Clone of a Clone of a... Degredation Experiment

[imadoofus]

any fruit(sexual reproductive organs of a flowering female) will spoil if left to over rippen. thats just common sense.

as far as clones degredation will take decades, check out any violet or tulip forum for that. cannabis is no different in that regard. it will happen, but the amount of time is substantial.

lol good luck with the experiment... only 19 more years and counting!

 

[mean mr.mustard]

I was referring to a clone that has grown into an adult, off of which clones could be cut, as a "mother"... not the original seedplant.

Nuturing any plant back to health should produce healthy cuttings. If the plant has been infected with a virus or has sustained genetic mutation then all bets are off the table.

 

[Sam_Skunkman]

Anyone that wants to work with RKS is welcome to do the work, but not with my Clones that I selected and kept maintained for 20 years.
Yes I am an old dude, getting older, sooner or later I will be gone...
This is why I don't like to waste my time on work I have no interest in. I don't lose varieties, if I developed them, for sure I don't.
But why didn't anyone else save a RKS Clone? Or seeds?
BTW, I have given several friends most of my Clones to keep maintained, not to use them, I told them If I die, they should do as they like with them.
-SamS

I understand u are the MAN when it comes 2 Cannabis ...I have one question..I kno u said u dont like 2 work with the RKS ..Also ur not gonna let anyone work your line ...soo Does another great strain bite the dust ? As i mentioned b4 it would be Cool 2 live forever but im pretty sure ur getting old sam ...The part that kills me is one of the most sought after plants is just sitting in a room somewhere dying 2 be flowered

 

[silverhazefiend]

I can understand where ur coming from ..But its like asking non-mechanics why dont they have brake fluid ...As far as the question of no one saving clones or beans ..There must be a valid explanation for this but i cannot take on such a task ..cause i have limited info on the subject..I do kno it is hard 2 maintain in flower bc of the smell ..And i heard something of potency issues ..

I don't lose varieties, if I developed them, for sure I don't

hats off 2 u for that ..

Sam i wish u another 50yrs of happiness and good health.......But please dont let me choose between u and the RKS ...JK

p.s..Tell them boys 2 put me down for a cut ..It doesnt matter how many yrs from now ..

 

[spurr]

Hey, great news. Steep Hill lab is already testing for CBN related to harvest date as they tend to agree with my stance that letting plants over ripen may alter the cannabinoid profile (ratios). I am entering samples to help gather data. This debate should be put to rest soon enough. Clone of a clone on the other hand... IMO may be a much less simple debate to settle.

This has been looked at before, at least in part, see below. I have been testing THC and CBD levels of cannabis harvested when most glands are clear, cloudy and amber using TLC with spot destiny measurements, and my findings so far agree with the findings of the paper below (granted my findings are far less quantitative than the work below and by GC assays by Steep Hill). I.e., cloudy trichs have the most THC and CBD in my tests...


"THC (TETRAHYDROCANNABINOL) ACCUMULATION IN GLANDS OF CANNABIS (CANNABACEAE)"
Paul G. Mahlberg and Eun Soo Kim
http://www.hempreport.com/issues/17/malbody17.html

(see section "Cannabinoid, including THC, composition of glands"; part "B")


I found how they removed the trich heads to be neat:

Whole gland heads were removed individually from leaf or bract surfaces under a stereomicroscope with a tungsten microneedle and placed in vials containing chloroform to extract cannabinoids. The needle was rinsed in chloroform after collecting each gland to avoid cross contamination between collected glands. Samples of twenty and 100 glands were collected for different sampling periods and analyzed by GC as described (Turner, Hemphill and Mahlberg, 1978).

FWIW, it appears the reason there is no mention of CBD in the first sample (the drug type) is because the amount of CBD in each trich head was so little the researchers could not (or did not) quantify it as nanograms per trich head like they did with THC. AFAIK there is no data on THC for the hemp plants for the same reason above, the amount of THC was so low that the researchers could not (or did not) report it as nanogram per trich head.

