.
Last edited:
.
- Thread starter willydread
- Start date
Maple_Flail
Well-known member
you've already added Autoflowering genes, just make your selections out of the small percentage that actually autoflowers if you want to pass this forward.
you'll need a few generations to stabilize the autoflowering if that is your goal.
if you are intending on BX'ing it back to your hybrid AF then there should be a greater percentage of autoflowering progeny then the previous generation.
Check out "Aridbud's" response,VVV MUCH better worded than mine. VVV
you'll need a few generations to stabilize the autoflowering if that is your goal.
if you are intending on BX'ing it back to your hybrid AF then there should be a greater percentage of autoflowering progeny then the previous generation.
Check out "Aridbud's" response,VVV MUCH better worded than mine. VVV
Last edited:
P1 Photo x P1 Auto = F1 photo(recessive auto)
F1 photo x f1 photo = F2 75% photo, 25% Auto
F2 Auto x F2 Auto = F3 100% Auto
Cross the 2 F1s to go to f2. The f2 photos will be 66% recessive Auto, 33% non recessive. Two F2 photoperiods together could make some(25%) auto seeds if they're both holding the recessive auto gene. But if you manage to breed with one that's not recessive auto, you could go to f3 100% photoperiod(recessive auto), or if you cross 2 of the f2 photos not holding the recessive gene, you can go to f3 100% photoperiod non recessive. The only way to really test is to grow a bunch of beans you made and see if any auto.
That's without use of hormone manipulation.
F1 photo x f1 photo = F2 75% photo, 25% Auto
F2 Auto x F2 Auto = F3 100% Auto
Cross the 2 F1s to go to f2. The f2 photos will be 66% recessive Auto, 33% non recessive. Two F2 photoperiods together could make some(25%) auto seeds if they're both holding the recessive auto gene. But if you manage to breed with one that's not recessive auto, you could go to f3 100% photoperiod(recessive auto), or if you cross 2 of the f2 photos not holding the recessive gene, you can go to f3 100% photoperiod non recessive. The only way to really test is to grow a bunch of beans you made and see if any auto.
That's without use of hormone manipulation.
^right, arid. yerz are da bomb! luvin the new strainz - fire!
What about F1 Photo x P2 Auto(P1's brother), is this considered Auto backcross(BC or BX) ? What percentage of autoflower plants should come out of this?
Cheers
Photo F1 x auto = ~25% Growing out those, finding the autos to self, it increases, yet still semi-auto at that stage. We do 4 generations, back crossing w/ auto from F1/P2 for full stabilization.
aridbud is correct
Arid, I am planning to cross a landrace sativa mom to a male ruderalis. When backcrossing to the photo Mother to increase the landrace gene pool, is it wiser to wait until you have f3, or can I select a male that autoflowers in the f2 generation and use that pollen to get new f1 seeds with less rudi genes and breed down to f4 from there? Or backcrossing one more time from f2 before moving down to f4 for a stable auto.?
My initial plan was breeding down to f4 to lock in auto traits, then do a backcross to the mom and repeat the process, gradually eliminating more of the rudi traits save the auto genes. Just wondered if I can save time by backcrossing from f2 instead of a later generation or two.
My initial plan was breeding down to f4 to lock in auto traits, then do a backcross to the mom and repeat the process, gradually eliminating more of the rudi traits save the auto genes. Just wondered if I can save time by backcrossing from f2 instead of a later generation or two.
AgentPothead
Just this guy, ya know?
Hey teide, I sent arid a pm for ya letting him know you had a question. Wasn't sure he'd see it at the end of this thread. Once you hit 50 msgs you can pm yourself. 
Got the PM from Agent- thanks!!
Look back on this thread...it shows how many generations you need (my quips) for stable auto, approx 4 generations. Ruderalis is a recessive gene so you have to Bx the F1, F-2 of yours with auto, then F3 crossing to make F4....then grow those out to see if they are all autos.....if not, Bx again F3, F4 to auto.
It takes time to cross photo with auto (not like many breeders do crossing auto hybrids to fems).
Keep careful notes on phenos....F1, F2. F2 is a semi auto, but not 100%.
COM<BINED INFO:
P1 Photo x P1 Auto = F1 photo(recessive auto)
F1 photo x f1 photo = F2 75% photo, 25% Auto
F2 Auto x F2 Auto = F3 100% Auto
Cross the 2 F1s to go to f2. The f2 photos will be 66% recessive Auto, 33% non recessive. Two F2 photoperiods together could make some(25%) auto seeds if they're both holding the recessive auto gene. But if you manage to breed with one that's not recessive auto, you could go to f3 100% photoperiod(recessive auto), or if you cross 2 of the f2 photos not holding the recessive gene, you can go to f3 100% photoperiod non recessive. The only way to really test is to grow a bunch of beans you made and see if any auto.
That's without use of hormone manipulation.
