"Male hermies arent bad"

[CreeperStipule]

To answer his question we would have to know exactly what sex each seed is before germination to quantify any bias derived from the males pollen.

Again if it is a male ie proven Y then it's 50/50 if mated with a stable dioecious female XX. Maybe it's you who needs to learn some shit before running your mouth off? a phenotypic change does not alter DNA nor the genotype, the changes that have happened have been on the X. WTF do you think the dosage compensation is about?
We know how sex is determined!! the presence of the Y chromosome makes it male ffs.
Can agree on things like the Y has accumulated repeats and could lead to it being epigenetically silenced over time. We can get a female to show as male via hormone manipulation it doesn't make it a male, and with your thinking doing so would mean we could see a 50/50 split in the next female generation! yet we don't do we?.
Make your mind up on what we are talking here, it's either X/Y and dioecious or it's X autosomal and X-hemi, which are both female, the 1st X/Y is most def genetic (genotypic sexual determination) or in the latter cases ESD (environmental sexual determination) though there are no males (in the Y sense).. ie these are the labile plants that flip out and aren't stable hence they change expression, why do you think shorty and all the others that have used "males" with pistils have seen an upswing in the amount of females and intersex? ffs.

anyway enjoy the playpen and don't throw all your toys out.

 

[Mudballs2.0]

Maybe it's you who needs to learn some shit before running your mouth off?
you wanna see where i took down a PhD? You ummm...yeah...idk what to do with this much stupid lol.
That didnt help the convo at all...imma block you and just move on

 

[Cerathule]

Again if it is a male ie proven Y then it's 50/50 if mated with a stable dioecious female XX. Maybe it's you who needs to learn some shit before running your mouth off? a phenotypic change does not alter DNA nor the genotype, the changes that have happened have been on the X. WTF do you think the dosage compensation is about?
We know how sex is determined!! the presence of the Y chromosome makes it male ffs.
Can agree on things like the Y has accumulated repeats and could lead to it being epigenetically silenced over time. We can get a female to show as male via hormone manipulation it doesn't make it a male, and with your thinking doing so would mean we could see a 50/50 split in the next female generation! yet we don't do we?.
Make your mind up on what we are talking here, it's either X/Y and dioecious or it's X autosomal and X-hemi, which are both female, the 1st X/Y is most def genetic (genotypic sexual determination) or in the latter cases ESD (environmental sexual determination) though there are no males (in the Y sense)

This is what I'm reading out of the posted studies (+ a review) as well. IIRC they suggest there was a time, once a dozen million years ago, where the species genepool got wrecked by something (a virus maybe, etc) in its original habitate in western asia. Which then causes the instability giving rise to the exceptions of the normal XX/XY sex determinism.

 

[Thcvhunter]

Again if it is a male ie proven Y then it's 50/50 if mated with a stable dioecious female XX. Maybe it's you who needs to learn some shit before running your mouth off? a phenotypic change does not alter DNA nor the genotype, the changes that have happened have been on the X. WTF do you think the dosage compensation is about?
We know how sex is determined!! the presence of the Y chromosome makes it male ffs.
Can agree on things like the Y has accumulated repeats and could lead to it being epigenetically silenced over time. We can get a female to show as male via hormone manipulation it doesn't make it a male, and with your thinking doing so would mean we could see a 50/50 split in the next female generation! yet we don't do we?.
Make your mind up on what we are talking here, it's either X/Y and dioecious or it's X autosomal and X-hemi, which are both female, the 1st X/Y is most def genetic (genotypic sexual determination) or in the latter cases ESD (environmental sexual determination) though there are no males (in the Y sense).. ie these are the labile plants that flip out and aren't stable hence they change expression, why do you think shorty and all the others that have used "males" with pistils have seen an upswing in the amount of females and intersex? ffs.

anyway enjoy the playpen and don't throw all your toys out.

Um, actually, theres a peer reviewed journal on NCBI done by a PhD that shows cannabis may not even be XX, but may only be XY with varying levels of Y-suppressing hormones.

As for your "we already know the sex," how do you explain how seedlings choose their sex based on environment, or how a plant can express as one sex, then change its sex later in life.

 

[CreeperStipule]

Um, actually, theres a peer reviewed journal on NCBI done by a PhD that shows cannabis may not even be XX, but may only be XY with varying levels of Y-suppressing hormones.

As for your "we already know the sex," how do you explain how seedlings choose their sex based on environment, or how a plant can express as one sex, then change its sex later in life.