 

[sm0k4]

We all know the degradation of a cannabis plant over years of taking clippings is very minuscule if anything based on human observation. People have been doing perpetual cutting grows for decades with no noticeable losses of quality and yield.

Does it degrade over time? Maybe. Do we care as growers since it will most likely not degrade enough by the time we are done growing it?

Unless you kill or maim your plant beyond repair, its DNA structure will outlive you. I just believe this because it is easier and I have better things to study.

This got brought up with someone I met through my girlfriend. He had the misconception that cuttings got worse every generation if not from the original seeded mother. I said ok and left it at that. This point is not worth arguing about because the research will never be conclusive. By the time the researcher sees significant changes, the plant will have died from something or he would die from old age.

 

[Microbeman]

We all know the degradation of a cannabis plant over years of taking clippings is very minuscule if anything based on human observation.

Foundation? Citations? Observations? or are you Yoda? :>)

 

[sm0k4]

Foundation? Citations? Observations? or are you Yoda? :>)

I gave my reason. Lack of interest and have not heard otherwise from people that have done it for many years. Unless you are calling them liars. Its better for me to just believe actual results than try to find some out-dated or inaccurate research paper that shows otherwise.

Wasting time in this is pointless because DNA don't change unless you actually do something to change it.

If anything the plant will learn to adapt to your space better over the years.

 

[GET MO]

I took a seed and planted it the year before last up in the hills about 40 degrees north in foothills, rough weather n stuff. then I took a cut before flower and kept it alive indoors, clone of clone of clone.... then ran it outdoors in the valley, hot hot year. seems like this would make the clone tuffer, and I think it has, still produces the same dope flowers but it seems like it has improved in vigour..

 

[Cannabologist]

Microbeman:

If you observed gradual degredation over a number of years of a line of plant which was sourced from cuttings of cuttings of cuttings... but other lines were not so effected in the same growing environment, what would you attribute this to? (informally)

- There could be a number of factors to look at. First, we have to think about what we mean by “gradual degradation”. Does that mean the plants just don’t seem to grow as fast, or as large? Or perhaps yield as much, or seem as potent? What this really entails is diagnosing the problem (I know you further describe the problem in subsequent posts).

- If the problem has happened or is happening more than once, why would you think that you are the rare person to get all these genetically damaged strains (rather than the problem lying with the environment)?
- And why would the problem not inherently lie with the mother, as opposed to simply the clones, if the issue was an inherited genetic malformation?

- If exposure to a chemical was the reason for chromosomal damage, why were all your plants not affected? Why would exposure and damage by some unknown mutagen be only with some clones and not with other (all) plants you are growing?

- If these were from clones other sources, why would these sources have such exposure (and why would you keep going back to them)? Surely they would have noticed that their entire grows are being affected by some mutagen, or that they are growing, literally, retarded plants :-D

Something to think about; In any given population, certain individuals (cultivars) Pathogen infected crops of multiple cultivars that would have a particular strain that bore no pathogens; these individuals were resistant.
Also, larger plants are much more resistant to pathogens than smaller plants or cuttings; you may not notice a small infection on a large plant or in larger crops that happens to spread to very susceptible cuttings, which then are stunted by stress from pathogens.
My next steps would be to ascertain when the problem started happening.

Did you look over the information I posted earlier where several species of plants are used to study chromosomal damage from chemicals? I thought this indicated that such damage is possible in plants.

- Yes, I read it. I don’t think you will have a problem getting anyone to believe you when you say that known mutagens will cause chromosomal damage or alterations to the genetic structure of organisms.
- But plants and animals alike do not readily encounter these mutagens in nature, so why would there be suspected chromosomal damage from a mutagen with any of your clone lines?

- Remember too that these chemicals were not simply applied to growing organisms, but that the tissues to be studied are typically removed and exposed to the mutagen in question and then analyzed.

If so, logically, if I take a cutting from a plant which has suffered such damage, the plant which grows from this cutting will be similarly effected....no?

- Generally speaking, a plant with damaged chromosomes will simply die and you would not be able to make cuttings from them. Such a plant, if started from seed, will often simply die within the seedling stage or not germinate at all.

