without explaining how this difference makes a difference. All you have done is come up with a shades of grey argument, but what ever way you cut it, grey is just different mixes of black and white.
Of course you take the position that there is no such thing as a female that won't produce pollen.

IMO- a true XX can be induced to produce pollen and the progeny of this cross is perfectly acceptable. It's when "breeders" are using the naturally intersex plants as parents that we as cannabis consumers run into problems.

This is the cornerstone of your argument in the defence of fem seeds. I knew it would be.

My position is that you have true XX females that won't produce pollen and a large category of females that will produce pollen under a range of circumstances. This category carries, what we might call the intersex gene (but a rose by any other name, is still a rose) which is capable of various degrees of expression.

I won't be hypocritical and say that we should never use females that carry the intersex gene to any degree, because there wouldn't be much left. But what I do believe is that the use of true males suppresses the expression of this trait.

If you had taken the position that there is such a thing as true female, XX no pollen, and crossing these with masculinised latent intersex females, is relatively safe, I might agree with this with some reservation. Using these females as mothers for further seed production is fraught with the risk of amplifying the intersex trait, especially if you are making more fems.

The general consensus is that selfing is not the way to go, and I agree, but there are circumstances. I tied very hard to self the NL5. I would have suffered loss of vigour and even Hermies if I could have amplified resin production, but she wouldn't and I say couldn't produce pollen.
N.

 

[GreenintheThumb]

Well I'm a little dissapointed Greeninthethumb. Where's the meat?
All you've done is substitute the word intersex for Hermie and then proceeded to tell us that you don't know how it works! If your saying that there are distinct differences between Hermaphroditic and Intersex plants and you give us some criteria to measure this by, say differences in how these two types are inherited then we are making progress, but all you have done is divide a category of plants that we call Hermies into groups, without explaining how this difference makes a difference. All you have done is come up with a shades of grey argument, but what ever way you cut it, grey is just different mixes of black and white.

Hermies throw male pods and female flowers all over the plant. From the very beginning. Intersex plants are generally female but will throw a late pod or two. They are not the same Nevil. Regardless, none of them are suitable as parents.

Of course you take the position that there is no such thing as a female that won't produce pollen.

The only person who claims to have one is Sam the Skunkman. And he got into hormone reversal relatively recently. Maybe with more time he'll tweak a mix that will work. Or maybe some plants don't have the sex differentiation genes at all.

This is the cornerstone of your argument in the defence of fem seeds. I knew it would be.

Uh, I'm glad?

My position is that you have true XX females that won't produce pollen and a large category of females that will produce pollen under a range of circumstances. This category carries, what we might call the intersex gene (but a rose by any other name, is still a rose) which is capable of various degrees of expression.

And my point is that many XX females that won't show pods even under different stresses CAN be induced to produce male flowers through hormone treatments.

I won't be hypocritical and say that we should never use females that carry the intersex gene to any degree, because there wouldn't be much left. But what I do believe is that the use of true males suppresses the expression of this trait.

And what evidence do you have that it suppresses the trait? I bet most of the fem seeds you popped were poorly made and like plenty of Soma's work the populations were selected towards intersex traits. Something I despise and argue against, incessantly.

The general consensus is that selfing is not the way to go, and I agree, but there are circumstances. I tied very hard to self the NL5. I would have suffered loss of vigour and even Hermies if I could have amplified resin production, but she wouldn't and I say couldn't produce pollen.
N.

Selfing has its place in breeding. It's not the end all be all but no breeding methodology is. You need the right tools to reach the chosen goal.

How many different times did you try to reverse her? What treatment doses and regimes did you use?

I'm not really against the idea that some plants can't reverse. I've heard of plenty that could produce pods that were all sterile and many that produced pods that wouldn't open on their own. But these sort of issue happen in the same population on 'natural' plants. The same mutations are present in Fem seeds and dioecious populations. Not a reason to fear properly made, stress tested, gynoecious populations.

 

[brock1]

I've been saying that all the time... but the army is against me.


In holland there is a grow op on every block, so anyone who thinks they could get near 100% pollenation from there own pollen would need to be running one hell of a clean enviroment, clean cloths and everything incomming hepa filtered.. Mistakes are frequent in the fem seed bizz and breeders rush to produce fems. Each parent needs to be tested for its subseptability for "herming" under stressfull conditions that growers incounter.

