Inbreeding.....the Skill of the Breeder.....

[harvestreaper]

interesting post romanoweed it would for sure be interesting to map feral weed to try to understand the genetic lineages and any visible patterns ,, look at all the plants in the himalayas im sure some are super powerful but weather that means they are consistant or a one off would be hard to tell ,,the point i was trying to make on inbreeding really comes from my understanding of breeding animals its a little different with wild plants when a female could quite possibly bear offspring from 100 males at the same time,, very tricky to map offspting , youd also have to consider all the animals and insects that could induce pollination and there ranges within the same geography, how easy could a bee add fresh unknown dna to a outdoor strain crossed my mind more than once when looking at outdoor plants ,,,,i have a hardtime defining a landrace is it feral ?is it just location bred?? i dont believe anyone knows when any strain was first touched/influenced by human hands i mean noah coulda planted out the himalayas for all we know ,, mankinds history has been deliberatly falcified to suit those in power so we have little to go off when it comes to mans true timeline of anything never mind breeding cannabis im a believer its value and uses in anceint times was the same as today i dont believe humans were part ape few thousand years ago but same as now but the western brotherhoods that cointrol our lives teach us we were subhuman animals until the romans came and made uncivilised tax paying slaves out of us and the message to the people remains the same YOU NEVER HAD IT SO GOOD DONT ROCK THE BOAT IT COULD GET A LOT WORSE and there preachers reiterate that and tell us BE OBEDIANT TO YOUR MASTERS DONT MAKE NO WAVES WHEN YOUR DEAD YOULL GET YOUR REWARD,focus on that and get back to work cowardly donkeys ,, i digress lol my point is because of there proven record of deception i dont trust our current rulers approved version of history so if were using that resource to work out mankinds dealings with cannabis we have no chance , we have to find out/prove to ourselves
that vietnam weed always had a rep but who knows it appears it coulda been thai they smoked under that label and vice verca i think the logic behind wild weed being weak is that some think nature would not require potent cannabis and it would select itself on much simpler charateristics and end up hemp im not so sure,, its said filial degeneration happens when a genepool is isolated /inbred and the genetics will revert to the average of the line which again seems logical but the main flaw in that idea as a guide would be the variables of averages of each genetic line ,, average could range from the most potent weed known to man to hay in diffrent familys lineages or even in the same family etc so if a strain is wild from extremely potent ancenstery i see no reason for it to revert to anything less at all, if a strain is geographiclly relocated then sure the new enviroment will dictate a diffrent selection process but that a diffrent thing alltogether ,,,has there been any recorded evidance of strong ganja strains becoming weaker when left unattended ???ive not heard of it only heard people guess , the oldest people in the area would be a good place to ask about a landrace/strain origins if they dont know probly no body knows

sensitive souls please exuse my enhanced rants
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLSpUlPBKic

 

[romanoweed]

harvestreapere: I know , when you try map children of parents, shure you cant know exact who are parents, especially, that in wild populations rarely there is a place with say 5 plants and just one male. So yes thats probably abit a noisy Tesatesult you get there. But still with intense mapping and also intense MAthemetical tricks you could probably eliminate that noise, an still find Patterns. (ESPECIALLY IF YOU FIND A BATCH WITH ONY ONE MALE IN A BIGGER RADIUS)


Yes and i believe like said also or probably geographical Features snails, hill-boundaries, river-budrot, soil-Features, whatever birdeating, could also give much more data.


The hardest part is for MAthemeticans to process this raw data into a Formula. Like said: if you find one Batch with one male, you can mathematically draw potential-lines further into multimale-batche-data..


Acording not knowing if it was Vietnamese: that strain you see in my link in my last post IS reported to be the most cosmodelic weed multiple times .. And it is reported to been collected Wild, so the source is not iported brickweed.. So , probably it was planted there, but since there is really wild weed in Provinz ha giang vietnam that Looks similar makes me wonder .


Yes i like you try to debunk what People tell about wild weed. Interesting thought that they only speak about the averages, not the phenotypes, we Need more questioning this old "Facts" ! Also you follwo the same idea: if there is one strong phenotype, the children should also become stronger!!! Thats what i wanna Research in my Raw data Project i envision.. Find a Reason, or Formula what makes the plants strong..


