What's new
  • ICMag with help from Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest in November! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!

Chimera on the Myth of Cubing

K

kopite

chimera had edited/reposted on his earlier writings...
Wow that is painful for me to read.... I must have been pretty stoned when I wrote that, now years ago. I'm glad at least that it's info that has spread a little knowledge and perspective into the community over the years.. I do however need to re-write it...

Here's a snipet on backcrossing from the breeding chapter I wrote for Jorge's most recent version of the bible.

Backcross Breeding –
A type of breeding that involves repeated crossing of progeny with one of the original parental genotypes; cannabis breeders most often cross progeny to the mother plant. This parent is known as the recurrent parent. The non-recurrent parent is called the donor parent. More widely, any time a generation is crossed to a previous generation, it is a form of backcross breeding. Backcross breeding has become one of the staple methods clandestine cannabis breeders use, mainly because it is a simple, rapid method when using greenhouses or grow
rooms, and requires only small populations. The principle goal of backcross breeding is to create a population of individuals derived mainly from the genetics of one single parent (the recurrent parent).

The donor parent is chosen based on a trait of interest that the recurrent parent lacks; the idea is to introgress this trait into the backcross population, such that the new population is comprised mainly of genetics from the recurrent parent, but also contains the genes responsible for the trait of interest from the donor parent.

The backcross method is a suitable scheme for adding new desirable traits to a mostly ideal, relatively true-breeding genotype. When embarking on a backcross breeding plan, the recurrent parent should be a highly acceptable or nearly ideal genotype (for example, an existing commercial cultivar or inbred line). The ideal traits considered for introgression into the new seed line should be simply inherited and easily scored for phenotype. The best donor parent must possess the desired trait, but should not be seriously deficient in other traits. Backcross line production is repeatable, if the same parents are used.

Backcross breeding is best used when adding simply inherited dominant traits that can easily be identified in the progeny of each generation (example 1). Recessive traits are more difficult to select for in backcross breeding, since their expression is masked by dominance in each backcross to the recurrent parent. An additional round of open pollination or sib-mating is needed after each backcross generation, to expose homozygous-recessive plants. Individuals showing the recessive condition are selected from F2 segregating generations and backcrossed to the recurrent parent (see example 2).

Example 1– Backcrossing: Incorporating a dominant trait

Step1– Recurrent Parent × Donor Parent
|
V
F1 Hybrid generation

Step 2 – Select desirable plants showing dominant trait, and hybridize selected plants to recurrent parent. The generation produced is denoted BC1 (some cannabis breeders break from botanical convention and denote this generation Bx1. BC1= Bx1).

Step 3 – Select plants from BC1 and hybridize with the recurrent parent; the resulting generation is denoted BC2.

Step 4 – Select plants from BC2 and hybridize with the recurrent parent; the resulting generation is denoted BC3.
.

Example 2 Backcrossing: Incorporating a recessive trait

Step1– Recurrent Parent × Donor Parent
|
V
F1 Hybrid generation

Step 2 – Select desirable plants, and create an F2 population via full sib-mating.

Step 3 – Select plants showing the desired recessive trait in the F2 generation, then hybridize selected F2-recessive plants to the recurrent parent. The generation produced is denoted BC1.

Step 3 – Select plants from BC1, and create a generation of F2 plants via sib-mating; the resulting generation can be denoted BC1F2

Step 4 – Select desirable BC1F2 plants showing the recessive condition, and hybridize with the recurrent parent; the resulting generation is denoted BC2.

Step 5 – Select plants from BC2, and create an F2 population via sib-mating; denote the resulting generation BC2F2.

Step 6 – Select plants showing the recessive condition from the BC2F2 generation, and hybridize to the recurrent parent; the resulting generation is denoted BC3.

Step 7 – Grow out BC3, select and sib-mate the most ideal candidates to create an F2 population, where plants showing the recessive condition are then selected and used as a basis for a new inbred, or open-pollinated seed line.

This new generation created from the F2 is a population that consists of, on average, ~93.7% of genes from the recurrent parent, and only ~6.3% of genes leftover from the donor parent. Most importantly, one should note that since only homozygous-recessives were chosen for mating in the BC3F2 generation, the entire resulting BC3F3 generation is homozygous for the recessive trait, and breeds true for this recessive trait. Our new population meets our breeding objective. It is a population derived mainly from the genetics of the recurrent parent, yet breeds true for our introgressed recessive trait.


Backcross derived lines are expected to be well-adapted to the environment in which they will be grown, which is another reason backcrossing is often used by cannabis breeders who operate indoors. Indoor grow rooms are easily replicated all over the world, so the grower is able to grow the plants in a similar environment in which they were bred. Progeny therefore need less extensive field-testing by the breeder across a wide range of environments.

If two or more characters are to be introgressed into a new seed line, these would usually be tracked in separate backcross programs, and the individual products would be combined in a final set of crosses after the new populations have been created by backcrossing.

The backcross scheme has specific drawbacks, however. When the recurrent parent is not very true-breeding, the resulting backcross generations segregate, and many of the traits deemed desirable to the line fail to be reproduced reliably. Another limitation of the backcross is that the “improved” variety differs only slightly from the recurrent parent (e.g., one trait). If multiple traits are to be introgressed into the new population, other techniques such as inbreeding or recurrent selection may be more rewarding.

