Basic genetics explained

[Only Ornamental]

Spagyrics? just saying.

LOL!
Spagyric isn't about isolating a pure compound but 'purifying the true essence'. Basically, it's an approach loosely based on principles used in alchemy (i.e. philosopher's stone) some three hundred years ago. Apart from essential oils and some minerals and trace elements which may or may not be beneficial, spagyric is superstition and humbug and a step back towards medieval practices.

 

[ozza]

LOL!
Spagyric isn't about isolating a pure compound but 'purifying the true essence'. Basically, it's an approach loosely based on principles used in alchemy (i.e. philosopher's stone) some three hundred years ago. Apart from essential oils and some minerals and trace elements which may or may not be beneficial, spagyric is superstition and humbug and a step back towards medieval practices.

In your opinion.

 

[Infinitesimal]

here is a very very basic video on genetics and heredity... you need to understand all of this completely before you even think about cannabis genetics... one of the most important things to note IMO is that most traits observed in cannabis are not controlled by a single gene/locus but instead by a combination of many genes... so trying to use simple monohybrid punnett squares to plot inheritance is futile for most traits.

Heredity: Crash Course Biology #9
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBezq1fFUEA&list=PL3EED4C1D684D3ADF&index=9
[YOUTUBEIF]CBezq1fFUEA[/YOUTUBEIF]

 

[Only Ornamental]

In your opinion.

Nope, not mine and it's not an opinion; besides being a scientist and pharmacist, I'm also interested in the history of esoteric (not that neo-esoteric trend-shit), shamanism (idem), and also a bit alchemy (occupational hazard ). I'm not saying I do believe in it nor that it doesn't work . I simply state that spagyric is a half-heartedly refurbished philosophy of something refuted a long time ago and this sort of things usually get out of style only if they have no real benefit.

Many things work and we can't explain them, like praying, voodoo, or homoeopathy (which BTW is based on a mistake Hahnemann wasn't aware of, the whole concept is based on an error).
From any angle except believe, the philosophy behind spagyric is just plain ridiculous, like having a pope who forbids condoms (or, if you're a practising catholic, the Dead Sea Scrolls not being included into the bible), lapidation, or circumcising women.

I'm used to work in a pharmacy and we sold a lot of stuff (also synthetic drugs) which, from a rational, scientific, and/or pharmaceutical point of view do nothing... but they worked somehow... at least in the eye of the patients... much like cosmetics does too...
I wouldn't want a pharmacy without homoeopathy, even if most of the modern preparations don't even follow the original philosophy, cause it's very helpful even if only as a placebo (which have a non-neglectable proven effect especially in pain management and children!).

Anyway, spagyric has nothing to do with the actual topic AND preparing cannabis according to a spagyric protocol will get you high no longer .

 

[Infinitesimal]

cannabis plants transmute shit into consciousness expanding phytochemicals... sounds pretty alchemistic to me

but I agree I don't know what it has to do with breeding other than breeding for the production of plant tonics.

 

[Only Ornamental]

...
but I agree I don't know what it has to do with breeding other than breeding for the production of plant tonics.

Thinking about it, I have to revoke my prior statement. They actually have a lot in common!
Truth be told, I admire (and detest at the same time) those who have the guts to take others old stuff, perform some 'miracle act' with it, and make it famous and become famous themselves by 'motivating' (i.e. tricking) millions of people into buying the stuff and at least for some time become really happy about it.
Isn't that about the same with many who 'breed' cannabis or at least sell 'new strains' every few months?

I'm stupid not to do so myself... reminds me of a saying: Only those have a clear conscience who don't use it.

 

[Betterhaff]

The best way is to run sheer numbers and pick out the winner.

Wow, spoken like a true Burbank.

 

[Infinitesimal]

Thinking about it, I have to revoke my prior statement. They actually have a lot in common!
Truth be told, I admire (and detest at the same time) those who have the guts to take others old stuff, perform some 'miracle act' with it, and make it famous and become famous themselves by 'motivating' (i.e. tricking) millions of people into buying the stuff and at least for some time become really happy about it.
Isn't that about the same with many who 'breed' cannabis or at least sell 'new strains' every few months?

I'm stupid not to do so myself... reminds me of a saying: Only those have a clear conscience who don't use it.

I know the production of cannabinoids aren't miraculous but it is damn awesome!

I would rather have my principal, than cash in that is for sure.

with the emerging studies into the endocannabinoid system and phytocannabinoids I see a legitimate use for highly concentrated alcohol extractions of raw fresh cannabinoids... to up regulate the endocannabinoid system without being so dramatically psychoactive... and there for I guess a reason for breeding such things (some people DO want the medicinal effects without the high) so there should be a legit market for whole plant tonics in my opinion.

 

[rasputin]

OO, all that being said... I still don't know where you stand re: Tom's statement on breeding cannabis like strawberries.

LB seems to agree with Tom, run numbers and pick the best. Infi seems to agree. I happen to share that view as well.

Where do you stand on that particular matter, OO?

Reason I ask is, Tom seemed to catch a lot of flak for that statement. I don't think he's really far off. In fact, it's a much more accurate representation of what people are currently doing versus any pie-in-the-sky ideals of what they should be doing.

One thing I do feel is often overlooked in the "run big numbers, pick the best" is the criteria used for what is best. Is it something you back into after the harvest or do you have a goal in mind at the start and cull anything that deviates from it?

In this regard, I relate most strongly to the actual Luther Burbank and, more recently, DJ Short as both have expressed similar views albeit in different terms. Burbank was pretty succint: pick the best, cull the rest. DJ thinks of it in terms of computers, specifically top down programming. That is, to have the 'vision' or idea for what the program should do already in mind before you build it.