But im poor, any Investors?

 

[harvestreaper]

would be nice to see it attepmted like you say maths computers today could make it easier im hopeless at maths myself so over my head so my many mysteries to solve in this life but i for sure want some cosmodelic herb lol

 

[romanoweed]

The cosmodelic herb was just a old 1977 line, nothing different then the myths hover about , been smoked from my lung in 2002. believe it or not,you dont Need to confess to my annecdotes (cause you cant believe in just letters).




I like staying on this questioning-thematic : Its the same when People talk about landraces (atleast my feling tells that) . People all tell Landraces are just imbreed. I dont say no, but i have the Feeling, they dont really know it. It probably came like that when modern breedes found out modern breeding-sciences(mendel) i could imagine, that they just startet to Claim it was done the same way like they did (i just guess)... The funny Thing is, i never hear someone creating this true Gems today wich we once had before this modern breeders. So im asking me: are These modern breeders really able to create LAndraces? I never hear reports of People taking old Thai lines, and considerably improoving them, no? The only improovement today seems to be Balance, but im talking about TRUE GAINING of Traits. Acording the modern Breeders Idea, humans took Hay and made it Gemstone. But what they are showing today is rather that they Balanced the Thai line,
Like say (in a 1-10rating):
before it was : Potency 8 / robustness 8..
Now they made it: potency 10 /robustness 6
They balanced to favorisation(potency is more Need).... They gained but lost in Exchange..


Or do they that:
before it was : Potency 8 / hempy harsch taste 8
Now they made it: Potency 10 /hempy harschTaste 6


You see: im asing myselve if selection HAS to come with a downside. Or if you can gain something good in Exchange for something bad(wich would be TRUE gaining and not just balancing)... Im really unshure and want to know, have no Idea. Cause often you hear: if you select for this(say potncy), then you loose the other wanted(say robustness) Trait. Like you cant win bouth.


I know, i know what someone might say now, you can select for potency and robustness seperatly and then Combine the resulted breeds. But does this work in extreme: can you select for Potency/ for Robustness/for Taste/for beautifull Look/for Resistency/for Yeald/ for anti Anxiety/ for wanted all Traits ever? Can you TRUELY create? OR could it been that the old Tribes just took the one of a Million Wild-phenos.. from then on just preserved it..


For me the best 70 Landraces seem to be the nearest to that, and i wish to hear that we managed to gain this with modern Science!!!! please Show me the most complex Achiefements today, shom me some pics. Vietnamese had even the Yeald... It was like potency 10/robustness10/beauty10/yeald10/antianxiety10/
How do you do that.?


((Breeding with wild hemp thread: https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=133960&page=2 ))

 

[harvestreaper]

i hear you romanoweed while theory have great value for mental exercise or even trying to find our way to truth its often spoken an intertwined with proven truth in the academic comunities ,which can be very misleading for a person tryng to learn so for me your theories are as valid as any other and worth exploring ,,also lots of huge egos in acedemia some will go crazy if you take em out there comfort zone an you see in seconds there no scientist just people that memerise others theories //ideas ego is a great vehicle to push oneself but a true scentist has to have full control of it to see clear as a wise old freind of mine used to say" ego like good drugs a lil put you on a peak too much make an asshole out of you" lol combine that with profit driven organistion controlling the scientist direction and funding leaves us little choice but to try find out for ourselves or accept contaminated elements
i belive you can have it all when it comes to breeding ,,nature shows us that over and over ,perfection for its purpose desighn exxelence ill take natures proven methods and evidence over a manmade theory any day to me its obvuois if we take plants an animals from nature our guide for breeding has to be natutre ,,to try to understand these trade off compromises you only see in mans half baked attempts in breeding not when something is left untouched in its own envirment ,,they say dominant genes show which i belive is true but dominants can become recessives an vice vercca over time ,the purer the genepool the faster this can happen so to me logic would suggest if you simply found as little as 50 potent plants of a wild breeding landrace and relocated those to breed seperately with the assumption dominate genes show, the potency in said indivuals will be dominant so larger percent of there offsping will carry it,, a line created from such specimens that came from the same landrace family would be interesting expriment if one had the resources time and simplist way to tr to atain consistant potency without reinventing the wheel so to speak