Soon there will be a new seed out there and it will be one that produces sterile offspring. Then the true evil breeders will present themselves, with seed that will have both sterile Males and females so the breeder can protect there assets...

This is the beginning right here...below.. did anyone read it?
Sciencedaily Reports.....


A reliable method for producing plants that carry genetic material from only one of their parents has been discovered by plant biologists at UC Davis. The technique, to be published March 25 in the journal Nature, could dramatically speed up the breeding of crop plants for desirable traits.

The discovery came out of a chance observation in the lab that could easily have been written off as an error.

"We were doing completely 'blue skies' research, and we discovered something that is immediately useful," said Simon Chan, assistant professor of plant biology at UC Davis and co-author on the paper.

Like most organisms that reproduce through sex, plants have paired chromosomes, with each parent contributing one chromosome to each pair. Plants and animals with paired chromosomes are called diploid. Their eggs and sperm are haploid, containing only one chromosome from each pair.

Plant breeders want to produce plants that are homozygous -- that carry the same trait on both chromosomes. When such plants are bred, they will pass the trait, such as pest resistance, fruit flavor or drought tolerance, to all of their offspring. But to achieve this, plants usually have to be inbred for several generations to make a plant that will "breed true."
The idea of making a haploid plant with chromosomes from only one parent has been around for decades, Chan said. Haploid plants are immediately homozygous, because they contain only one version of every gene. This produces true-breeding lines instantly, cutting out generations of inbreeding.

Existing techniques to make haploid plants are complicated, require expensive tissue culture and finicky growing conditions for different varieties, and only work with some crop species or varieties. The new method discovered by Chan and postdoctoral scholar Ravi Maruthachalam should work in any plant and does not require tissue culture.

Ravi and Chan were studying a protein called CENH3 in the laboratory plant Arabidopsis thaliana. CENH3 belongs to a group of proteins called histones, which package DNA into chromosomes. Among the histones, CENH3 is found only in the centromere, the part of the chromosome that controls how it is passed to the next generation.

When cells divide, microscopic fibers spread from each end of the cell and attach at the centromeres, then pull the chromosomes apart into new cells. That makes CENH3 essential for life.
Ravi had prepared a modified version of CENH3 tagged with a fluorescent protein, and was trying to breed the genetically modified plants with regular Arabidopsis. According to theory, the cross should have produced offspring containing one mutant gene (from the mother) and one normal gene (from the father). Instead, he got only plants with the normal gene.
"At first we threw them away," Chan said. Then it happened again.
Ravi, who has a master's degree in plant breeding, looked at the plants again and realized that the offspring had only five chromosomes instead of 10, and all from the same parent.
The plants appear to have gone through a process called genome elimination, Chan said. When plants from two different but related species are bred, chromosomes from one of the parents are sometimes eliminated.
Genome elimination is already used to make haploid plants in a few species such as maize and barley. But the new method should be much more widely applicable, Ravi said, because unlike the process for maize and barley, its molecular basis is firmly understood.
"We should be able to create haploid-inducing lines in any crop plant," Ravi said. Once the haploid-inducing lines are created, the technique is easy to use and requires no tissue culture -- breeders could start with seeds. The method would also be useful for scientists trying to study genes in plants, by making it faster to breed genetically pure lines.

After eliminating half the chromosomes, Chan and Ravi had to stimulate the plants to double their remaining chromosomes so that they would have the correct diploid number. Plants with the haploid number of chromosomes are sterile.

The research also casts some interesting light on how species form in plants. CENH3 plays the same crucial role in cell division in all plants and animals. Usually, such important genes are highly conserved -- their DNA is very similar from yeast to whales. But instead, CENH3 is among the fastest-evolving sequences in the genome.

"It may be that centromere differences create barriers to breeding between species," Chan said. Ravi and Chan plan to test this idea by crossing closely-related species.

The work was supported by a grant from the Hellman Family Foundation.