Photo F1 x auto = ~25% Growing out those, finding the autos to self, it increases, yet still semi-auto at that stage. We do 4 generations, back crossing w/ auto from F1/P2 for full stabilization.
Thank you for the quick and lengthy answer, Aridbud! That is the way I would do it, and how I have read most suggesting it. But I guess there will be a higher percentage of the auto father genetics in the end product this way, especially with a final backcross to the auto parent to stabilize. I was hoping to minimize the ruderalis gene pool. So I have thought and read about cubing, or repeated backcrossing. Some claim backcrossing gradually minimizes one parent's genetics contribution to a few percent, so that in the end it is mostly the recurrent parent's genes left in the mix. So I planned on backcrossing several times and in the end breed down to f4 to achieve full auto. I have been told that if I am to backcross, I don't have to go to f3. I can cross a bunch of f1s, and choose the few ones who autoflower and backcross from those to the sativa mother. I thought maybe doing this a few times would give me a semi auto cross with more sativa gene pool and less ruderalis in the f2 stage than if just crossing the initial f1s from the first cross. Hope I make sense. Some say cubing is a crap shot and doesn't work, others say I will achieve a higher percentage sativa genes in the final auto. Mostly genes from the mother, but in a reshuffled order.
How would I proceed to wash out most genes from the ruderalis? Must I go to a stable auto generation and then backcross, and then repeat the process a few times, or can I do several backcrosses earlier, just to alter the genetic make up to mostly the recurrent mother, and then breed down to a fully auto generation? If I need three or four backcrosses, I would rather go from the f2 than the f3, saving time. What have I missed? Hope you are able to clarify.
How would I proceed to wash out most genes from the ruderalis? Must I go to a stable auto generation and then backcross, and then repeat the process a few times, or can I do several backcrosses earlier, just to alter the genetic make up to mostly the recurrent mother, and then breed down to a fully auto generation? If I need three or four backcrosses, I would rather go from the f2 than the f3, saving time. What have I missed? Hope you are able to clarify.
I am still getting my head around the photo x auto process. It was a lot easier crossing an auto hybrid to fem and just looking for phenos, knowing all are auto. Or likewise crossing photo and just selecting for traits I like.
What I don't get is what exactly happens if I select one of the few f2 males that will auto (roughly 25% will auto I read) and backcross that one to the recurring mother. Then select offspring from this backcross that do autoflower in the new f2 generations and I cross these? Have I lost something important in the process? Or will I be at the same stage in the process of creating an auto, but with more genetics from the sativa recurring mother?
What I don't get is what exactly happens if I select one of the few f2 males that will auto (roughly 25% will auto I read) and backcross that one to the recurring mother. Then select offspring from this backcross that do autoflower in the new f2 generations and I cross these? Have I lost something important in the process? Or will I be at the same stage in the process of creating an auto, but with more genetics from the sativa recurring mother?
How would I proceed to wash out most genes from the ruderalis?What is that intention? Thought you wanted auto, or semi-auto. Crossing back to photo mother, you've got a photoperiod.
Have I lost something important in the process? Or will I be at the same stage in the process of creating an auto, but with more genetics from the sativa recurring mother? Yes, you've lost something in the process. Same stage as you started, pretty much.
Read up on Punnett and Mendel. Good luck!
Have I lost something important in the process? Or will I be at the same stage in the process of creating an auto, but with more genetics from the sativa recurring mother? Yes, you've lost something in the process. Same stage as you started, pretty much.
Read up on Punnett and Mendel. Good luck!
Ok, thanks Aridbud.
I will read a lot more before posting again.
I am sorry to bother you and the other meisters with this issue, I think I get mendel as regards to recessive auto genes. Just bear with my final point..
Seems my confusion lies in the validity of backcrossing. I realise that backcrossing will set me back when breeding for auto, and back to the same stage concerning the percentage of auto genes. But when you state I am at same stage that I started, pretty much, I really wonder what the details are.
My intentions are breeding in one extra trait to the mom, the auto trait. I don't aim to cross with a potent auto hybrid. I want to only add the auto gene. I don't mind if any hardiness from the ruderalis or other beneficial traits tag along in the cross, but mostly I just want the auto trait from an auto that is not a poly hybrid. Therefore the ruderalis. Not much else to desire from it, as it is a low thc strain. But crossing this landrace with ruderalis makes the hybrid purer, is my thought, compared to if I cross it with a potent purple gorilla cookie or what ever. It was my understanding that backcrossing is used when wanting to add a trait to the recurring parent. So hence my idea of backcrossing the f2 generations to the landrace mother. If the offspring I backcross is auto, then I will get new offspring that still needs further inbreeding to reach full auto, but each backcross results in fewer genes from the rudi and more genes from the landrace, no? Not exactly back at the starting point?
Please tell me if this is a way to go if I want the final auto hybrid to be as much landrace as possible and not just a 50/50 rad sativa and lame ruderalis. And please feel free, other experts to comment on my thinking. I'll keep reading meanwhile
I will read a lot more before posting again.