 

[romanoweed]

Conclusion:
Yes, using inbreeding TO study breeding bares possibilities to learn. So , its rather good as a Experiment. depends What inbreeding even means, like you said its half baked attempt in breeding, so its not really defindes what it even is. We can call it otherway around a small Science. It PROOVES a SMALL Frame, like per ex. lowering genetic base and same time dominance.. haha It prooves a blurry Picture.
Nature probably would provide a better lecture regarding its blurry Picture, since its not halfbaked breeding, BUT like you said its harder to get Testresults. Im quiet shure we could extract the "noise" from data with mathematics to a reasonable degree.
Im just repeating ..


Imagine: we could take Maeasurements with many Generations, in equal squares over a landscape. We could see per example if high-thc plants Show in a straight line, or probably in waves. That gives us a first Truth: the form. We can acording this form find similar forms in whatever: incoming stream of fresh genetics (outcross-genetics) ....... You can search for Patterns. Later you try to recreate this probably more complex patters wich the mathematicans described as Formula ..........


I agree, we could do studies with inbreeds, and experiments like you said the Isolation of higher than average Plants aswell. But or And we could do that even better if we managae somehow to find out how to lower that Noise in Nature-measurements.


Per example: we can find similarities in Genetic markers, atlest for human Eye its visible whos parent, probably we can determine Father that way. i belive its actually possible, since there is a Company that you can send a sample of your dann, and they tell you how much say: arab or chinese, or english blood is in you in a certain Accuracy.


If we strudy our inbreeding, wich is not a well predictable Scinece, rather a small predictable, then we study a undefined Thing. Wich isnt bad, but if we will find more truth in it is highly questionable, since its Abit undefined.. not completely, but Abit. Its still possible tho, since it gives a certain zoom and could be an analysing tool. Like you said with 50 Plants. The best Thing is to study in apruptely isolated Plants is their dominant or recessive trait thingys. Ance taken out of the true Breders Nature Hands, you can study dominantes and recessive for a couple of open pollinatet Generations. Thats actually not studying inbreding. I cant make sense out of the idea of studying manmade inbreeding other than probably as a other controll-instance. Rather not since its a quiet blurry Science.


Infact your method with isolating 50 Plants, could be , said more exactly: a failsave Way to prove dominance in Plants. If These isolated open polinating(with themselve) Group doesent Show dominance, then there isnt.


Actually we could also get another Analysing Tool trough displacing Plants or Plantroups out of nature in General. Once displaced we can study the isolated Population OR we could Studie the remaining in Nature Plats. We could very selectively take plants away out Nature , to be able to study the remaining plants with less interferance.


Per example take evry males away and just let one stand. The nature would be changed, the Results influenced, BUT if we are lucky there is still a Testresult wich we probably have to convert Mathematically, so it acts more as an ACTUAL natural Testresult...


In short we could take selectively take plants out of nature, acording to what otherwise would be hard to measure(like multiple males interfearing), to then get better Meausurements-Expression


I agree we can take Inbreeding as Study-material, but i think there are even better Study matterials like Natural wild plants, IF we can manage to take out the noise out of Measurements


I just wanted to express the possibilities Abit more. They are basically in Measuring, but measuring the truthest(possibly nature) with the highest Expression (isolated Groups). After that we Need Mathematicans, to create Formulas over testresults(mathematics could aswell help express the bare Measurements more, say trough denoising)

 

[romanoweed]

So dont get me wrong: Inbreeding May produce good results, BUT i cant really make that Statement since Inbreeding is a loose Science. Infact the exact breeding-Decision is made by Stommage, and only guided by Inbreeding-science, Scince sorted out just a couple Options ( recessives , undominant....) , didnt completely predicte it. So, inbreeding CAN do, what it may be. hahah
And a perfect science would predict, to a very high degree, if we would have her.


