is this how you breed quality genetics?
- Thread starter FRIENDinDEED
- Start date
Good, question Tonygreen.
I wonder why there is no debate now. Done debating, right? You need evidence.
I wonder if I must build a car engine, to prove I know that a piston compress air on the up movement and it burns on the down movement?
Do you get the philosophy of that?
And by the way, thanks for your helpful, non-personal, scientific and on-topic contributions:
Thanks for your belittling posts, they are really different from mine, which have included information on which we are speaking.
So in the same rite Infinitesimal hasn't been helpful either, right? Because he is debating?
The people speaking back to us debating (apparently contributing to a wasteful communication is what we are doing, not them) are somehow contributing and staying on topic, but the people you perceive to be wrong aren't?
As to how it will help people,
Probably the people who believe that a plant will get shorter, develop roots differently when planted together, really close, so that maybe an outdoor guerilla grower has a shorter plant that "understands" it has limited rootspace and therefore will grow better with other plants, simply because based on it's histony it know it doesn't have to grow a huge root system because it's small.
Maybe also the hollow stemmed plants are adapted to weird situations like too much water, but you don't wanna screw up your genetics, I wonder if that trait would changing over time by water logging/and or starving of water over generations, that the way it grows in accordance with those changes, while remaining genetically the same. Also maybe at sensescese, the plant branches are able to get weak and snap better, releasing seeds as they weigh down the plant. Who knows, if you snap plants while seeds are being grown, maybe they will change, but apparently we need to build jet engines and clone things to prove these combustion-engines and biological findings exist.
I wonder why there is no debate now. Done debating, right? You need evidence.
I wonder if I must build a car engine, to prove I know that a piston compress air on the up movement and it burns on the down movement?
Do you get the philosophy of that?
And by the way, thanks for your helpful, non-personal, scientific and on-topic contributions:
-For someone making observations and trying to "figure it out" you sure speak in certainties quite often.
-You have shared very little that that is helpful to the average breeder.
-Idk about contempt PWF but your punctuation is horrible and your sentence structure is laborious to read.
-Im sorry devil when one posts 20 times about how he feels about another person in a thread about breeding thats babbling, children do it.
-When you argue for the sake of arguing you are trolling.
-Tom said that first why are you trying to make an fact he stated and you agree with a point of conflict?
-GG stop trolling PNW... you are babbling...
bab·ble (bbl)v. bab·bled, bab·bling, bab·bles
v.intr.1. To utter a meaningless confusion of words or sounds: Babies babble before they can talk.
2. To talk foolishly or idly; chatter: "In 1977 [he] was thought of as crazy because he was babbling about supply side" (Newt Gingrich).
3. To make a continuous low, murmuring sound, as flowing water.
Thanks for your belittling posts, they are really different from mine, which have included information on which we are speaking.
So in the same rite Infinitesimal hasn't been helpful either, right? Because he is debating?
The people speaking back to us debating (apparently contributing to a wasteful communication is what we are doing, not them) are somehow contributing and staying on topic, but the people you perceive to be wrong aren't?
As to how it will help people,
Probably the people who believe that a plant will get shorter, develop roots differently when planted together, really close, so that maybe an outdoor guerilla grower has a shorter plant that "understands" it has limited rootspace and therefore will grow better with other plants, simply because based on it's histony it know it doesn't have to grow a huge root system because it's small.
Maybe also the hollow stemmed plants are adapted to weird situations like too much water, but you don't wanna screw up your genetics, I wonder if that trait would changing over time by water logging/and or starving of water over generations, that the way it grows in accordance with those changes, while remaining genetically the same. Also maybe at sensescese, the plant branches are able to get weak and snap better, releasing seeds as they weigh down the plant. Who knows, if you snap plants while seeds are being grown, maybe they will change, but apparently we need to build jet engines and clone things to prove these combustion-engines and biological findings exist.
Probably, Maybe, Maybe, etc. That isn't very helpful as a technique to breed quality cannabis. I can see people going to school to learn how to breed in a class like that... What do we take away from your info to add to our breeding lines?
Are trying to lean on epigenetics as being more important than being able to pass on genes and traits reliably and consistently?