-If you start many seed crops, you may see such random mutation(s) in the malformation and death of particular seedlings (or non germination). If you inbreed your plants over time too much you may see this happen more often (lack of potency/vigor, increased disease, lack of germination or malformed individuals, etc… ie. why you don’t screw your sis and then screw the kid you had with her and have another kid… badddd).

- I am not saying this happens all the time with seeds that don’t germinate, or seedlings that show problems (you could have a fungal issue for example with seeds that fail to germinate), only that this is one of many issues that could arise, but if it does, you would generally see this issue in the earliest stages of life, not later on when trying to clone the plant.

- If it was a (genetic) problem you did not see (no outward symptoms of malformation in the seedling/vegetative stages) that was not so severe that the individual could survive past the seedling/vegetative stage, then you would notice the problems (ie. lack of potency/vigor) in the mother plant first and foremost (and cuttings you made of her to flower), not simply with the clone lines and subsequent clone lines upon clones, etc.
- If a damaged plant could survive and make viable cuttings then those cuttings will be just as the mother. So if there is a problem genetically with the clones, look to the mom first, not to a mutagen.
- If you took a callus and in culture applied damaging mutagens, then tried to grow your clone, I am sure it will not work, and you will have a mutated blob of dying/dead Cannabis (or whatever) cells in your culture, unless you are using some specific technique with a specific goal.

There are several ways which scientific dialogue can take place. One of the bases of many theories arises from hypothetical discussion, often through exchange of letters between parties. You engaged me in dialogue or so I presumed, raising a very good question, to which I replied with the above. I do hope that you plan on replying at some point.

- Actually, its good you ask this; I will reply in time, but it may take time, I like to observe and gather as much information as I can before making a response, and this is not an area I am an expert in, so I want to be careful to give the most accurate information as opposed to just what I (think I) know from when I had learned it.

You will note upon reading the thread that I have posted links to articles supporting both chromosomal degradation and race (cultigen) improvement through successive rooted cuttings (clones). I also posted my own experience as far as informal observation can take one.

- To me your experience and the links you posted are two separate things.

- Again, I don’t think you’ll find anyone who will argue at length against the fact that there are techniques and chemicals that can be used to alter genes. Scientists have used such techniques to first study chromosomes and then alter the genetic structure as we see fit (ie. GM crops).

-One issue I think you are forgetting is that in genetically altering a clone for improvement, you want to start out with as few cells as possible, and then once the alterations wanted are done, let the cells grow from there.

- In regards to the callus, the part of the plant the scientist has chosen to use as a basis for working with/cloning (as opposed to a cutting), it is important to remember that what the scientist is working is pretty much a large blob of cells in a Petri dish, not a whole organism. This makes the sample highly susceptible to contamination and it must be kept very sterile, unlike a whole organism which has barriers to such contamination.

- I’m not saying scientists don’t work with fully grown organisms, but we have to remember that genetic alterations done on animal systems is quite different from plant systems. One factor to consider is that plants have rigid, immobile tissues, and are just different from animals in how genes therapies can work. You want to have as few totipotent plant cells as possible (but still enough cells to maintain a culture) to target with your gene therapy, so when the altered plant cells start to divide, the whole organism will now be affected and grow with your new genes.

- It’s not like you can inject stem cells into the bone marrow of a plant and have the whole organism take up the genes, plants don’t have bone marrow, and a plant cell that has genes altered will itself be affected, and all the cells that divide from it will be affected (and remember my example here is also quite different from using viral or entirely chemical vectors, it is the cured HIV scenario where they essentially wiped out the person’s immune system with chemo and radiation, hence he had no cells to start, and then new cells with the new genes start to divide and replace what isn’t there).
- This is why in such experiments as you posted , if you want to study the effects on the whole plant, you have to inundate it with your mutagenic chemical as a gas, or otherwise spray the whole plant with the stuff, which could be hazardous to human health. Otherwise a specific part is taken from the plant to be studied, and the mutagen is applied.