Its even that bad, that normal inbreeding science cant anwser me: should i better take degenerated Vietnamese-landrace or better wild Vietnamese to reach a: potency 10/ taste 10/ helthyness 10/ yeald 10/ everything 10 -plant. It cant tell me whats the End-Result. Or if it can, anyone please tell me... It can tell me on short therm where to go with a certain small acuracy tho, leafing the danger that i will never reach out to the holy grail

 

[romanoweed]

A last add:
Also outcrossing would allow to study, since it provides a Zoom too. It would Show a certain Spectrum of outcomes (i would prefere small regional wildplant outcrossing since otherw. to many varibles), wich then could be studied. It would be another tool for finding the truth. Its a model-based Kind of learning, in order of gaining clean Measurements. It has Advantages to inbreeding-model-based learnign, since its a more defined act. but in return Needs more natural imput, and doesent make use of so much human creation, so that possible Inspiration (gained out human interaction/inervention ) while studying might be of a lower depth..




Aloah everyone.

 

[harvestreaper]

you said it ,,inbreeding is a tool ,, i guess the main diffrence between natutre an mans breeding is humanity nature dont care if its your only mistake or if you weak or tired you will be culled only the best of the best will survive to breed no slip ups no exeptions ever ,,,so if its potent weed your after ....easier said than done lol you can inbreed linebreed and outcross within one family or by crossing unrelated familys so many combinations but each time you cross you double the combos and the elusive genes your trying to isolate will be even harder to find this is why for me if we talking landrace inbreeding only way to go ,,that way if its there youll pull it out fast and if its not can move on to the next popluation once youve isolated the plants with desired chrateristics to maintain the line would prob require linebreeding outcrossing and inbreeding but intially i would inbreed

 

[romanoweed]

For me its not only a Tool, its a Sciene for short distance, or a Science with alegedly achievements , that was unable untill now to speak of the real achievement: a every-trait-10-Plant. I dont know wich is the better description. And a not so good Science can lead you into a void, compared to where a better science would lead you.


Its like gravitational science: Newton was quiet right, but Einstein was Abit more spot on. Per example a blak hole wouldnt be describable trough Newtons laws. So assume now we could find alternative enrgysource in Blackholes, so with no Einstein, we would probably have tried to find alternative energy somewhere wrong, or just would predict a couple sizes of planets. We would concentrate on differnt calculations. And therefore probably find no alternative Energy in completely overloked black holes. We would have been Walking(been lead) wrong direction


Science leads to truth, to physical achievments, so does modern mendel/inbreeding science and the bunch. Sometimes it still might be better to search a better science, in case the achievements are to low. Yes i can achieve a more balanced thaiweed if i inbreed, FOR SHURE. But my wish is to generate the 70s original LAndraces wich probably had even alot of Variation.. Im not shure with that Variation tho. They had something that modern breeding doesent really predict .. right.


I see, now People go like, 70s Landraces was more selected, and showed more defined traits like their wild ancestors. They Claim Landraces Show a Endresult of inbreeding. But do they relly know? Can they really see what they Claim to see? I mean can they see it clear enough to assure me if inbreed wild plant for looong time, i will suceed in recreating the 70s Landraces? Or is it rather a blurry Picture they see? And rather a Phantasy.


Im open to hear some insight thoughts what some modern breeders see in 70s Landraces! im Hearing, please tell me. Thats my Million Dollar question..!


Cause all i see is modern breedingscience rather a balancing of traits, i never saw reported that BOOST of traits, BUT BOOST IN A WHOLE, meaning boost of every trait. Ok you can boost each trait alone and then Combine, allright, but isnt there a downside? so you tell me then this creates 70s Landraces? Is this called Linebreeding , boosting each trait separatly, later cobyning all These single-Trait-plants?

 

[romanoweed]

I have to add: i love that sketchy way you described how you would gain and even contain 70 landrace-breeds once achieved in yor previous post! harvestreaper well done. more!

 

[Mr. Greengenes]

I'm one of the people who's inbred a number of cannabis strains past F7 so I can speak from experience about what happens.

First, the idea that inbreeding inevitably results in inbreeding depression is just not true. Isolating populations can prevent genetic defects as surely as it can create them. If I inbreed a population that is vigorous and healthy, the result is a large percentage of healthy vigorous individuals. Our notion that inbreeding depression is inevitable comes from zea mays or corn, which is the poster child of inbreeding depression. Corn was bred into the corner like 10,000 years ago. But, is corn done for? No. Thanks to good old selective breeding, corn has quadrupled in yield in the last century.

