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

  • Thread starter Thread starter hempy
  • Start date Start date
Well this is very interesting Chimera.
To see if I've got it right now; It was the MADC sequence, essentially a TE remnant in the cannabis genome located only on the Y, is what caused the differentiation of an X chromosome into a Y chromosome. So this MADC sequence is what caused cannabis to have two sexes? The sequence not being mobile means that it is always found on the Y chromosome. Doesn't that imply that pollen will only be produced in the presence of the Y chromosome? I'd like to be sure that I understand this properly as it seems to be the heart of the discussion.
N
 
Nevil said:
Well this is very interesting Chimera.
To see if I've got it right now; It was the MADC sequence, essentially a TE remnant in the cannabis genome located only on the Y, is what caused the differentiation of an X chromosome into a Y chromosome. So this MADC sequence is what caused cannabis to have two sexes? The sequence not being mobile means that it is always found on the Y chromosome. Doesn't that imply that pollen will only be produced in the presence of the Y chromosome? I'd like to be sure that I understand this properly as it seems to be the heart of the discussion.
N
Click to expand...

yeah i think you're onto it nevil, however the sex chromosome make up of cannabis plants seems to be much more complex than simple XX and XY, here's what two papers had to say in Robert Nelson's Hemp Husbandry ~ Botany and Breeding.

K. Hirata concluded that (x) has a higher male tendency than (X), and that (y) has a higher female tendency than (Y). The (X) has a net female tendency, and (Y) has a net male tendency. The male tendency in (Y) overbalances the female tendency in (X) so that a heterogeneous (XY) male is normally male, and a (XX) plant is normally female. Female hemp genes are (XX), (XXX), and (XXXX). The (XXXY) and (XXY) individuals are female or female intersexes. The males are (XY), (XYY), and (XXYY).

S. Hennick, et al., and others assert that this classification is impractical for purposes of breeding hemp, and have developed a new classification based on the theories of Grishko, Neuer, and Migal. The sex of dioecious hemp is determined by two tightly linked genes, both with two alleles. The Y chromosome carries the male allele M and the allele l, which expresses loose inflorescence. The X chromosome carries the female allele F and the allele i (compact inflorescence). Alleles M and l dominate over F and i. A recessive third allele, with a frequency from 0.5-1%, probably exists for monoecious hemp. The sex type of monoecious hemp is determined by autosomes. The sex chromosomes of diploid cannabis carry the genotype liMF and iiFF. The theory, however, does not explain how the loose or compact types of inflorescence are determined in monoecious hemp.(16)
Click to expand...

http://www.rexresearch.com/hhusb/hh4bot.htm

so i think that females do need the Y chromosome in their genotype (but absent from natural phenotype) in order to have intersex traits induced to create pollen. if the female has no Y chromosome it's a pure female and can't be reversed no matter what form of stress you use, natural/chemical, as it simply doesn't have the genes to produce the male flowers no matter what. anyway i think both those ideas above are just theories, but they're probably close to what's real, more research needed i guess :D

darwin
 
initial position

Nevil said:
Let me explain my thoughts a little further Kopite, re feminised seeds.
The best fem seeds would not be selfed! If I wanted to produce fems, I'd start with a true "lady" Say NL5. This would be represented by XX. The latent hermaphrodite I would choose would be one that doesn't show signs of masculinity under normal circumstances, but can be induced to produce some pollen when treated with hormones. Nevertheless, this parent would be represented by XX'. The X' represent the sex chromosome that carrying the latent hermaphrodite gene.
Therefore XX x XX' will give you 50% XX' and 50% XX(true females).
A female plant carrying a latent hermaphrodite gene when selfed is represented by the following. XX' x XX'. This will give you 50% XX', 25% XX (true female) and
25% X'X' ( strongly hermaphroditic)..
I know that this is an over simplification because of the various types and degrees of hermaphroditism, but in broad lines it will hold true to what ever degree the hermaphroditism is displayed.

NL5 was not sterile, the world is awash with it's progeny. It could be induced to produce male flowers, but the pollen sacks were empty. A true female.
Click to expand...

This was my position when I entered this debate. People wanted to point out that my symbol XX' for a, shall we say intersex plant. Was not scientific enough and it was suggested that XXm would be more correct. From the material Darwin cites, it would seem that XXY would be more appropriate.

I would suggest that what we are really dealing with is X(XY) as the Y cannot be passed on separately, otherwise we would be getting true males from fem seed (no one seems to be suggesting that). From a lay persons perspective I think my symbols were clearer, but as I have been trying to say, the issue is not the symbol but the meaning behind it.