- Also there is difference between using chemicals to alter and study chromosomal structure, and discover whether the chemical has mutagenic properties, what they are, how bad, etc., and using a targeted gene therapy to alter a genetic code for an expected result (or to study the result of the targeted change and it’s effects on the organism).

-TBO I am not a geneticist, my background is ecology and I tend to work in the field, so having someone who is up to date and familiar with current techniques and practices would be good to have.
-This side of genetics is not really my interest (genetic modification), I slightly abhor GM practices except strictly for study purposes in tightly controlled conditions or when there is the needed exception to the rule. Artificial selection has worked for humans for thousands and thousands of years and there is no reason to think it won’t for thousands more.

- I think as far as clones of clones are concerned, and as far as I am aware, clones are not going to spontaneously change their genetic code and start growing differently somehow from the mother unless they happened to encounter some strong mutagen or a virus.

- If a virus, why would it not affect the whole crop (ah, why you think it is not, since it only seems to affect certain clones, not the mother, eh?)

- Perhaps you have some sort of mosaicism going on.. I highly doubt it, but in terms of genetic malformation, this could be a possibility.

the varying measurements of CBD and THC perhaps could be attributed to light manipulation and un-natural vegetative extension....?? Could it then follow that this sort of manipulation could potentially cause chromosomal mutation?

- I don’t think such would cause chromosomal mutation; most environmental factors (temperature change, water level, etc) simply do not cause mutations in the genome to occur as you suggest. Strong UV light can act as a mutagen, or again mutagenic chemicals as mentioned, but to me if such was to occur, the mutations will simply kill the plant.
-In regards to your question overall I would ponder more about epigenetic changes than chromosomal damage. But something like light manipulation or intensity of light (of non-UV light, like red or blue light), is not going to cause chromosomal damage IMO.

- If such were the case, say in an experiment you inundated a part of a plant with intense red light to study the effects, you may find chromosomal aberrations or breakages. This could very well be possible (that the intense light will damage tissues, cells, chromosomes, etc.- we’ve seen what happens with light bleaching) but these effects will be local and confined to the area affected; the rest of the plant will grow as normal without any chromosomal damage. Does that make sense?

- TBO, I haven’t kept up to date much with current genetics knowledge in a long time, so anything I say may be incorrect. But it should be fairly correct.

vegetated cuttings which are stressed in some manner (eg. chemically as in the method I posted earlier in the thread)

- I think we know the result of exposing tissues and DNA to dangerous mutagens; mutated, dying cells and tissues.
- Obviously, with any given experiment there is a lot of sway in the results, depending on the chemicals and amounts used, the methodology, etc. I certainly think it is possible to use mutagens in a proper fashion to get good results; perhaps you could get some ridiculous mutant that has enormous trichomes, but I think there are better genetic techniques formulated for the insertion of genes into genomes.

As noted previously over a period of approximately 10 years, I noticed some leaf and flower deformities which seemed passed on.

- I would guess that as you grew more experienced with the plant, you started to notice all it’s foibles you did not notice at first. Otherwise there could be some pathogen that keep getting passed on, or a nutrient issue. Something like thrips can be very sneaky, the eggs are laid within the leaves, from which the larva will hatch. This means you could kill all adults and larvae, and still have eggs that will hatch later on and start a new life cycle. But in that meantime, everything appears normal, and your cuttings pest free, yet later you keep encountering problems.

when I get around to cloning myself, whether my clone will have similar deformities.

- Any deformity you already have will always be passed on in a clone; the issue here is whether new deformity can arise (over time) (in general, I think the answer is yes), and how/when/why it arises (in clones from clones of clones of clones due to aging… Perhaps, now we are starting to get into muddy waters… But I would wonder why the mother may or may not be so affected with time as any clones).

I guess the test would be whether I with a disease caused by DNA damage could pass it on to my offspring either through sexual or clonal propagation.

- Sexual gametes are somewhat different from somatic cells in their genetic content and ability to mutate.
- If you have gametes that are damaged you could pass on such a disease to your children.

