Just couldn't rest my head before commenting (great plants btw
@musashi ) about the
S,
IBL and
Bx topic - Since the work with Cannabis uses some different routes and tailored ways of growing, breeding etc. i think its often very clouded what somebody means even if many believe they understand what the terms stand for.
When i get plants that are labeled as
S generation
# in Cannabis these are always the exact same cut on the exact same cut (reversed fe-male ccc x female ccc) resulting in feminized seeds containing amplified mixes of the DNA of the mother cut, often expressing the qualities of the already good cut in a slightly altered and improved way
(usually selfing is used to save a loved cuts potential in seedform)
For prominent example look at Nspectas work. That alone would justify it to me to stick with this meaning of
S since he is probably the biggest in the selfing game and it is therefore established in an perpetual usecase.
A Backcross labeled
Bx usually stands for crossing a line back to its mother/father (not necesarily fixed on a sex only has to be consistently used once chosen imo thats optimal conditions) usually its something in there thats 'disturbing' wanted qualities and what its actually bred towards and in the process of Bx to Bx is tried to breed out the male influence by taking it back to the mother cut multiple times as seen in Karmas work on the Sour Diesel regulars (KG SD cut x Biker Kush male) backcrossed to the SD cut to improve the SD properties. A good Bx always starts with a donor thats close or beneficial to the dominant partner.
An
IBL to my understanding is breeding only inside this one cultivars family members (aaa x bbb male) x (aaa x bbb female) for example and is an overhead statement not further defining what exact male and femal have been used to gain IBL status but rather more the pure family breed. Certain traits get locked in and amplified, certain traits disappear as they are recessive and in a long term the line becomes very uniform.
For example and open pollination from generation to generation could also be accepted as an IBL.
I do this for example with one of my lines that i chose to keep alive for times to come but never had the intention to begin with at the time the mom and dad came together, so inbreeding from F1 stock ever since to keep them around. Now i do weed out weaker plants just by sheer harshness of conditions (as i would do with total fuckups and herms) they have to overcome to become reproduced and have a wider expression of the same genepool by having multiple males on multiple females and not seperating the seedharvest by plants (only special ones i take a few to the side to have the possibility to branch off into certain directions)
So this is one variety bred inside its family. An inbreed line. IBL.
I know some may would argue against it and i get it, the expectations may vary.
Also i usually just label them as
Gen. if done this way, followed by the number of generation they have gone from the start (initial F1) to avoid the controversy of this whole discussion and they may take a few more generations until the whole weed world would uniformly accept the IBL label to them but ultimately nobody can argue against it because if no new genetics are introduced in the mix it is indeed inbreeding.
This shows we can apply different techniques to forge genetics and as there are different forms of Damast steel the overall technique to obtain this layered steel is agreed on, but the patterns can vary and so does the end quality of the knive or whatever tool is made of it.
As you see these three labels definitely have all their righteous place and i am not aware of benefits in interpreting it otherwise as it would be highly misleading, imo a word should be used as close to its core meaning as possible to maintain a functional communication.
All these nomenclatures are pretty much self explaining once thought about.
@Diesel840 @Apollo thoughts?
.
