3 plus 3=?

[Mr GreenJeans]

Wow - 20 posts in just under a day! You and your Tri-Goils are bringing in the crowds GMT!

You have exceeded my meager genetic knowledge - never got heavy into ploidy topics in genetics. And you are right about the research - the relation is mostly unknown, makes good grist for the mill though, each early research attempt capable of generating an accepted paper - the acceptances being the true academic currency these days. Still, good indications of things to come can be read between the lines, and I have hopes that research will vindicate out favorite plant from the boondoggle governments have made of the situation. Meanwhile - for me - you will always be on the cutting edge of practical tri research!

Betcha roll a good bone too! :wink:

 

[Guest]

In my experience, treated seeds don't seem to show any difference from normal seeds other than being extremely aggressive when treatment is successful. I haven't done anything with mj plants in this regard though. I may try a Colchicine extract on some bagseeds just to see what they do.

I agree, I think trifoliar is very commonly mistaken as a sign of polyploidiism when it is more likely a variation/variant. It would be interesting to know if trifoliation can be induced with common mutagens such as some herbicides. In cactus temporary mutations like this occur quite commonly from use of foliarly applied chemicals.

J.

 

[GMT]

Hey MGJ, just like a buss mate, dont see ya for ages, then your on 2 threads, good to have you with us, saved ya the comfy chair. Yep this is the home of the end of the tri breeding program. I'm going to limit this one to them. The diff with academic acceptance and stoner acceptance, is in accademic circles they accept the evidence of success, in stoner circles they want the goods in their hands lol. Fortunately, I roll well enough to have enough patience for everyone.
Hi Pyrex, you've brought up something that could explain the confusion right there actually. Cannabis seeds treated with the poison Colchicine while, will typically die, and in 1000 or so, out of the ones that survive, 3 will be chemically induced polyploids. Apparently, someone has also noted that of the ones that survive, some will develop the whorled pho..... whatever the term is thats used to describe trifoliars. Now I'm not sure at what stage of pollination they would treat the mother plant, as it would in my mind need to be done at that stage to affect the genetic development of a DNA chain throughout the plant and the structure of the embryo in the seed. Its possible that the two observations have been linked, and its possible that they should be, but as far as I know, they are 2 separate observations. I have never done this. Let me just make that clear, these are not chemically induced in any way. They are naturally occuring trifoliar plants that are born from the shell that way, have a parent that way, a grand parent on each side that way, several generations of trifoliar plants bred to increase the ratio of trifoliar offspring over and over again. I dont even feed my plants nutrients, I dislike adding stuff that much. I grow in soil and just add water. No Colchicine has been introduced to at least 8 generations of these plants ancestors. And I only say 8 generations, as I cant say what happened in their history before that. What I can say is I found a single branch that displayed the trait, after crossing their parents who didn't, and worked from there. Still alot of work to do though.

 

[kooki]

Apparently, someone has also noted that of the ones that survive, some will develop the whorled pho..... whatever the term is thats used to describe trifoliars.

Ive seen the term,, whorled phylotaxy used before to describe the tri form , but im not sure or even saying its correct lol.. as opposed to opposing phylotaxy or alternating.. as in two opposite shoots or single shoots like once the plant is mature.. was that the term u were thinking of?

keep up the good work GMT

 

[Delta9-THC]

you know I gotta be watching the thread GMT ... I got 2 myself now ... Im looking into workin a tri line .... whatever the science behind it all I love the variation

and is there any evidence that'd suggest that they are more effective in production because of theire increased leaf mass?

and by that I mean are they more effective with more leaves lol

Take Care

Peace

 

[Guest]

I would be inclined to say that they would be more efficient at photosynthesizing. I think the question is; Does 1/3 more biomass necessarily equal 1/3 more yield? On a genetic level a plant has a predetermined limit to its greatness/yield but thats with normal plants.

j.

 

[GMT]

Hi Kooki, yep that's the one, I never liked the term myself (could never spell it), never understood what the logic of the term meant, which is why I plumped for the trifoliar.
Um, don't know Delta, what do you want me to do, start a bifoliar sibling and track its development against the development of these tri's. Oh ok, but bear in mind that it'll be a few weeks behind so dont say oh look how much bigger the tris are. Although this thread is purely for tri's, so pop over to lazy growing for that. Hi Pyrex, follow Delta, we'll find out.