Hope that's a little more clear......
Respectfully,
-Chimera
 
R

Red Swan

The fact that C99 is good pot is not the point of cubing. The Princess clone was cubed in an attempt to recreate it genetically in seed form. You would need the original Princess to compare to in order to see if the cube was indeed successful as stated, or not. I would bet that the differences would be profound, and if this is so, then even though C99 is inarguably good smoke (I like it too), cubing does not achieve the stated goal.

No one is stating that you can't get good smoke from a cubed plant...but does it represent the original parent, as the mathematical model of cubing states? I would say NO.

It's nice to see this thread revived along with some healthy discussion. Continue :)

Octavian

That's the absolute truth, but it's a big business hyping a "brand Name" clone and claiming that something that's pretty much a random cross is the same as the parent clone.

You could show pictures of incredible buds, with a smoke report that it was the most incredible tasting, greatest high ever and no one would blink. You could even say, hey, this only cost 50 bucks and no one would ask you where you got it.

You show a picture of a "brand Name " clone with buds the size of a postage stamp after 5 months growing and people will be begging you for a cut.

So if you attach a name to a new hybrid and claim its' the closest you are going to get in seed form, people will ignore more available, more reasonably priced, well bred gear for the name.

So why should someone be motivated to actually put the work in when suckers will line up to pay for a name? And people will justify it. At the end of the day, I guess it really dooesn't matter.
Some people will still prefer McDonalds over good , home made food.
 

dan_kass

Active member
more over there is strange thing all around C99 and A11.. (at least for me)
How a Jack herrer F2 (as supposed by M. Soul) can give three great plants homogenous as M.soul said?
J.H is an unstable polyhybrid..

How from 2 of them he creates 2 different lines A11 and C99 ?

It was actually 3....only a few people were gifted Cafe' Girl back then. It was supposed to be released as Dylans Diamond but he/they never got around to it. It's funny how Sly never gets mentioned, only Soul.

Anyway, I grew C88 a long time ago but once I got Cafe' Girl I was even more excited. I wish she was still around but at least I managed to make a cross to an extremely fruity Yumbolt before it was completely gone. Been growing out the F3's for the past year and have found some neat variations that I didn't see in the F1 or F2 gens....but I've yet to find the flavor I liked in the F1's.

Oh well, just started ten more that were from a different F2 mom (I used 3 in total) so I'm excited to see what, if any, the differences will be.

Take Care,
Dan Kass
 
C

Cinderella99

Thanks for your stellar reply Mr. G-

"...The whole idea of 'stabilizing' a strain is often misunderstood. People think a plant 'is stable' or not. But, it's more realistic to think of whether the plant is stable for X trait(s). Even then, what is accomplished? If your plan is to make seeds that are similar to clones, then a very uniform seedbatch might be desirable, but I don't see why not use a clone. In reality, breeders would prefer not to have something too uniform, because decreased variation makes it tough to improve traits. And trait improvement over time is the real measure of the breeder."

Amen. That makes a lot of sense, bro.

"...If two lines that share very little genetic material are crossed (F1), the F2 generation will sort into a very large number of phenotypes..."

OK....I think I get it: The more inbred or "stabilized" ( that is, stabilized for our most salient desirable traits, not holistically as a strain) the parent F1's are the less variation in F2 progeny? Stable parentage may represent closer to that textbook punnet square for a greater batch of desirable traits at same time in the F2 rather than the more random possibility of finding one or two (combo dominant) desirable phenos in the progeny generation of polyhybrid parent(s) since the series or batch of desirable traits are both fixed and combo dominant in the situation of more stabilized parent stock, yes?



Example: My champion line Amstaff was bred with a bitch (who's father was Bullet for any Amstaff fans out there) that had varying pedigree on her side: The bitches father, even though he was a widely heralded breed champion, had no siblings that came close to his quality (read "elite clone polyhybrid"). The bitches mother was, let's just say, stellar and then everything else on the East side of town (read "polyhybrid")...

A disproportionate number of the puppies--like 75%-- looked identical to my Amstaff since his genes were line bred for several generations (read IBL). I was very happy with the litter, even though I didn't get a mini-Bullet, since when I purchased my dog, I had carefully selected my dog for the traits that I still love. I guess my lesson was that dominance in a trait/set of traits, in a cross, is a function of how inbred one line is for a set of traits in relation to the other...

Wow...This hurts my head-- I was a stoned English major :)
 

Growbrass

Member
I can't believe I just found this.

Without sounding like a Chimera fanboi, I must say, this is a wonderful write up. Great information along with being very easy to read and comprehend.

Breeding understanding +1
 

VenturaHwy

Active member
ICMag Donor
Veteran
Another way of looking at it is if you backcross enough times you can get rid of all of the genes from the original outcross male..... or like an S1 but in regular seeds, not fem seeds.
 

roach

Well-known member
Veteran
Another way of looking at it is if you backcross enough times you can get rid of all of the genes from the original outcross male..... or like an S1 but in regular seeds, not fem seeds.

you cant get rid of the Y chromosome :p

and besides breeding out the genes of the male used in the F1 by backcrossing to the mother is just guesswork without DNA testing
 
Top