- If you made clones of yourself with such DNA damage the clones of you will also be damaged (remember we are talking about clones and not cuttings though..).

this may not be very descriptive but the deformities of the leaves consisted mostly of folding or bending of the leaflets at approximately 45 degrees in no particular pattern; the flowers grew small secondary levels with pronounced bracts (I use bracts in the botanical definition not as usually used by cannabis book writers)

Well now I want to see pictures of the phenomena

 

[Cannabologist]

Spurr:

The other reason I would most likely side with MicrobeMan is due to studies on other organisms, most notably upon mycelial cultures of fungi perfecti. It is well known and proven that strain* "senescence" (i.e. genetic senescence) of mycelial cultures is an issue to worry about. That is why a "master culture" of a first generation strain (ex. from a "multi-spore" germination) is kept for long term clonal propagation of said strain; analogous to a mother plant that is a first generation strain of cannabis from a multi-seed germination of a specific cutlivar like NL#5.

- This issue of “genetic senescence” starts to compound the “clone of clone” issue.

- I would first like to question in general how much time is needed before you will notice a reduction in genetic stability? And then, how many “clones of clones” so to speak, before you would notice? 5 cuttings of cuttings? 20? How many years before something starts going “funny” with most cultivars? And why wouldn’t this happen with the mother? Why wouldn’t the mother, as with her cuttings, start to lose genetic stability as she gets old(er)?

Daoboxer:

Do you think that senescence in the way you describe could be something that certain cultivars or strains would succumb to faster/more than others? Or indeed that some would show no sign of it?
We have got a pretty heavyweight split of opinion on this, could it be that no-one is really wrong?

- Yes as previously stated, certain cultivars could be more affected than others.
- It’s not that in this issue that no one is right/wrong, correct/incorrect, but that as like in reality, there is a spectrum, a cline, or gradient, that can be followed.

Headband 707:

Where is all the old great strains that have lasted 20+ years??? DO Tell EVERYONE that has all these fantastic strains that NO ONE else has LOL

- I think Sam has told you he has many, and I have encountered these strains as well. Its not that no one has these cultivars, they are simply not common. For example, many people have the cultivar "Bubblegum". While you can obtain "Bubblegum" from seed original Bubblegum should be from clone only, and it is a cultivar that has existed for well over 20 years.

Headband 707:

Once a plant has gone into it's flowering mode this signals that it is to reproduce then die. I'm not saying it can't be done as I have both cloned flowering plants and revegged flowered plants for a 2nd harvest....I'm saying that it will trigger changes in the plant that are not desirable and the plants will eventually degrade.

- This discussion centers around vegetative mother plants or cuttings which never have gone into flower or have been exposed to a flowering photoperiod. What do you mean “degrade” after revegging? What changes are triggered, and what studies do you have that show this? I know there are studies done "revegging" flowering plants, but I am not aware of what changes, if any, may or will occur in Cannabinoid ratios or levels.

 

[Microbeman]

- If the problem has happened or is happening more than once, why would you think that you are the rare person to get all these genetically damaged strains (rather than the problem lying with the environment)?

“but other lines were not so effected in the same growing environment,” Also the central dispensary where we delivered our produce, reported other growers encountering similar changes in successive cuttings.

And why would the problem not inherently lie with the mother, as opposed to simply the clones

Not using mothers – except for over 5 years prior

If exposure to a chemical was the reason for chromosomal damage, why were all your plants not affected?

Who said this?

Why would exposure and damage by some unknown mutagen be only with some clones and not with other (all) plants you are growing?

I assume you mean some races and not some clones. Because they were not successively vegetated from cuttings for the same duration.

If these were from clones other sources, why would these sources have such exposure (and why would you keep going back to them)? Surely they would have noticed that their entire grows are being affected by some mutagen, or that they are growing, literally, retarded plants :-D

I don’t know exactly what you mean here but as already explained the deviations were mostly visual and did not overly effect the business at hand as also previously outlined. Plus there was no other choice because the race began and ended with me. In retrospect I should have started seeds again; more about that...later.
Who is they?