 

[kooki]

GMT, no probs i remember the term used from a thread on OG, where at the time a lot was said along the lines of. oh they all become male and if u lucky n get a female it wont finish flowering or will be a runt etc etc... how wrong is that eh? when u have such great results!!
Well, interestingly on one of my flowering plants i have a tri branch and the rest normal.. i dont see yet any difference in budsize or anything , just difference in how it looks leaf sets wise, i use LST to try keep even canopy, and the only part bigger is the main tip that always manages to regain its dominant position then gets tied back.. only time will tell tho, by end of flowering i cld compare one normal branch to the tri one but.. i dont think that would be a good test..

EDITto save a new post, and respond to below )
Well i have two branch on plant in mind that at this stage(2 days short of their 3rd week in 12/12) are pretty much the same in develpment so far.. i shall endeavour through flowering to give them the suggested conditions GMT and see how they go. its a quick flower strain so hopefully shldnt be too long before harvest comparison.. i wont post pics ,unless ya want me to, dont want to litter thread with pic after pic, but shall take pics like i normally do for diary in week intervals,to record their progress.

 

[GMT]

Lol, the people who've told me that over the years Kooki, if I'd listened to one of them I wouldn't have these now.
No, if you could get them about the same distance from the light and about the same access to god air, then I reckon 2 branches from the same plant maybe the best test of all for that. With separate plants you always have a difference, with one plant and 2 branches its all equal. The ideal would really be 2 cuts, one tri and one bi from the same plant and then compare them.

 

[Bigmone357]

I always wondered about tri's

I always wondered about tri's

Neat thread GMT about time someone did a Tri thread nice info here also keep it comin'

 

[Core]

ello GMT

well its done ....i let my Tri-male have a shag with my most productive/compact girl....
just need 2 have a Spare cut of the father...i already have a extra cut from the mother....
pitty that the road is sooooooo looooong

lol she's on dark cycle...smoking a sig after that shag

EDIT ...done G

 

[GMT]

Hi Big357, Thanks for tuning in.

Hi Core, do me a favour mate, and move that photo to my lazygrowing thread, I dont want anything other than tri's to ever show themselves in here. Its interesting that you say you kept a cut of the mother that you pollinated, why? If she is Bifoliar, then she wont aid your tri quest at all. Now your father is, he will be worth keeping. You see, I still haven't worked out the maths behind whats going on with tris. But I have deffinately decided that if its a single tri gene, and if the tri plant is diploid, then crossing tri to bi will only give bi offspring unless the bi you use already contains the tri gene but supresses it. Therefore TT x BB will give you plants that contain both gene sets, but none that only contain one double set. To get a double T set, you would need to cross TT x BT. 4 out of 9 should then be Trifoliar themselves. Trouble is they arent lol. But tri x bi ( with no tri genes supressed) will always get you Bi seeds. It is possible that tri's actually are triploid, or polyploids. But Those numbers dont really work out either. This week I'm working out whether the numbers match up with my latest theory.
If only one gene in each chromosome but a combination of 2, 3, or 4 of them are required as in diploids, triploids or polyploids, the ratio of offspring providing one parent exhibits the trait and theother is a carrier of the gene is between 1:1 and 63:4.
If polyploidity is not not involved, then it could be due to the sex chromosomes forming is a way which allowed the genes for leaf formation to cross over from one sex cromosome to a chromosome one chromosome along from the opposing sex chromosome, possibly due to ratchets theory altering the length of the relative chromosomes, yet all 3 chromosomes still or now containing the leaf forming genes; forcing the formation of 3 leaves per node.

 

[kooki]

GMT
I got my Top44 cut to root , and now potted. Its doing good in veg and planning to keep it around for a while. Interesting stuff above about offspring of crossing tri and bi,and tri x tri. My knowledge of that kind of stuff is pretty limited so shall take your advice on this and hold onto this cut until i can find a tri male(phew cld be a while huh lol) or at least a male that has a tri branch to cut( i assume that means it has the gene but has supressed it except for the branch that goes tri for some reason or other) .
Great work u doing and dont forget to get that camera out n give us some pics now n then D

heres that top44 tri cut...

 

[Core]

if i understand correct....to make this lango easy.....i should take a F3 tri (if i find 1) and pollinate her with the original tri male ...?

ohw and i keep a spare cut mainly for making a mum otta her....but if potency levels are verry high i always can make a other batch of seeds.....

@Kooki
lovely Tri my friend

 

[GMT]

Hi Kooki,
glad you managed to get that tri cut to root. I'll try to out line the problem a little below.
Hi Core, thanks for understanding about that. Since you and kooki have asked the same kind of Q I'll try to run through some possabilities.

