is this how you breed quality genetics?
- Thread starter FRIENDinDEED
- Start date
actually folks, approximately 30 families/individuals are recommended to avoid catastrophe on the larger scale, but I thought it best to take one thing at a time
I'm wondering how this number was derived...
This is the second time I've seen it.
I think it was Chimera that mentioned 27 individuals...
I just started reading the thread too.
Sorry if this had already been asked.
i believe if possible you have to keep the (p1's) parents viable in seed form using non-bottlenecked breeding. this is critical. if you properly preserve the parents you can always go back to the point of origin and start over. if this cannot be done then keep lots and lots of the closest thing you can get to the p1's well preserved in seed form.
then you take selected individuals and do fems and or s1's and keep the f1 parent(s) as a clone.
then you run these bottlenecked fems and s1's and if it is grail (for your desires)
you make lots of the fems and s1's off your preserved fem, s1 parent(s). i mean lots. keep them well preserved.
eventually the bottlenecked femx's and sx's go to shit because they are intentionally bottlenecked.
eventually, you go back to your well preserved parents and do another hybrid. run the seeds. select for keeper breeders. do fems and s1's. keep the parents.
if this was done for many of the "lost to never to be seen again" strains they would not have been lost.
the key is to keep the parents viable in seed form. look at all the grail parents of the grail hybrids that are gone. viable seed stock is critical.
then you take selected individuals and do fems and or s1's and keep the f1 parent(s) as a clone.
then you run these bottlenecked fems and s1's and if it is grail (for your desires)
you make lots of the fems and s1's off your preserved fem, s1 parent(s). i mean lots. keep them well preserved.
eventually the bottlenecked femx's and sx's go to shit because they are intentionally bottlenecked.
eventually, you go back to your well preserved parents and do another hybrid. run the seeds. select for keeper breeders. do fems and s1's. keep the parents.
if this was done for many of the "lost to never to be seen again" strains they would not have been lost.
the key is to keep the parents viable in seed form. look at all the grail parents of the grail hybrids that are gone. viable seed stock is critical.
I read somewhere that 30 is the number where you can start to see reliable statisticals, are able to see meaningful ratios that give evidence of what the cross is expressing. A breeder made the comment, I can’t remember who. After I read it I couldn’t remember where I read your post, lol.
all hail (pollen)chuck norris
blessss
blessss
25-30 is an often used number in the realm of mathematical statistics based on well, the maths.
it will pop up over and over again,, here are 2 examples from bos and caligari. "the number
of non-segregating bulks should amount to at least 25."
"To reduce the probability of random fixation the number of progenies should
be high enough to retain for continued breeding work at least about 25 parental
genotypes."
glad to see you back posting mr. tom.
^ word.
i'm definitely a pollen chucker. compulsively addicted. i got no shame about it either. in fact, if a person can duplicate their results (which a lot of breeders can't) and those results happen to be excellent, and the person that buys those seeds produced by pollen chucking can actually easily get the advertised results (not true on many "breed" strains) and the pollen chucker can reproduce the strain down the road 'cause he kept the parents then there is something to note.
true producing seed stock.
repeatable results down the road.
excellent product from seeds.
^^ not so shabby.
since when should a "superior method" which may in fact not be superior be paramount over actual performance?
^ word.
i'm definitely a pollen chucker. compulsively addicted. i got no shame about it either. in fact, if a person can duplicate their results (which a lot of breeders can't) and those results happen to be excellent, and the person that buys those seeds produced by pollen chucking can actually easily get the advertised results (not true on many "breed" strains) and the pollen chucker can reproduce the strain down the road 'cause he kept the parents then there is something to note.
true producing seed stock.
repeatable results down the road.
excellent product from seeds.
^^ not so shabby.
since when should a "superior method" which may in fact not be superior be paramount over actual performance?
glad to see you back posting mr. tom.
^ word.
i'm definitely a pollen chucker. compulsively addicted. i got no shame about it either. in fact, if a person can duplicate their results (which a lot of breeders can't) and those results happen to be excellent, and the person that buys those seeds produced by pollen chucking can actually easily get the advertised results (not true on many "breed" strains) and the pollen chucker can reproduce the strain down the road 'cause he kept the parents then there is something to note.
true producing seed stock.
repeatable results down the road.
excellent product from seeds.
^^ not so shabby.
since when should a "superior method" which may in fact not be superior be paramount over actual performance?
BULLSHIT BECAUSE IM NOT PAYING FOR WHAT I CAN GET DOWN THE DAMNED ROAD IM PAYING FOR STABILITY ON ARRIVAL OF PURCHASED PRODUCT. IF YOU AINT GOT IT THEN DONT CHARGE ME OR ADVERTISE AS THOUGH YOU DO AND THEN BACK IT ALL UP WITH THE SHITTIEST CUSTOMER SERVICE KNOWN TO MAN. AND THATS AS SHABBY AS IT CAN DAMN WELL GET
imagine you copp an ounce from a dude and its shitty and he tells you to just hold onto it cause it will get better down the road
quite a read....I have been less than happy overall from my seed purchases...takes time to do real breeding...I have had better results chucking pollen than a lot of my purchases...buyer beware I guess....theres only like 7 breeders that have gave me consistant results
now that's the natural order of things, the pollen chuckers SHOULD BE that average guy, at home, nothing else to do, with a couple of flowering plants and some pollen to spare, this should be the rule.
and the shame of it all is that the "buyer beware" is an actual slogan and comes after the fact of purchase
fwiw most, but not all, breeders up to this point in time are just pollen chuckers, they don't make many test crosses using several males from the same line and then make a decision on which male to use based off the results from those test cross's... and most don't keep male clones alive either so they can't reproduce the same seeds over and over again regularly over time... others do. Some use very good lines and can get away with not keeping males... though that is not a strategy I would recommend to someone wishing to take breeding seriously.
polygenic inheritance, quantitative traits...
http://www.wisegeek.org/what-is-a-polygenic-inheritance.htm
http://www.wisegeek.org/what-is-a-polygenic-inheritance.htm
So, once again it all comes down to numbers, trial&error, and long-lasting progressive selection work...