Im my mind thats why Genetics trumps everything.
Also, your examples seem to be about growing and propagation, how do you breed for those traits and how are they passed on?
If you can't explain that how can we teach the masses anything useful?
Im no expert here, learning as I go, I can honestly say I have gotten nothing I will use in my breeding from any of these epigenetic posts, I have gotten tons of useful info on the dominance, recessive, how traits are passed on and recombined posts.
Are trying to lean on epigenetics as being more important than being able to pass on genes and traits reliably and consistently?
Im my mind thats why Genetics trumps everything.
Also, your examples seem to be about growing and propagation, how do you breed for those traits and how are they passed on?
If you can't explain that how can we teach the masses anything useful?
Im no expert here, learning as I go, I can honestly say I have gotten nothing I will use in my breeding from any of these epigenetic posts, I have gotten tons of useful info on the dominance, recessive, how traits are passed on and recombined posts.
You can't debate someone who is babbling when they have no facts or examples of fact to back up their arguments. Well you can but it is jabberwocky and a way to waste idle time.
But yes please educate all of us mindless fools on your superior breeding technique thats what this thread is for no? But yes please give us a proven technique.... Or else how am I to replicate the results?
But yes please educate all of us mindless fools on your superior breeding technique thats what this thread is for no? But yes please give us a proven technique.... Or else how am I to replicate the results?
B
Bag
find some bud ya love, take seed from said bud , grow plants, if ya love this smoke then take a male from said seedplants and cross to whatever fuckin plants ya like puffing, grow those seeds out , find plants ya like, repeat, I WIN FUCKERS !!! I WIN !!!!!!!
Now that is how ya fuckin breed quality genetics !
Now that is how ya fuckin breed quality genetics !
Tonygreen, you're right we need to make the idea or implication viable in the real world.
No, I find genetics is key. Environment doesn't trump it. In landrace, it may change expression possibly, but the breeding we do....... they lose epigenetic traits because we breed them so much and they disappear after a few productions.
And yes, "maybe" isn't a good thing.
But sure, epigenetic effects are taught in Psychology. People do a drug and their genes and the way entire genomes (the coiled X's and L's) interact, are changed forever, some switch back, others stay like that forever.
Is it taught, in class to a high degree, dealing with plants?...no.
Neither are the abstracts I read nor Einstein's inventions "taught in class" before they were fully understood, and even so...you'd specialize in it, as psychology and biology classes both mention these epigenetic effects.
And like I said, someone is cramping their plants, exposing them to mold and doing all these things. Like the LED people in the beginning building their lights, these people are building something you can't see in the genetic sequence.
What's with making me seem like I am teaching mindless fools?
I never once implied or stated, inclined to agree with and do definitely disagree with it being "a superior breeding technique"
It seems you breed and feel like I am looking down at you as a mindless fool.
You have been saying everyone is babbling and even said
So really, you're going to talk about how we shouldn't talk about how we feel about another person, but you condescendingly call PWF a child?
How does it feel looking what I've collected from what you said and telling people to talk about useful breeding and not talking about people personally? Do you really think you're not being hypocritical?
Or, what if I had an ion thruster here on Earth, I would have a hard time proving it going though space with very very little force, but yet a high speed. Same with ideas, you must understand that showing someone a clone of a sheep, would be proof, but the knowledge and technique were there before.
No, I find genetics is key. Environment doesn't trump it. In landrace, it may change expression possibly, but the breeding we do....... they lose epigenetic traits because we breed them so much and they disappear after a few productions.
And yes, "maybe" isn't a good thing.
But sure, epigenetic effects are taught in Psychology. People do a drug and their genes and the way entire genomes (the coiled X's and L's) interact, are changed forever, some switch back, others stay like that forever.
Is it taught, in class to a high degree, dealing with plants?...no.
Neither are the abstracts I read nor Einstein's inventions "taught in class" before they were fully understood, and even so...you'd specialize in it, as psychology and biology classes both mention these epigenetic effects.
And like I said, someone is cramping their plants, exposing them to mold and doing all these things. Like the LED people in the beginning building their lights, these people are building something you can't see in the genetic sequence.