Source:http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0324142012.htm

your right this probably is the future krk but were not in the future yet. plant tissue culture on a cell level is dangerous stuff. i read this artical month's ago so no need for it to be put up 2 time's on the same thread. theres a lot of country's that don't allow geneticaly modified crop's to be used or grown without a special lisense for a reason. in simple term i don't think i would get jail for growing a few plant's. breeding a gm crop without a lisense with tissue culture would put me straight in jail and risk people's health as well. i plan on doing some basic tissue culture experaments soon. but theres limit's to what i will do regarding ptc. goverment scientist's advised again's gm plant's for a reson and well you only have to look into the affect's gm food's have had to see them. gm crop's were rushed on to the market by power and money in most country's without real testing being done on them first. money speak's very sad but true and missifomation is shown as true evadence as a result only to find out later not all the fact's were released in the first place. reason being half the fact's paint a beter picture than the ugly trueth. like i sead your right this is the future like it or not. but misstakes have aready been made and will again and again back up's must be made everystep of the way. when misstakes are made we dont allway's see them straight away and we may need to go back meany genarations to put thing's right. realeasing thing to the public to early would make going back imposable leaving only a few with the ability to make the genetics before the mistakes were made. but imposable to keep away from the bad genetics once in the hands of the public. a clever man dose things properly and only a fool rush's a greedy man only care's about him self and what he has only. wich man would you rather be?

 

[krk]

The new method discovered by Chan and postdoctoral scholar Ravi Maruthachalam should work in any plant and does not require tissue culture.

You misread this... this is just a few steps above treating a female with chemicals... If seed bank could sell you fems or seeds that can't reproduce than they will... Just think they will sell it to you as "our best line"... or they wont even tell you they are treated at first.

Oh well its a little off topic, but just like how fem seed have come about so will the next breeders tool, some I welcome and some raise a hair... but geneticly modified hemp now has resistance to MOLD and mold is my #1 problem growing outside and if there was a GM seed for mold I would try it.

 

[bonbolos]

hi all

@brock1

yet. plant tissue culture on a cell level is dangerous stuff

hi mate, there is nothing dangerous about plant tissue culture !

plant tissue culture is a method based on plant cell totipotenty giving many tools to biologists and breeders, it is useful for
- simple propagation,
- haplodiplomethods (which is for me a major tool in plant breeding, especially allogamous crops such as cannabis)
- cryopreservation
- genetical modifications (GM crops)

and many other applications!

The new method discovered by Chan and postdoctoral scholar Ravi Maruthachalam could improve the haplodiplomethods without using plant cell culture.

@krk : hi mate, mold is such a worry for me too, but GM crop is not yet the solution, I've never seen one single company having a breeding program from resistance to Botritys cinerea or just any resistance to diseases. This is a major issue in all the major crops in the world.
There is still a big gap to fill using simple but accurate methods of selection (early screening would be the best, faster) using quantitative traits and with real mesures that could be exploited by statistiques (one of the most used tool for breeders, along with exel !)
but this is an other story!

cheers

bonbolos

ps: It seems that people are arguing again and again on the same few questions, these questions haven't good black or white answers and not enough research have been done to be able to tell for sure.

 

[Nevil]

The same mutations are present in Fem seeds and dioecious populations. Not a reason to fear properly made, stress tested, gynoecious populations.

I don't fear properly made stress tested fem seeds, but I do fear that most will not be properly made.
I don't see the fem seed trend as empowering for the individual. Without males, few will be encouraged to breed for themselves. Growers will become dependant on fewer and fewer sources of genetics. With less males and fewer breeders diversity will decline.

What I do fear, is that skilled fem seed producers with the best intentions, will nevertheless pave the way for those whose ambition is to control, restrict and regulate every aspect of cannabis production and distribution. I don't want somebody telling me if I can smoke or what I can smoke and I don't want to pay for the privilege.

There are advanced plans to do just this.

If corporations like Monsanto, GW Pharma, Bayer and HortaPharm are allowed to carry out there interests, they will hold the genetic copyrights to all Cannabis strains on the planet. GW Pharma and HortaPharm have stated their intent to engineer Cannabis strains similar to Monsanto’s terminator seed technology. Their strains seem to be artificially manipulated to produce "one-off sterile females" which prevents reproduction of harvest-able seeds. These are the kinds of strains that are waiting to be controlled, regulated, licensed and taxed after the potential passage of proposition 19 in California and many similar initiatives across the United States being funded directly by Monsanto shareholders.

Does this worry you Greeninthethumb?
Where do you stand?
N.