Generally speaking, a plant with damaged chromosomes will simply die and you would not be able to make cuttings from them.

Are you sure about this? Why then do they bother studying genetic damage in races of plants as in some of the studies posted in this thread?

In regards to your question overall I would ponder more about epigenetic changes than chromosomal damage.

Epigenetic changes are still genetically inherited traits or changes are they not? I’m not well versed in this area.

I would guess that as you grew more experienced with the plant, you started to notice all it’s foibles you did not notice at first. Otherwise there could be some pathogen that keep getting passed on, or a nutrient issue. Something like thrips can be very sneaky, the eggs are laid within the leaves, from which the larva will hatch. This means you could kill all adults and larvae, and still have eggs that will hatch later on and start a new life cycle. But in that meantime, everything appears normal, and your cuttings pest free, yet later you keep encountering problems.

I’m not really that inobservant.

Any deformity you already have will always be passed on in a clone; the issue here is whether new deformity can arise (over time) (in general, I think the answer is yes), and how/when/why it arises (in clones from clones of clones of clones due to aging… Perhaps, now we are starting to get into muddy waters… But I would wonder why the mother may or may not be so affected with time as any clones).

Most congenital deformities in humans are not related to genetics so….not. I think the issue is whether a deformity is passed on through subsequent generations and can possibly deviate.

Well now I want to see pictures of the phenomena

So would I but that ended in 2005 when the federal authorites declared our contract to be ineffective and confiscated everything.

 

[Cannabologist]

Microbeman:

but other lines were not so effected in the same growing environment,” Also the central dispensary where we delivered our produce, reported other growers encountering similar changes in successive cuttings.

- Ok that helps explain some things.

Not using mothers – except for over 5 years prior

- So these are subsequent clones of clones and the original mothers, from the central dispensary, had the moms (which are probably gone).

Who said this?

- No one said it, I was asking a hypothetical question and trying to lay down causes and sources for the issues. Knowing certain clones which were affected were from one central dispensary tells me that they could have exposed the plants to something that is affecting them, or there could be a common pathogen, etc.

I assume you mean some races and not some clones. Because they were not successively vegetated from cuttings for the same duration.

- Well, I mean with some clones(rather, cuttings), but, well I guess I am confused. I’m trying to find out when certain cuttings started suffering damage, and I guess then I should ask did all the cuttings from that ‘generation’ suffer malformations, as all subsequent cuttings of that one strain? Also, how many different strains suffered malformations, and their source (that one and only dispensary I assume?).

I don’t know exactly what you mean here but as already explained the deviations were mostly visual and did not overly effect the business at hand as also previously outlined.

- Well, if they have the moms and cuttings of the moms, and something is going wrong with them at some point, I can’t imagine the dispensary wouldn’t notice.

Plus there was no other choice because the race began and ended with me. In retrospect I should have started seeds again; more about that...later.
Who is they?

- They meaning the dispensary or otherwise the source of cuttings.

Are you sure about this? Why then do they bother studying genetic damage in races of plants as in some of the studies posted in this thread?

- I was saying in general, and I qualified that right after by saying when growing plants from seed is when you will typically see these kinds of malformations, and when they arise, they will result in plants that do not grow and die within the seedling stage, or do not germinate at all.

- Those studies as far as I could tell dealt with applying various chemicals to study the effects on chromosomes, not chromosomal changes from birth or acquired over time.

- Obviously there are many types of chromosomal damages that can occur in any organism over the course of time for various reasons.

Epigenetic changes are still genetically inherited traits or changes are they not? I’m not well versed in this area.

- Don’t worry about not being well versed in this area, no one is yet well versed in epigenetics and the science is still in its infancy.
- I have to be careful, and should go back and do back research, because the word ‘changes/traits’ can make all the difference in an answer.

- The genes for expression are inherited. Environmental changes can alter the expression of genes, and even the alteration of this expression can be passed on and inherited (though you have to have the change first, and then have offspring and pass on those genes). This inherited alteration was not thought to occur, but had been proposed as far back as within the 1940s I believe.