Wow, don't be too dramatic. Someone a while back in the thread disagreed it had effects, I debated them.
What's with making me seem like I am teaching mindless fools?
I never once implied or stated, inclined to agree with and do definitely disagree with it being "a superior breeding technique"
It seems you breed and feel like I am looking down at you as a mindless fool.
You have been saying everyone is babbling and even said
So really, you're going to talk about how we shouldn't talk about how we feel about another person, but you condescendingly call PWF a child?
How does it feel looking what I've collected from what you said and telling people to talk about useful breeding and not talking about people personally? Do you really think you're not being hypocritical?
Or, what if I had an ion thruster here on Earth, I would have a hard time proving it going though space with very very little force, but yet a high speed. Same with ideas, you must understand that showing someone a clone of a sheep, would be proof, but the knowledge and technique were there before.
what are your criteria for selection and what are the variables involved like gene pool and environment?
what are the numbers the gene pools and environments of the average breeder?
tell me what tech that is extolled here other selling their own or some one else's proven keeper or crossing it to another of the same?
how many are running the numbers being put out?
cultivar performance is relative to environment and selection is relative to cultivar performance
my discussion is no less relative to the average breeder as are 1000 plant selection pools but if fluffing breeders will get you past your hermie blues go for it
This was good the rest was irrelevant to me trying to breed cannabis. Im reppin yer post just for that line really.
You can show me cloned sheep and I would believe it could be a clone, but if I wanted to make my own cloned sheep just looking at one that has been cloned isn't going to help me much.
And sure I can admit I got dragged into the babbling but I'm was cool enough to admit it and try to get back on topic, eh?
Aardwolf
Active member
Hello SamSkunkman.
Good to hear from you,Genotype + Environment = Phenotype is generally used for producing high quality sinsemilla in my experience. When propagating seed I am looking for Superior F1 generations which display multi-environmental stability.
The environment that all seeds are propagated in will nearly always differ from that of the functioning environment, thus the breeder is motivated to produce cultivars which can stand up to multi-environmental differentiation.
There is not much hope for the people that believe they're right, beliefs, much like religions are based on things other than a typical scientific analysis.
I understand what you mean by your last 2 posts. I don't think that many people would care to elaborate about their practices for lack of such an understanding and fear of ridicule.
Tom Hill has been rude to say the least about many people’s practices when not disclosing his merits for his own breeding plans. Typically there are many ways to create/propagate seed, are there not?
The fact that someone uses a particular method/technique in their breeding plan which intern takes away from their initial goal they in particular are trying to breed seems silly to me.
Is this loss of they're goal due to misunderstanding what is needed to advance the particular metabolites in their favour?
Or is it the parent plants?
Or the Environment?
Tonygreen very positive exchange. I will contribute to this thread and not talk about epigenetics so much as we have yet to learn real world results of anything like it, relating to cannabis.
Aaardwolf: I would breed them in different environments and then select for the ones that remain homogenous in their phenotype regardless of the conditions.
Adze: Examine a histone with DNA winding around it, and then look at how methylation effects folding dynamics of DNA and therefore expression of DNA. The changes aren't stored in DNA. They are stored in the way that DNA folds, because the methylation is storing a methyl group on the DNA cytosine and is made the same on new DNA created from it.
This was mentioned in a previous thread by drrico "The Good Doc's notebook."
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=60733
And here is another thread of his notes on his use of 5-azacitidine:
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=54574
Aaardwolf: I would breed them in different environments and then select for the ones that remain homogenous in their phenotype regardless of the conditions.
Adze: Examine a histone with DNA winding around it, and then look at how methylation effects folding dynamics of DNA and therefore expression of DNA. The changes aren't stored in DNA. They are stored in the way that DNA folds, because the methylation is storing a methyl group on the DNA cytosine and is made the same on new DNA created from it.
This was mentioned in a previous thread by drrico "The Good Doc's notebook."
