Genetic Drift (strain degradation?)

[- ezra -]

Thie topic of this thread is: To what extent would genetic drift cause a loss of quality in "classic" strains? I am referring to classic strains IBLs or hybrids such as NL#5/Haze (just an example) some of which were cannabis cup winners over a decade ago. Can we assume these strains are just as good today as they were when they were first released? Are the cup winners of yester-year still elites, or has there been a noticeable loss of quality due to genetic drift?

 

[Guest]

I dunno exactly how much I believe in this, at least as it pertains to herb.. Take Trainwreck for example. its like what, 20 years old?

 

[Haps]

I think of genetic drift in terms of successive seed crops growing weaker due to being grown to far north or indoors. Especially under hps, whick I consider completely inadequete to use for seed production. Is your query only on the age function of long time clone successions?
H

 

[- ezra -]

Is your query only on the age function of long time clone successions?
H

Both really.

Presumably if the mother/father plants are kept in a healthy state under controlled conditions the effects of genetic drift are much less apparent than if the plants are stressed repeatedly or for an extended period of time. Theoretically there is always going to some degree of genetic drift at the mother/father plants accumulate genetic mutations caused by environmental factors.

 

[DocLeaf]

Many breeders preserve generative breedlines in seed form, not clone.

a #5 line stems from a #4 line,
the #4 is then held back for future procreation.

this is why certain established seedlines shift ego (and owners) from time to time...


peace all
dLeaf

 

[Guest]

Good thread here. Thank you ezra.

 

[JimmyEatWorld]

I've heard about yield degradation in clones ...

In OG there was an article (scanned from a magazine if i remember well) written from BOG, doing a OG kush smoke report. There it was saying that the clone does not yields good cause of its age.

But from what i've read over some threads here (can't find them now,bored a bit )this is not a fact. Age does not affect yield etc.

 

[fishing time]

I'm kind of talking out of my ass but I would think that anything repeatedly inbred would become poor in quality and change in character as undesirable and rare recessive traits come out. Like in dog breads which are over bred.

If you try and lock something like good genetics up and keep it the same forever. Luckily people are always crossing different strains and variety's so there's always fresh and diverse genetic possibility.

 

[zamalito]

Inbreeding being a solely counterproductive force is not true at all. The very nature of landrace cannabis is that they are being acclimated to environments which naturally select for the traits they possess. Look at some of the african thai indian mexican and colombian strains that produce herb of the absolute finest quality when grown under the right conditions yet had remained unhybridized for hundreds of years. Even with dogs some breeds had been inbred for thousands of years with little problems due to merciless selection based on health and working ability the problem started when people started breeding for a human designated aesthetic or creating/maintaining breeds starting with a small population/genepool then the problems became much more apparent.

 

[Closet Funk]

Good thread. I agree with Zam. Inbreeding will show mutations and loss of vigor if a small gene pool is used. In the wild plants inbreed naturally, but usually there is a big gene pool. Look at the IBL strains for example. Strains like Deep Chunk and Sour Diesel were both inbred more many generations. The breeders probally pollinated with more males to show more variation to open the gene pool. Then probally crossing plants that had similar traits until the strain was stable. Selection from a larger gene pool I'd say is impotant when inbreeding strains.