- Could an epigenetic change effect one cutting say in location A and not the mother or another cutting in location B? (Yes it could).

I’m not really that inobservant.

- I’m not saying you aren’t, I’m just trying to troubleshoot the issue.

Most congenital deformities in humans are not related to genetics so….not. I think the issue is whether a deformity is passed on through subsequent generations and can possibly deviate.

- This is getting into unrelated stuff, but your statement about congenital deformity and humans is a little misleading. Around half of all congenital anomalies have unknown causes, and depending on the numbers of percents, which do vary a bit when I briefly looked this up, and may all be inaccurate now because it’s been 10 years based on the sources I was viewing, but between purely genetic and a mix of environmental and genetic causes, a good proportion of cases has some genetic component, which puts saying “most… not related to genetics”, again somewhat misleading. For all I know I’m wrong, and the number of unknowns has gone significantly down, and it is all purely environmental, but I would doubt it.

- A deformity passed on in subsequent generations of cuttings (or seed)? If a plant had a deformity, and you made a cutting of it, and subsequent cuttings of cuttings, those cuttings will all bear the deformity (though, if the change was cause via epigenetic changes, it may be possible to reverse such changes in genome expression). What do you mean possibly deviate?

- Now that it has come up I will keep this issue in mind for informal and formal observation over the course of my lifetime. I trust eventually the issue will be resolved, but not for some time.​

 

[HPS4VEG]

the hemp plant is a perfect example of a fractal. you can cut and cut off of the new clones over and over and the plant will still be the same.

 

[Microbeman]

Microbeman:- Ok that helps explain some things.

- So these are subsequent clones of clones and the original mothers, from the central dispensary, had the moms (which are probably gone).


- No one said it, I was asking a hypothetical question and trying to lay down causes and sources for the issues. Knowing certain clones which were affected were from one central dispensary tells me that they could have exposed the plants to something that is affecting them, or there could be a common pathogen, etc.



- Well, I mean with some clones(rather, cuttings), but, well I guess I am confused. I’m trying to find out when certain cuttings started suffering damage, and I guess then I should ask did all the cuttings from that ‘generation’ suffer malformations, as all subsequent cuttings of that one strain? Also, how many different strains suffered malformations, and their source (that one and only dispensary I assume?).



- Well, if they have the moms and cuttings of the moms, and something is going wrong with them at some point, I can’t imagine the dispensary wouldn’t notice.



- They meaning the dispensary or otherwise the source of cuttings.



- I was saying in general, and I qualified that right after by saying when growing plants from seed is when you will typically see these kinds of malformations, and when they arise, they will result in plants that do not grow and die within the seedling stage, or do not germinate at all.

- Those studies as far as I could tell dealt with applying various chemicals to study the effects on chromosomes, not chromosomal changes from birth or acquired over time.

- Obviously there are many types of chromosomal damages that can occur in any organism over the course of time for various reasons.



- Don’t worry about not being well versed in this area, no one is yet well versed in epigenetics and the science is still in its infancy.
- I have to be careful, and should go back and do back research, because the word ‘changes/traits’ can make all the difference in an answer.

- The genes for expression are inherited. Environmental changes can alter the expression of genes, and even the alteration of this expression can be passed on and inherited (though you have to have the change first, and then have offspring and pass on those genes). This inherited alteration was not thought to occur, but had been proposed as far back as within the 1940s I believe.

- Could an epigenetic change effect one cutting say in location A and not the mother or another cutting in location B? (Yes it could).



- I’m not saying you aren’t, I’m just trying to troubleshoot the issue.

- This is getting into unrelated stuff, but your statement about congenital deformity and humans is a little misleading. Around half of all congenital anomalies have unknown causes, and depending on the numbers of percents, which do vary a bit when I briefly looked this up, and may all be inaccurate now because it’s been 10 years based on the sources I was viewing, but between purely genetic and a mix of environmental and genetic causes, a good proportion of cases has some genetic component, which puts saying “most… not related to genetics”, again somewhat misleading. For all I know I’m wrong, and the number of unknowns has gone significantly down, and it is all purely environmental, but I would doubt it.