I am sorry to bother you and the other meisters with this issue, I think I get mendel as regards to recessive auto genes. Just bear with my final point..
Seems my confusion lies in the validity of backcrossing. I realise that backcrossing will set me back when breeding for auto, and back to the same stage concerning the percentage of auto genes. But when you state I am at same stage that I started, pretty much, I really wonder what the details are.
My intentions are breeding in one extra trait to the mom, the auto trait. I don't aim to cross with a potent auto hybrid. I want to only add the auto gene. I don't mind if any hardiness from the ruderalis or other beneficial traits tag along in the cross, but mostly I just want the auto trait from an auto that is not a poly hybrid. Therefore the ruderalis. Not much else to desire from it, as it is a low thc strain. But crossing this landrace with ruderalis makes the hybrid purer, is my thought, compared to if I cross it with a potent purple gorilla cookie or what ever. It was my understanding that backcrossing is used when wanting to add a trait to the recurring parent. So hence my idea of backcrossing the f2 generations to the landrace mother. If the offspring I backcross is auto, then I will get new offspring that still needs further inbreeding to reach full auto, but each backcross results in fewer genes from the rudi and more genes from the landrace, no? Not exactly back at the starting point?
Please tell me if this is a way to go if I want the final auto hybrid to be as much landrace as possible and not just a 50/50 rad sativa and lame ruderalis. And please feel free, other experts to comment on my thinking. I'll keep reading meanwhile
if I want the final auto hybrid to be as much landrace as possible and not just a 50/50 rad sativa and lame ruderalis. In that case, get an auto that mirrors the characteristic similar to land race. There's far more to breeding than dusting pollen on a photo. Best to learn by doing taking careful notes....see what's good or not. It won't be 50/50, as you mentioned because, ruderalis is a recessive trait......as mentioned read up on Punnett to understand recessive/dominant traits.
I understand the basics of genotype prediction.
Re-reading the thread I think we just talked slightly past each other. My bad for not being clear enough, I guess.
I asked what is Arid's take on repeated backcrossing to increase the genepool of the recurrent mother in the auto hybrid, and what would be the difference in using the auto offspring from f2 in stead of later generations.
This is based on the assumption that repeated backcrossing will work when trying to gradually increase the amount of genes from one of the parents in the hybrid offspring.
I know this is a method used in other types of breeding. Mostly to add one or few traits that one of the parents lack.
In my case I want to use the landrace mother and ruderalis father. Backcrossing several times until the gene pool in the final auto hybrid contains mostly genes from the landrace and minimum from the ruderalis. Then breed down to stable auto generation. That's what I meant by "washing out most ruderalis genes", but keeping the recessive auto genes.
Backcrossing the few autos that arise in the f2 offspring makes it a quicker process than waiting for f3 or even f4, especially if I backcross three or four times.
I have been assured by others that repeated backcrossing in my case shifts the gene pool towards landrace, and that's all I want to accomplish, not stability nor potency, just knowing that it is as purely landrace as possible, gene pool-wise.
I will proceed with the backcrossing method. Since f2 seeds that autoflower seem to have the same autoflowering genotype as f3 or f4 seeds, I will use f2 to save time. Unless I get solid arguments against this method.
Re-reading the thread I think we just talked slightly past each other. My bad for not being clear enough, I guess.
I asked what is Arid's take on repeated backcrossing to increase the genepool of the recurrent mother in the auto hybrid, and what would be the difference in using the auto offspring from f2 in stead of later generations.
This is based on the assumption that repeated backcrossing will work when trying to gradually increase the amount of genes from one of the parents in the hybrid offspring.
I know this is a method used in other types of breeding. Mostly to add one or few traits that one of the parents lack.
In my case I want to use the landrace mother and ruderalis father. Backcrossing several times until the gene pool in the final auto hybrid contains mostly genes from the landrace and minimum from the ruderalis. Then breed down to stable auto generation. That's what I meant by "washing out most ruderalis genes", but keeping the recessive auto genes.
Backcrossing the few autos that arise in the f2 offspring makes it a quicker process than waiting for f3 or even f4, especially if I backcross three or four times.
I have been assured by others that repeated backcrossing in my case shifts the gene pool towards landrace, and that's all I want to accomplish, not stability nor potency, just knowing that it is as purely landrace as possible, gene pool-wise.
I will proceed with the backcrossing method. Since f2 seeds that autoflower seem to have the same autoflowering genotype as f3 or f4 seeds, I will use f2 to save time. Unless I get solid arguments against this method.
YukonKronic
Active member
So to accomplish the stabilization BX you just pop a bunch of the F2s that contain 25% Autoflowers and select the best Autoflowers from them as BX candidates?
Giving us F3 (100% Auto) x F2 (25% Auto individual selected)
Sorry if I’m misunderstanding..
Giving us F3 (100% Auto) x F2 (25% Auto individual selected)
Sorry if I’m misunderstanding..