I refer you to the position I have taken earlier. Is this not in essence where we have arrived now?
N.
 
K. Hirata concluded that (x) has a higher male tendency than (X), and that (y) has a higher female tendency than (Y). The (X) has a net female tendency, and (Y) has a net male tendency. The male tendency in (Y) overbalances the female tendency in (X) so that a heterogeneous (XY) male is normally male, and a (XX) plant is normally female. Female hemp genes are (XX), (XXX), and (XXXX). The (XXXY) and (XXY) individuals are female or female intersexes. The males are (XY), (XYY), and (XXYY).
Click to expand...

Thank for the above information DB. I wouldn't mind some help unravelling it.
I'd guess that XXXX and XXXY are polyploids and not really applicable to non hemp varieties and would probably inherit like this (XX)(XX) and (XX)(XY). XXYY would probably be (XY)(XY).
I'd like to know what K.Hirata means with x and X, y and Y.
N.
 
Nevil said:
This was my position when I entered this debate. People wanted to point out that my symbol XX' for a, shall we say intersex plant. Was not scientific enough and it was suggested that XXm would be more correct. From the material Darwin cites, it would seem that XXY would be more appropriate.

I would suggest that what we are really dealing with is X(XY) as the Y cannot be passed on separately, otherwise we would be getting true males from fem seed (no one seems to be suggesting that). From a lay persons perspective I think my symbols were clearer, but as I have been trying to say, the issue is not the symbol but the meaning behind it.

I refer you to the position I have taken earlier. Is this not in essence where we have arrived now?
N.
Click to expand...

yeah i see what you mean, i guess we just need to be able to differentiate between the following:

1. pure females
2. females with Y (male/intersex genes)
3. males with X (female/intersex genes)
4. pure males

i think you might be right with respect to the X(XY) female chromosomes. i think a few papers have stated that the male gene seems to be connected to one of the female X chromosomes and is more an autosome that tags along, though don't quote me on this. this would account for as you stated, no males let along pure males, occurring in "femmed seeds".

it would be interesting to reverse a male plant, and self it or cross with another reversed male, to see if we get all male offspring out of the seed?

the results of such a test might shed further light on the way in which sex chromosomes are passed on, how they react to recombination etc.

darwin
 
Nevil said:
Thank for the above information DB. I wouldn't mind some help unravelling it.
I'd guess that XXXX and XXXY are polyploids and not really applicable to non hemp varieties and would probably inherit like this (XX)(XX) and (XX)(XY). XXYY would probably be (XY)(XY).
I'd like to know what K.Hirata means with x and X, y and Y.
N.
Click to expand...

no problem at all mate :D

i'm unsure if they refer to polyploidy or not. it may just be that in cannabis there is 4 sex chromosomes that help to define the sex of a plant. above is unlikely to be the real case but is just one way of picturing it.

i'm not 100% sure, i'll have to read his entire study to be more certain of what they mean. but it suggests that sex determination is sort of a balance act if the plant has both X/x and Y/y chromosomes, and depending on the sequence the balance may lean towards male or female (but not necessarily be that sex - depending on environment and stresses etc) ie. xxXY is more likely to be male than XxXY and that XXyy would be more likely to be female than XXyY. in the cases where the sex chromosomes of a plant include those little y's and x's they can lean the plant towards one sex or the other compared to if the plant was XXYY (male) or XXXY (female). so if the plant has chromosomes that are 50% or more for one sex, plants will generally be that sex, but i think they could be reversed as long as they have any lower or upper case chromosome of the opposite sex, and pure plants would be XX, XXX, XXXX or YY, YYY, YYYY. but yeah when written that way it seems it could be polyploidy in the sex chromosomes... more research is needed i guess.
 
it would be interesting to reverse a male plant, and self it or cross with another reversed male, to see if we get all male offspring out of the seed?
Click to expand...
Yep, done that. I selfed the HazeC male. Theoretically their should be 25% YY. I was looking for them.
I got about 33% females and 66% males, no intersex. I progeny tested maybe 20 males, All produced normal male to female ratio's and no intersex. The seeds had normal viability, so I guessed that YY would block seed growing in the first place.