Modern cannabis has tons more variability than corn. It's nowhere near inbred to the point of losing vigor. Sure, there is a lot of needy 'boutique' genetics as my daughter calls them going around. But, any loss of vigor is because breeders are selecting less vigorous plants, probably while focusing on other traits. I inbred Cherry Bomb at least a dozen generations before releasing it in the early 2000's, and anyone can tell you CB is, in addition to being 'stable', extremely vigorous and hard to stress. All it takes is selecting for more traits each generation instead of just focusing on a few. In fact, this is what really separates novice breeders from advanced in my mind. Experienced breeders can make sweeping changes in few generations by observing and selecting for more traits. It's quantitative.

When I was 8-9 years old, I got heavily involved in breeding fancy guppies so I was always at the library reading everything I could find on genetics. I loved my punnet squares! They actually worked fairly well for certain traits on my guppies, but not much help for my grandmothers beans and tomatoes. Fast forward to my late teens and I'm breeding cannabis. I return to my punnet squares for a while, but give it up when I realize that all the traits I'm selecting for are variably expressed. That means even sorting them is subjective. That science was way to soft for my literal rigid young mind, so I gave up on using my precious punnet squares with cannabis.

So, no use for big breeding words and theory....then what? I think it's clear that the goal is to identify plants that have W.Y.S.I.W.Y.G.* to breed with. People use the term stable, but I'm not comfortable with that word unless it's qualified; “This plant is stable for X traits”. If a plant comes from an inbred line, or IBL it should be relatively stable for the traits it was selected for. Using a male from an IBL is one of the best ways to ensure good male selection. It takes the guess work out of the job. If a plant is from a recent hybridization, it will need to be progeny tested to see if it's WYSIWYG. It's the only way to find out. Some hybrids 'throw' some (or more rarely, all) of their desired traits, others don't.

Also, a word on 'unicorns'. A true outlier in a large (100 or more) seed batch needs to be viewed with a bit of skepticism. If absolutely no other plants share certain traits with the unicorn, it should be suspected of being an accidental pollination from something else. A plant can have very extreme traits, but as long as their shared by others, it is probably not accidental pollination. But, it is also unlikely to have WYSIWYG for those extreme traits. It is a sad fact that, highly select hybrid plants often don't breed true for their extremely expressed traits. By progeny testing a group of ladies that can almost run with the unicorn, the one that 'throws' the most desired traits can be found.

Increased or decreased variation can both be achieved through inbreeding. Both can also be achieved through hybridization. One of the most 'stable' (decreased variation) seed batches I ever made was the result of a double outcross. All depends on the individuals used in selections.

TL;DR Progeny testing is your friend. Two steps forward, one step back. Slow and steady wins the race. It's really not years and years to create something. I've bred a strain through 5 generations in a single year, so....
* What You See Is What You Get

 

[harvestreaper]

@ romanoweed dont know much about newton einsten <einstein looks like a smoker in pics >im not that academically educated my understanding of breeding comes mainly from breeding dogs i know newton explained gravity but everyone already new if you fall off a cliff you hit the deck no one thought you floated so not sure lol but yea his theory is something i guess we applying today in science ,, as far as should you try no one can tell you its an idea and you either head down the road to findout or you dont but id be really interested to see how you get on if you get round to tryng the opinions of 70s weed quality are so varaiable how would you even know if your experiance and result was the same ,im afraid its impossible so you can only breed them to your own satisfaction and understanding and maybe youll be lucky enough to give some to an old head who had the stuff in the 70s and give you the seal of approval ,,my own small experiance of a similar situation was with acapulco gold id not smoked it in the 70s only heard/read stories ,,i was given some weed in amsterdam in the early 80s that was called acapulco gld its was very nice,,later in the mid 80s i was given some again in london it was the same as the stuff id had in amsterdam and that was it,,, in the 2000s i aquired some seeds said to be the old acapulco gold strain kept going in usa when i grew it out one pheno tasted smelt the same as the stuff i had in amsterdam an london does that mean its real?? not at all but thats all i have to go on so it can be tricky to autheticate anything and all that really matters is if its any good and worth preserving ,,the only place i see every trait boosted as you say is in nature ,but is not really boosted its as it should be,once something is taken out of the arena/proving ground of nature its hard to maintain its quality and it drops fast that why i could easily see natutre producing the most potent weed you can see it in captive bred lions after only one or two gens they start looking fucked up ,,,real science and truth are one an the same there cannot be one without the other ,,not sure if your joking about my sketchy post but yea im double sketchy if i get thru the day without causing meself a problem thats a win for me lol