- A deformity passed on in subsequent generations of cuttings (or seed)? If a plant had a deformity, and you made a cutting of it, and subsequent cuttings of cuttings, those cuttings will all bear the deformity (though, if the change was cause via epigenetic changes, it may be possible to reverse such changes in genome expression). What do you mean possibly deviate?

- Now that it has come up I will keep this issue in mind for informal and formal observation over the course of my lifetime. I trust eventually the issue will be resolved, but not for some time.​

You wait way too long to reply in order to have a sensicle discussion. You have confused everything. There was no central dispensary which had the mothers. This was my race which was very well known for a number of years (which I developed). If you really wish to know what I stated, go back and read what I actually said. I'm no longer going to contribute to this thread. It is too disjointed.

 

[headband 707]

Stock plant rotaion by Panic Pete (Cannatalk) tip#25

Stock plant rotaion by Panic Pete (Cannatalk) tip#25

GrowPanic Pete​

Plant Stock Rotation

The biggest mistake many growers make is in thinking that the plants they keep and use for cuttings,​

crop and crop again and Stock Plants can be used indefinitely. This is not true! Stock plants, referred

sometimes erroneously in this industry to as Mother Plants, that are maintained properly, cut

properly, and watched closely, will last for several rounds of cuttings. The process of removing the
dominant shoot as a cutting, and the resulting breaking of this dominance in axillary buds through
hormone floods, tend to wear on the genetics of the new plant that forms as the dormant bud ‘breaks’
and starts the new tip. Other than being connected to the same root system, this is a new plant
and there is every possibility that some genetic change has occurred. Some of the most important
advancements in plant varieties has occurred in this fashion from new ‘sports’ found from bud breaks
on older varieties. The more genetically variable the plant is the faster this can occur.
Usually, however, this process results in a weakening of the plant overall in vitality, size, or quality.
To avoid this, plan and change out old stock plants with new stock plants, on a regular basis,
based on the plant in question, after a determined number of harvesting dates.
Always harvest and trim the entire plant to maintain control and cutting size. Always take appropriate
cuttings at the point where the Carbon Nitrogen balance is right, not too green nor too woody.
Use correct pruning techniques on the stock plant: while it is great to have large numbers of cuttings
from one plant, it is more important to have less that are healthy and consistent in size and quality.
This can only occur by looking at the plant and which buds will break on the cut, selecting those,
and then removing the ones that you do not want.​

 

[beta]

^ Needs citation.

 

[DocLeaf]

Clones definitely get "played-out" with age,,, as do mother plants. This is because cannabis is genetically an annual plant.

The strength , vigor and longevity of a clone,, also depends on the inter-node the original clone and following clones where taken from in propagation.. (i.e. strong upper branches make better lineage than lower weaker branches,, in many specimens).. this is related to 'hormonal growth' / natural metabolism.

Hope this helps

...clones of clones of clones,, also inherit any infections, pests, and viral diseases the living material may have picked up along the way.

 

[beta]

@DocLeaf: Do you have any evidence to back up these assertions?

 

[DocLeaf]

@DocLeaf: Do you have any evidence to back up these assertions?

Do you have any existing evidence to suggest otherwise? that is the real question.

senescence in the growing shoots or tips plants is basic botany kid !! (see our galleries if you seek images)

likewise plants are susceptible to viruses and pathogens, every time plant tissue is scared , cut , and damaged during propagation methods. Thus exposing internal plant cells to airborne pathogens and knife borne bacterium, and anything you have up your nose. This is the reason why professional growers use sterilised blades when taking 100s of clones in the garden.

Anyhow,,

Cheese (Skunk #1) is the oldest clone, of a clone of a clone we know of round these parts... (c1988-2011). Today there are healthy clones of Cheese ,, and there are less healthy clones of Cheese. Much depends on how they have been treated since then,, and the way they where cloned originally.

Technique is EVERYTHING !!!