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=60733
And here is another thread of his notes on his use of 5-azacitidine:
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=54574
sam skunkman talks about epi-genetics when he says a drug cultivar will revert back to hemp after a few generations in the wild.
kinda suggests that WE are an epi-genetic factor as well as environment trumping the genes themselves.
if the genes stood on their own then we wouldnt ever need to select.
peace,
pwf
kinda suggests that WE are an epi-genetic factor as well as environment trumping the genes themselves.
if the genes stood on their own then we wouldnt ever need to select.
peace,
pwf
Aardwolf
Active member
I just assume that with a 98% pure variety it would take some serious shit to revert it back anywhere when it is bottlenecked and stable. Where's it going??
With regard to the comparison of plant material in a set of multi-environment yield trials, the term genotype refers to a cultivar (i.e. with material genetically homogeneous, such as pure lines or clones, or heterogeneous, such as open-pollinated populations) rather than to an individual’s genetic make-up. The term environment relates to the set of climatic, soil, biotic (pests and diseases) and management conditions in an individual trial carried out at a given location in one year (in the case of annual crops) or over several years (in the case of perennials). In particular, an environment identifies a given location-year (annuals) or location-crop cycle (perennials) combination in the analysis of trials repeated over time.
http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/y4391e/y4391e04.htm
Hi everyone.
I thought I would contribute some stuff for you to consider.
The mechanisms of inheritance and adaptation are complex indeed. To say they are not fully understood is an understatement at best.
For the classical “gene centered” folks, I would encourage you to look at the material I am linking to, and think about it. Just because the folks flogging environment in this thread have made a sub-optimal presentation of non-genetic inheritance does not mean that there is nothing to it.
For the people on the other side, I would encourage you to gain a fuller understanding of the standard gene-centered breeding that has been so incredibly successful for the last century or so. Most of your comments indicate to me that you are missing out on some really good stuff. Full understanding of the non-genetic parts of inheritance is not possible without it. You can also make more persuasive contributions for the people that have invested the time in understanding the conventional wisdom when it comes to plant breeding.
USEFUL TERMS TO LOOK UP
For gene-centered folks:
*epiallele
*paramutation
*retrotransposon
For the other folks
*heritability
*read some textbooks about genetics
INTERESTING LINKS:
Epigenetic contribution to stress adaptation in plants
Epigenetic mechanisms in plants and their implications in plant breeding
Epigenetics and Plant Breeding
Here is a guy who is doing cutting-edge research on this topic, his publications are listed at the bottom of the page:
Jay B Hollick
Here is his latest (incredibly interesting) paper:
required to maintain repression2 Is a Novel Protein That
Facilitates Locus-Specific Paramutation in Maize
(That is the correct title, even though it looks like I cut the front off. "required to maintain repression2" is the name of a protein.)
Ill will is the enemy of useful discussion.
mofeta
I thought I would contribute some stuff for you to consider.
The mechanisms of inheritance and adaptation are complex indeed. To say they are not fully understood is an understatement at best.
For the classical “gene centered” folks, I would encourage you to look at the material I am linking to, and think about it. Just because the folks flogging environment in this thread have made a sub-optimal presentation of non-genetic inheritance does not mean that there is nothing to it.
For the people on the other side, I would encourage you to gain a fuller understanding of the standard gene-centered breeding that has been so incredibly successful for the last century or so. Most of your comments indicate to me that you are missing out on some really good stuff. Full understanding of the non-genetic parts of inheritance is not possible without it. You can also make more persuasive contributions for the people that have invested the time in understanding the conventional wisdom when it comes to plant breeding.
USEFUL TERMS TO LOOK UP
For gene-centered folks:
*epiallele
*paramutation
*retrotransposon
For the other folks
*heritability
*read some textbooks about genetics
INTERESTING LINKS:
Epigenetic contribution to stress adaptation in plants
Epigenetic mechanisms in plants and their implications in plant breeding
Epigenetics and Plant Breeding
Here is a guy who is doing cutting-edge research on this topic, his publications are listed at the bottom of the page:
Jay B Hollick
Here is his latest (incredibly interesting) paper:
required to maintain repression2 Is a Novel Protein That
Facilitates Locus-Specific Paramutation in Maize
(That is the correct title, even though it looks like I cut the front off. "required to maintain repression2" is the name of a protein.)