None of the HzC male selfed, came close to being as good as HzC for breeding.
N.
 
yeah that's a theoretical possibility, it may be that there are vital genes on the X that each plant requires to live, so any YY fertilized eggs may die straight out and never develope, which would account for you 2:1:0 ratio i guess. interesting stuff :D
 
Nevil said:
Yep, done that. I selfed the HazeC male. Theoretically their should be 25% YY. I was looking for them.
I got about 33% females and 66% males, no intersex. I progeny tested maybe 20 males, All produced normal male to female ratio's and no intersex. The seeds had normal viability, so I guessed that YY would block seed growing in the first place.

None of the HzC male selfed, came close to being as good as HzC for breeding.
N.
Click to expand...

You're one of the first drug cultivators to actually say what they found when looking at the YY. Thanks for sharing. I was curious if they wouldn't even set seed or if some seed wouldn't pop or what it would look like. Thanks for the info.
 
Chimera said:
Kyle,

I hope my use of the words 'gynoecious' and 'methodologies' does not preclude my argument in this discussion from being useful... I certainly don't intend these words to be used as a measure of what I do or don't know..... I hope we can get past that so we can all come to a more enlightened viewpoint.

I'm open to concrete, factual and verifiable evidence and/or ideas that can support your theory and disprove my current opinion on the subject. I would hope in a logical conversation that you other posters won't hold on to your 'faithful' belief against the process as well,and are open to the possibility that you current opinion might not be backed up by ample scientific evidence... I have a difficult time discussing FACTS with those of Faith and opinion, who's beliefs are not supported by FACTS.

Respectfully,
-Chimera
Click to expand...

Hello Chimera!,

Welcome to where the best and brightest growers mingle and get smarter.

Everything I have learned about cannabis has been through experience/observation. I have not been formally educated in botany, and use simple terms in a normally playful manner at times. I hope that this doesn't preclude me from discussion in the matter.

As far as faith is concerned I'am ordained but find belief stifles my potential, so I live in the world of opinions and theories. I find it keeps me young. :)
Since I'am not a believer I'am willing to hear about your motivations for promoting "gyneocious releases." It would seem to me your intelligence and experience making seeds would let you see this as a dangerous scenario presenting itself to the seed buyer.

As far as bottlenecking is concerned I share your feelings. Poor selections, low numbers, and 1:1 matings are a huge threat as well, but as long as guys like SB are making seeds with many genotypes present this is less of a threat IMO to the species as a whole.

I hope you can directly address my main issues of concern with simple verbage so "closet breeders" like myself can understand.

1. What is your motivation for releasing "gyneocious $eed$?"

2. How will mankind be better served by removing something before it is fully understood? We are just starting to learn about anatomy of the Y(as evidenced by the studies you posted), so is it wise to remove it from the genepool before we even understand it's anatomy?

While I have you here. Isn't your C-Plus a 1:1 mating? I thought it was a single DJ male x Cali-O 77? I have not purchased it because of this assumption.

Any Insights Appreciated,
KB 8)_~
 
technical

Hi All...

Shanti here, Nevil Here, and Chimera...I am estatic...

Now I am not the most technical guy. Some of these discussions fly right over my head, but I find it quite interesting to read, and have taken away from this thread many new ideas, and thoughts of seed, and breeding. Keep it coming all, and thank you for the info as well as helping to improve my understanding of this great plant...Ns
 
kylebroflovski said:
single DJ male x Cali-O 77? I have not purchased it because of this assumption.
Click to expand...

Chimera reversed many of DJ's selected moms and used them as pollen donors. It's why his blueberry hybrids aren't 50-50 m-f.

So who's gear are you running if you have such a problem with 1:1's?

And Chimera has said that he's kept gynoecious AND normal populations of all his lines. So just because he may release some gynoecious stuff doesn't mean the Y is gone.
 
chimera did it with drug stuff[ithink],,,an ive also read the YY genotype was viable in hemp paper i read,,,im sure you commented on it Green ,,,do i need to find it,,,im sure you commented on the YY genotype being viable

sorry fresh,,,it will probbly be best if someone like chimera explains the YY genotype in drug and fiber stuff
 
Good idea?

Fun time lol.
Originally Posted by kylebroflovski
single DJ male x Cali-O 77? I have not purchased it because of this assumption.
Click to expand...


GreenintheThumb said:
Chimera reversed many of DJ's selected moms and used them as pollen donors. It's why his blueberry hybrids aren't 50-50 m-f.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Blue girl
441096_090118215017_silk_pink_blue_girl.jpg


Blue girl reversed
4460349120_d08700f315_z.jpg


___________________________________________________________________

Blue girl reversed
4460349120_d08700f315_z.jpg


+
Cali girl
caligirl.jpg


=

rockyhorror.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top