Essentially, yes, there is no real widely available alternative, short cut or aid.
The thing is, what most people fail to understand (and I learned from the good people here
), that the traits which we observe and desire in our cannabis varieties aren't controlled by single genes (especially the good ones, cannabinoid/terpenoid profiles, resin production, special effects etc.) they are polygenic quantitative traits and it takes a whole host of genes all being present and expressed in order to observe the trait in the plant. And when the goal is breeding seeds to posses all of these quantitative genes, having a true breeding individual... one who possess homozygous conditions across all the loci that effect these quantitative traits... becomes necessary in order to have consistent results in a seed line, and it not be a pheno hunt from hell for the grower in order to find a female that has a combination of all the desired traits in one plant... The only way for polygenic inheritance to happen is when the parent is true breeding for those quantitative traits... the problem with numbers is that each locus we select for (which is many for a single quantitative trait) exponentially increases the odds against us finding an individual that breeds true across all the necessary genes, to insure polygenic inheritance and that the quantitative traits pass on to the next generation, making these individual specimen hard to find.
Further adding to the confusion is the fact that many people do just pop a small amount of seeds, make poor selections and still end up creating great work... but the factors involved are often more complex than someone with a passing interest may be able to understand. The reason there are so many successful pollen chuckers out there is because, the genetics they use to start their projects, most of them are all using the same or related genetics which have been found over time and spread via clone (strawberries ?
lol)... specimens which happen to be highly homozygous dominant for these quantitative traits and are perfect examples of polygenic inheritance... making it easy for anyone to whack them together, against themselves or against whatever else and the results come out possessing many of the traits the original cutting was selected for... making, those plants and their offspring easy to use breeding tools and, the odds of finding a true breeding polygenic individual much better... but these individuals that breed true in such a manner are really extreme cases and can't be universally applied to breeding in general... And if you don't start out with one of these special genotypes then you must rely on the numbers and testing.
What you mentioned in the last paragraph is exactly what I was worried about ;( . Would explain A LOT!
I'm still hoping there were some sort of visible 'markers' at least for some of the genes/traits involved... *dreaming*
With the proper equipment, one could at least test for most of the enzymes involved in cannabinoid synthesis. Seems it would be better to test the proteome or transcriptome than the genome for this, even if that doesn't reveal zygosity. Might be even possible with a rudimentary lab setup and only basic manipulation skills given the wherewithal. (Why does it always come down to time, number, or money?)
I'm still hoping there were some sort of visible 'markers' at least for some of the genes/traits involved... *dreaming*
With the proper equipment, one could at least test for most of the enzymes involved in cannabinoid synthesis. Seems it would be better to test the proteome or transcriptome than the genome for this, even if that doesn't reveal zygosity. Might be even possible with a rudimentary lab setup and only basic manipulation skills given the wherewithal. (Why does it always come down to time, number, or money?)
It seems like you know a little bit about a little bit and I had assumed most of my last post would have been somewhat redundant for you, but could help other people reading along... but if you were able to take something from it as well, then nice
you can use the visible phenotype and standard selection methods to obtain your goals though it will be slower process, with larger variation and require some amounts of luck... in terms of expeditiously finding a true breeding individual.
admittedly though, a lot of this stuff is still relatively new to me... so this is still very much a learning process for myself and new things are learned almost daily.
it would seem that... without the aid of molecular biology and other highly sophisticated laboratory environments and methods, the current traditional breeding method where we; rely on data of phenotypic expression across large populations, parallel lines and multiple generations... essentially requires taking 3 steps forward, collecting data, then 2 steps back in order to identify the desirable genotypes within certain individuals. So it becomes very unfeasible for most to do proper work (plant number limitations aside), so many either put out substandard product or they use the same genotypes as everyone else.
I just finished watching this video... very insightful and very helpful. it tickles my brain and makes me want to go back to school. He talks about and shows how gene sequencing and marker assisted selection by way of various molecular methods, can actually identify linked genes then using the sequencing/mapping to select plants which contain the marker gene that is known to be linked to the desirable trait... then use proven breeding methods to cross and work the lines toward homozygosity (ideally using gene marker techs each step of the way) and notice that even with all these high tech advantages he still mentions HUGE populations
.... but obviously this kind of stuff goes way way way beyond the scope of probably 99.99999999% of people interested in playing with cannabis genetics. but IMO the only way to separate the good from the bad, is to know right from wrong... so education helps no matter what, knowledge is power, if nothing else maybe more people can learn how these guys should be doing it, then customers can ask the pertinent questions to find out if the dude they are potentially buying from is doing it correctly or not... which in the long run can only help everyone involved with the plant.
lots of juicy info to chew on in here, not that I completely understand it all, especially in regards to the molecular laboratory techniques but a lot of it makes very good sense indeed.
Plant breeding using genotypic markers, marker assisted selection
[YOUTUBEIF]9fSRav3kpRw[/YOUTUBEIF]
Peace