 

[harvestreaper]

great post mr greengenes very informative ,, thanks,, ive not been chucking pollen as long as dog breeding but as your post reiterates to me breeding is breeding and genes is genes everything you sayng makes total sernse to me any male from an ibl will produuce more consistantly than an outcross bred plant/ dog whatever it cant be any other way im fooling with a few diffrent lines at the moment and you gave some good tips there nice one

 

[romanoweed]

no, i wasnt joking harvestreaper. It was written like thoghts rushing trough mind, in the midst of it(sorry english) . somewhere before the final knowledge. Well , might be long road to it still, but the right road. No no, didnt mean it ironic .

 

[romanoweed]

Greengenes: you wanna say with it, that: if you first inbreed for a couple specific Traits , but in later in further Generations select for broader spectrum of traits, this does look for you somehow similar to 70s Landrace creation? Is it that what you ment with it? I also heard similar things from member fuel, Kind of.. first select very precise, exact, with no excuse, but later in further Generations , select rather blurry (sorry english).. . So you actually allow for more excuses in later Generations? And let the broad Mass of wished Traits qualify as your next choosen Parents, and allow; no you rater accept/wish Dynamics in later Generations, right? (hope Fuel he is ok with that copy of Statement).


Or better say it like: there is just SOMETIMES life beyond the laws of breeding science, wich not really interfear with it, but are astonishing, especially for one who just thinks he has to strictly perform the advices. Like that outcrossing leads sometimes to most stabile childs. hmm

 

[Mr. Greengenes]

first select very precise, exact, with no excuse, but later in further Generations , select rather blurry

I get what you mean exactly romanoweed, and yes that is a very good summation. The first selection in making an F1 is critically important. Not only the choice of what 'family' or strain to cross with what, but the individual plants are most important too at this point. Progeny testing is the only way to go in early generations. Later on, at say F3-4 and beyond, selection can , and should be to preserve diversity, more relaxed.

Good friend romanoweed has also suggested to me in a PM that I should get some pix of the 3 way hybrid and 'stable' result, and I'm going to deep dive my hard drive to see what I can come up with. The project I have in mind was a cross of a nice Jack Herer cut with a male of my White Wizard strain. A breeding associate of mine then took a male F1 of 'Jizz' (sorry very un pc name!) and crossed it into a nice Blue Dream cut (probably the Santa Cruz). This double hybrid was not my idea, and frankly I didn't think it would work out. The resulting seed batch (Blizz) showed such a high degree of similarity that it was impossible to choose a best and even progeny testing gave such similar results that there still was no clear choice of best. You learn something every day!

Here's the Jack Herer cut. I still have it, it's about 20 years old now and going strong. It comes from the Bay area around '99-2000.

Here's a White Wizard plant, not the exact one used in the cross. This is probably F6.

Here's a pic of 'Jizz' the F1 cross of JH and WW. It has the same cone shaped cola as it's mom (which doesn't show best in the JH pic above).

Like I said, I don't have the BD cut any more, but I do have pix of the Blizz, just have to dig the drive, watch this spot! Instead, here's a current White Wizard outdoors somewhere in LA.

 

[romanoweed]

Thanx Greenegens, in meantime i place some other bluedream pic, if you still find that bluedr. pic i erase mine:
some bluedream:

I preffere to write Hybrid-breeds like that: ((Jack Herer x White Wizard) x Blue dream) Shure you call them their individual names aswell...

 

[Mr. Greengenes]

((Jack Herer x White Wizard) x Blue dream)

You're right, I'll try to remember to write it that way from now on.

 

[romanoweed]

you can go crazy with it: (((Afghan x Thai) x India) x (((Afgah x Mexico) x (Santa Marta x Durban)) x Michogan)) = to late .. haha


It gets too complicated to read at some Point, but, if you would paint it on paper step by step as tree, you could visualize it again. Cause written like that its 100 percent inpossible to missunderstand.