Ill will is the enemy of useful discussion.
mofeta
Yes, I know Aardwolf ! Plants can have the same DNA...the whole traits dealing with genetic information and their chromosomes (genotype) a plant could express given it's environment (phenotype) and on top of those singly being a factor for any know behavior or trait, they also affect their environment and therefore the environment will doubly interact with it because it changes it's own environment and....
And the fact we are a sort of an environment in our selecting, therefore we effect the genes or atleast their frequency of expression. The idea that the plant could be choosing us, is not absurd at all. Even though it can't "think", well.... the DNA that made me on this Earth, made my brain that think, so the DNA is thought, the environment is it's director.
And the fact we are a sort of an environment in our selecting, therefore we effect the genes or atleast their frequency of expression. The idea that the plant could be choosing us, is not absurd at all. Even though it can't "think", well.... the DNA that made me on this Earth, made my brain that think, so the DNA is thought, the environment is it's director.
Aardwolf
Active member
Answer me this as no horticultural lecturer has ever been able to elaborate, Francis and Charles Darwin investigated phototropism and discovered; When half a plant/seedling/plantlet is not able to process photosynthate effectively due to shading, the other half of the plant in exposure is able to reposition and manipulate the apical stem and elongate towards the light, How's the plant know to do this?? There is no plant brain....
I like devilgoob think that these magical phenotypes genes are expressing themselves in such a way to seduce us to propagate them, much like when a peacock is showing his tail. The plant is expressing itself so acutely to interact with us more so than others.
I like devilgoob think that these magical phenotypes genes are expressing themselves in such a way to seduce us to propagate them, much like when a peacock is showing his tail. The plant is expressing itself so acutely to interact with us more so than others.
@aardwolf: should be the effect of apical dominance, auxin concentration is highest at terminal shoot tips, hence the shaded area is most likely below the apical shoot -> higher auxin concentration in the non-shaded shoot -> "repositioning" which is the "natural" growth direction for shoots towards light (recognised by the plant via auxin saturation). for more detailed info, dig into a good plant physiology textbook, there you should find all the infos needed
blessss
blessss
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023%2FA%3A1011923222493
Is plant breeding science objective truth or social construction? The case of yield stability
Abstract
This article presents a holistic framework for understanding the science of plant breeding, as an alternative to the common objectivist and constructivist approaches in studies of science. It applies this approach to understanding disagreements about how to deal with yield stability. Two contrasting definitions of yield stability are described,and concomitant differences in the understanding and roles of sustainability and of selection, test, and target environments are explored. Critical questions about plant breeding theory and practice are posed, and answers from the viewpoint of the two contrasting definitions of yield stability are analyzed, based on key publications in the field. Differences in answers to these questions appear to result both from the contingencies of plant breeders' experiences with particular crop varieties and growing environments, and from differences in social and institutional settings – plant breeding science is both objective truth and social construction. The goal of using aholistic framework is to encourage discussion among plant breeders,farmers, social scientists, and others, of the bases for disagreementswithin plant breeding, in order to facilitate plant breeding'scontribution to a more environmentally, economically, and sociallysustainable agriculture.
Is plant breeding science objective truth or social construction? The case of yield stability
Abstract
This article presents a holistic framework for understanding the science of plant breeding, as an alternative to the common objectivist and constructivist approaches in studies of science. It applies this approach to understanding disagreements about how to deal with yield stability. Two contrasting definitions of yield stability are described,and concomitant differences in the understanding and roles of sustainability and of selection, test, and target environments are explored. Critical questions about plant breeding theory and practice are posed, and answers from the viewpoint of the two contrasting definitions of yield stability are analyzed, based on key publications in the field. Differences in answers to these questions appear to result both from the contingencies of plant breeders' experiences with particular crop varieties and growing environments, and from differences in social and institutional settings – plant breeding science is both objective truth and social construction. The goal of using aholistic framework is to encourage discussion among plant breeders,farmers, social scientists, and others, of the bases for disagreementswithin plant breeding, in order to facilitate plant breeding'scontribution to a more environmentally, economically, and sociallysustainable agriculture.