They chose their sex hahaha fkinell..... Seriously it's like you've not read where I say intersex is swayed by environment but it's sex stays the same... Hey just increase the heat and you'll get all females from a XY lot... Some of you are either ignorant or plain thick.

 

[Cerathule]

Um, actually, theres a peer reviewed journal on NCBI done by a PhD that shows cannabis may not even be XX

Do you perhaps remember the name of the work?

 

[Mudballs2.0]

I wonder where nanners on feminized seeds get their coding from

 

[Cerathule]

I wonder where nanners on feminized seeds get their coding from

 

[YellowCanaryConsulting]

I like you...crazy smart.
If i may
Hermie must be somatic...hear me out. If all plants are hermies by dent of species survival, then the intersex trait is not a sex chromosome attribute. It must be somatic? ..no?

Definitions of somatic chromosome. any chromosome that is not a sex chromosome
This is just a gene getting expressed right? .."oh shit we need to survive.flip and polinate asap!" That's autosomal cue.

The only known role that Y chromosomes play is helping develop pollen sacks pollen tubes and pollen granules.

The balance between male and female is like 49/51 not 0/100. Don't listen to anyone who posts pundit squares or references mendel as their qualifications, you're getting that gradeschool miseducation. Borderline hate criminals these days.


Skunkboy, Slimera, show me your nipple-less chests if I'm wrong. Go on everyone, post your tits. You're at least 45% female according to real science.

 

[Mudballs2.0]

I have no idea if you're agreeing with me or not lol but i can do shirts vs. skins i take care of myself.
These are self compatible plants so im not sure the Y chromosome is even necessary for that.
Self incompatible (SI) vs. Self Compatible search results

 

[Thcvhunter]

Do you perhaps remember the name of the work?

I can only remember it was from Hungary
They never banned cannabis, so its been in their culture - and science - since forever. So they have studies that have been going on for decades

 

[Thcvhunter]

They chose their sex hahaha fkinell..... Seriously it's like you've not read where I say intersex is swayed by environment but it's sex stays the same... Hey just increase the heat and you'll get all females from a XY lot... Some of you are either ignorant or plain thick.

Honestly, i dont read what you said.
Ive already read the science, and done the experiments.
In cannabis, sex is phenotypic, not genotypic. So, yes, the plants choose sex. Thats why every experiment to try and determine sex by seed shape fails.

 

[CreeperStipule]

Honestly, i dont read what you said.
Ive already read the science, and done the experiments.
In cannabis, sex is phenotypic, not genotypic. So, yes, the plants choose sex. Thats why every experiment to try and determine sex by seed shape fails

Sex is phenotypic in cannabis hahahaha wtf are you smoking? Pass it on ffs....

Oh wait you're serious? What triggers their response to ermmm make them choose their sex? Hahahahaha

Tomorrow I'll choose a 14 inch girthy cock

And seed shape is determined by the maternal sporophytic and zygotic tissues along with the environment it's what's inside that counts.

 

[Thcvhunter]

Sex is phenotypic in cannabis hahahaha wtf are you smoking? Pass it on ffs....

Oh wait you're serious? What triggers their response to ermmm make them choose their sex? Hahahahaha

Tomorrow I'll choose a 14 inch girthy cock

And seed shape is determined by the maternal sporophytic and zygotic tissues along with the environment it's what's inside that counts.

Environmental factors, even including the ratio of M/F in the 'field'
There are many factors.

And hey, if you dig schwantz, its 2023 - cheers

 

[CreeperStipule]

I can only remember it was from Hungary
They never banned cannabis, so its been in their culture - and science - since forever. So they have studies that have been going on for decades

You sure it wasn't do to with mono hemp? They did a lot of hemp studies, but to think there's no XX when it's proven is just madness.

 

[CreeperStipule]

Environmental factors, even including the ratio of M/F in the 'field'
There are many factors.

And hey, if you dig schwantz, its 2023 - cheers

Exactly GxE = P

 

[CreeperStipule]

Do you perhaps remember the name of the work?

I think it's called bollocks or bullshit.