Lets for example 1, assume that most of the plants are Diploid in make up. That means has 2 helixs, or the classic double helix structure that we imagine when thinking of a strand of DNA. And lets also for the sake of the example, assume that the tri gene is located in one chromosome on one of the DNA chains, but is recessive and needs to be matched to another chromosome also containing the recessive tri gene.
The options when breeding a tri with a pure bifoliar plant are :
--------t------t----
B--B-]-Bt-----Bt---
B--B-]-Bt-----Bt---
There would also be additional options created when allowing for triploids and polyploid formations. The point being that in that case, non of the F1 generation would display the necessary tt combo.
Now if you opt for the Triploid or Polyploid (4 genome helixs) reasoning to explain Trifoliar plants, the same is true whether the bifoliar plant you are using is Diploid or Triploid or Polyploid itself, if it doesn't contain the tri t gene, then non of the F1 offspring will display the trait. However all of the F1s will carry the gene. If that is accurate, then depending on the number of helixs involved, a percentage of F1 backcrossed to tri parent, should result in trifoliar causing DNA structures. What ever structure that is.
Stabalising the trait into all offspring may not be possible, it depends on the cause of the phenomenon.
Personally if I had to take a guess, I'd go for one of 3 options, the rumour that trifoliar plants being polyploids with a structure of recessive tttt genes, is accurate, or the plants are all Diploids, with the genes that make leaves being posessed by both the exclusively male chromosome and the exclusively female chromosome. The info is in both chromosomes as info is generally passed and copied and swapped inbetween chromosomes at the same position along the chain as one is from the mother and one from the father both to do the same thing. This is the starting point in the second option, and that starting point is back in time when all the plants are all hermies. As time passes on, a theory called ratchets theory, says that as individual sex advantages start to play a role, a chemical will start to be produced that prevents the male and female chromosomes from sharing and both contributing to the development of the growth of the plant / animal. And in this way the 2 sexes evolve. Now in general, one of the sexs will contain both genes and one will only contain a double helping of one. Therefore in one of the chromosomes, only info specific to the production of the reproductive system is necessary. As this happens, info is passed into opposing chromosomes in order to reduce the contents of the exclusively sex chromosomes. This reduces the length of that section of DNA, meaning that chromosomes now over lap new chromosomes in small areas. This could allow the duplication of the leaf gene into a chromosome next to a chromosome containing the leaf gene already. Therefore creating one strand of dna containing 2 leaf producing chromosomes and 1 strand producing 1 leaf due to its sole leaf producing chromosome. This info is then passed out of the exclusively sex genes, but eventually into a total of 3 chromosomes instead of 2.
Or alternatively, it could be a combination of genes all co-existing in the same plant without any relevant genes also existing to silence them. There are so many possablities to this. I'm trying to map out the frequency ratios of the various options, and then comparing those to observable frequency ratios to decide on which option to guess at. But I keep giving up and then going back to it. I've ruled out the simple Diploid tt theory. I think I've ruled out the Triploid ttt theory. The Polyploid tttt theory is possible. I'm rambling now, pics when something looks different from the last pics.

 

[Verite]

I get a lot of these with some of my bcsc genetics. Some are tri's some are quad's and others are just downright mutants with a dual stalk that parts in mid growth.

 

[GMT]

Hi Verite, interesting, when you say a lot, have you any idea on one in how many are tri etc? Also I've only ever had 2 turn quad on me, and I mean turn, not born quad. Have you had any quads born that way? Also, what is bcsc ?

 

[GMT]

Thought I should update this thread. I'm sorry aobut neglecting it, and looking back through photos, I didnt keep any of the male shots I dont think , still, the story is I used 2 trifoliar males to pollinate 1 girl, about 10 days appart. The girl that is already posted, this is how she has grown so far.



Now for some related babies that will form the side line, that eventually will be used for a cross between the 2 tri lines.

The seeds are forming on the big girl, I'll post an update nearer harvesting of the seeds.

 

[GMT]

Well these are the side line tris that I wanted to select for another genertion, unfortunately killed off all the girls I think, the one in the middle of the last pic isnt a tri.




Still waiting for the flowering tri girl to finish up and give me all her seeds.

 

[Verite]

Hi Verite, interesting, when you say a lot, have you any idea on one in how many are tri etc? Also I've only ever had 2 turn quad on me, and I mean turn, not born quad. Have you had any quads born that way? Also, what is bcsc ?

Doh.. sorry I missed yer ?'s before.

Anyways I have a few right now that are doing the tri thing. In some of my bcsc stuff I get about 10-20% tri's. Only about 5% of those start out as first leafset tri's.. the other 95% start out as normal looking doubles and turn like you say at about node 6-10. The bcsc stuff I had was capable of making tri's, quad's, and some multi-funk branching that defy's decent description.

Bcsc is british columbia seed company. I got some of their genetics back from 2000-01.

My suspicion is they were messing with colchicine in some of their breeding projects.