 

[Only Ornamental]

Tom's right about what's being currently done in the US and in Holland... but that doesn't it make good breeding nor the way to go. It's a strategy which works but IMHO there's no honour to find in it, only money (though only the latter feeds you and your family, the former is for dreamers... I like dreaming...).
DJ Short's view is what I like but I can't say anything about its feasibility. As it all comes down to numbers, no matter how good or bad the strategy (what's the difference between 10'000 and 100'000 anyway?), spontaneously decide what's good seems to bear more chances of finding something. But then again, that's not a breeding strategy but counting on luck.
For one, I'll have to try it for myself to form a good opinion of my own. For another, I'd like to see more things properly applied to cannabis that are common in, say, wheat or cabbage breeding.

 

[rasputin]

If it produces the best plants and those happen to be the plants you wish to work with, why is not good breeding?

Is there an objectively definable "good breeding" versus bad breeding in spite of the results? Serious question. Just seems like the important part is finding the plant, how you got there isn't necessarily as important though I certainly understand its significance.

I always counter the arguments that say you need X amount of plants in order to do any "real" breeding that if you find the plant you're looking for in the first five seeds the rest are just in the way.

It is luck to some degree but having the ability to not only select the right plant but also envision it before it arrives is certainly not luck. It's a skill, perhaps a difficult to define skill, but a skill just the same.

Based on nothing more than my own life experiences I feel selection is more art than science.

 

[Elmer Bud]

G`day OO

I don`t understand how a clone can compete with a seed plant in tropical conditions .
At 13 hours or less the clones want to flower straight away . Seed plants grow for at least 6 weeks before sexing and develop into small bushes then stretch and increase again .
I do think Tom is USA centric . Selecting a clone for 1 environment would be a very big undertaking . How about ones for every corner of the globe ?

Then who is the person to decide what people from other cultures and life styles will like ?

Not every one likes OG .

Thanks for sharin

EB .

 

[gaiusmarius]

i find selection takes time, it's taken me over 10 runs with the same genetics to really judge each and every one and take note of it's unique qualities. i'd have to look back to see when i popped these 80 seeds i started out with, but ever since, i been re running the best females of the bunch and slowly getting rid of those that are not quite the best, but it's taking ages and sometimes you find you were wrong the last time about a certain pheno. if i had run 1000 seeds it would take even longer to be sure you selected the best few. there are so many aspects to consider as well, from growth characteristics, to the effects, taste smell, how it stores/ages, even how it looks if you have 2 equally special phenos and of course how long they flower.

so i certainly see the advantage of working at it with the strawberry method.

 

[rasputin]

So how long before there is an heirloom cannabis variety market and a conventional cannabis variety market?

What if its a case of whats best for the hobby breeder isn't necessarily whats best for the commercial breeder? And that the differences in approach are not necessarily bad, but possibly even worth celebrating?

I'm just brainstorming... but maybe the strawberry approach is best for the home gardener looking for the 'best' performing expressions in a given amount of seeds, likely <100. Whereas the commercial breeder attempting to produce a high quality seed line has to work it successive generations, weeding out the poor performers, and selecting the 'best' performing expression in a given amount of seeds, 500-1000+.

The commercial breeder is always trying to produce a line-up of all-stars across the board. The hobby breeder is looking for the HOF player in that line-up. Even if/when the commercial breeder improves the line to produce consistent HOF plants the hobby breeder is still then going to pursue the 'GOAT' plant and it will repeat itself. Its an arms race.

 

[oldchuck]

Is ever higher and higher THC content an "improvement?" I think not.

 

[KiefSweat]

I would consider import/brick weed to be heirloom. and would say this is true in many locals. I would assume until recently in most places there wasn't outside influence on the genetics and the same lines where grown and selected from over generations.

With the numbers i always find it interesting with cannabis that the number of parents is so low. With field crops and other breeding programs your going to select multiple plants that fit your ideal with cannabis there is a lot of 1:1 matings and even just single plant matings.

 

[Sam_Skunkman]

Well if you place a 60 watt blue agri bulb above every 10 Square meters and run them from sunset for 5-6 hours above the clones even on the equator they will get as big as you want, off the lights and they flower. Clones do fine on the equator, even early flowering ones.
-SamS

G`day OO

I don`t understand how a clone can compete with a seed plant in tropical conditions .
At 13 hours or less the clones want to flower straight away . Seed plants grow for at least 6 weeks before sexing and develop into small bushes then stretch and increase again .
I do think Tom is USA centric . Selecting a clone for 1 environment would be a very big undertaking . How about ones for every corner of the globe ?

Then who is the person to decide what people from other cultures and life styles will like ?

Not every one likes OG .

Thanks for sharin

EB .

 

[Sam_Skunkman]

It is obvious that Cannabis is being grown like strawberries, I do not see it being bred like strawberries. Not yet.
Cannabis elite clones are selected by many and compared and the best are used to grow crops.
The real difference is that unlike strawberries no single breeder is making the crosses to be grown out by the 10's of thousands to find the one or two clone keepers, it is all done by many different growers/breeders each with different standards as to what is a keeper, quite a bit different then if a single breeder had 100,000 to select from at one grow.
Like old Luther Burbank used to do.
-SamS

 

[Johnnyseed]

I would consider import/brick weed to be heirloom. and would say this is true in many locals.
.

This is the main reason I still buy the Columbian Brick that comes around my way. I figure that they're growing some of the stuff there been growing forever..

 

[Infinitesimal]

where I see most fail, is there understanding of the importance of the genotype and instead most people doing "breeding" are looking for and selecting phenotypes, because well they probably don't know how to select for genotypes/what the difference is.... and the sheer amount of time and work involved in testing and identifying genotypes also makes pollen chucking using attractive phenotypes a quicker more financially viable option