 

[Piff_cat]

another question is where does the y chromosome come from and how does this effect drug cannabis... monoceious cannabis plants are xx. somewhere in the transitin to diploid the y chromosome appears. its worth mentioning that male plants genome is larger then the females. when labs do early sex testing this is how- they"weigh" the seeds genome and the larger scores are males. cannabis started monoceious just like any plant. in order to change to dioceious there are a few steps in between including gynoceiocy which includes self fertile hermy and female only. at some point the female only provides an advantage over the self fertile hermy and the split is completed.

however its very possible that the more primal or ancestral lines are still in that gynoceious stage. at this stage gender is scored on a scale instead of being black and white. you could make an argument that the bottleneck which created the y chromosome is integral to developing drug cannabis.
if we ask what advantage a female only could provide over a self fertile hermi, it would be increasing survival rates by utlizing secondary metabolites(terpenes/cannabinoids) to protect/deter from the plants enemies- especially fungi, humidity, bacteria, herbivores but also heavy metals, uv etc.

the biggest takeway is that male and female plants are not interchangeable. there is likely a large and important part of cannabis genome which cannot be carried on without both sexes. an interesting case study for this concept is the hokkaido male work by kismet and juno.
using an outlier hokkaido male which was so late to show it was mistaken for a female. this male has been imparting unique terpene profiles accompanined by mentholated red stems./petioles and high sessile trichome(cbc) density. it seems to improve every line it touches. late showing primal males seem to pass on most of their traits in outcrosses and are disproportionately associated with higher phenol count for example all of these mexican death sativas(guerro x michoan) by cornbread mafia.

while we are trying to obtain seedless females for strictly drug use, its likely we are culling away many many desirable traits. the hermi plants are the best at surviving we may not like them but its not a negative trait in their opinion. its also a false equivalency to say hermi male is bad because a female hermi is bad. for all we know the hermi males are throwbacks to the primal monoceious types. feminization/culling all non stable plants could be responsible for the mediocre dessert strains we find ourselves with today.

also i think that selfing a male is a great way to add diversity and explore a line.. by feminizing a male and then pollinating it there will be xx xy and yy. even IF the yy dont work- we still have female progeny to explore. this could be great especially in situations of a seed pop where no femals are found. and if some YY do end up living could open a whole nother can of worms. i had an outback vietnam male which started as male then turned into full female and pollinated itself. the seeds created were of the wild type- tiny, finished outside of the bract and shattered when finished by abcising the wild type carnuckle on the end. the seeds the outback vietnam came from were not wild type so this is clear case of transgressive segregation with a self fertile male.

this pic is from lambchopped mexican death we see an incredible male but is culled for throwing pistils in reveg i wouldnt use this as the sole criteria to cull a great male. there has been no confirmed link between a male throwing pistils and its female progeny throwing bannanas.

 

[Mudballs2.0]

I say we draw and quarter @Redrum92 for bringing this durn topic up in the first place lol

 

[djonkoman]

I remember one paper where it was linked to hops and they seemed to propose XY, X-Hemi and Autosomal/Dosage compensation, but again better if can get the paper

still need to read through the other new posts, but already a reply to this:
I think I know which paper you are eferring to. this one:
Prentout, Djivan, et al. "An efficient RNA-seq-based segregation analysis identifies the sex chromosomes of Cannabis sativa." Genome Research 30.2 (2020): 164-172.'
(btw, just to clarify, I'm not using citations to make my text sound smarter, but because I get acces to papers through a uni, as soon as I visit the page of the paper my access kicks in, and changes the url to include some identifying information that I want to avoid posting here. so citation form it is. unfortunatly the browser plugin handling my access is bugging out a bit lately so often the page won't load)
when I first read it I was a bit confused by the x-hemizygous stuff too, but you need to read well how they define the words they use. which is why you sometimes really need to read the introduction/materials&methods sections to really get what they're talking about.

in this case, what they referred to with x hemizygous is genes associated with the sex expression, located on the x chromosome in the male father plant they used in their experiments, without a counterpart on the y.

those genes associated with sex expression also includes autosomal genes, because the way they find these is through rna-seq.
rna is genes currently being expressed/in use. so, if you take a sample from a male flower and from a female flower, then compare rna data between both, it will show a bunch of genes that have higher/lower expression in one sex vs. the other. doesn't mean all those genes are the cause of the sex expression, they can also be genes downstream from the trigger, so that's why it also includes plenty autosomal genes.

the dosage compensation they actually use as an argument for that the sex system must be relatively old. if a sex chromosome would evolve in a species that previously didn't have it, it would start out with minimal/no dosage compensation, so, there being quiet significant dosage compensation points to some time since the sex chromosome first came to be.

edit: managed to open the paper again, here is the explanation in the paper:

Figure 1.
Experimental design and bioinformatic pipeline to identify sex-linked genes. (A,B) The SEX-DETector analysis relies on obtaining genotyping data from a cross (parents + F1 progeny). (C) SEX-DETector infers the segregation type based on how alleles are transmitted from parents to offspring. Three segregation types are included: autosomal (alleles of the parents are transmitted to the progeny the same way in both sexes, in a Mendelian way), XY (one allele of the father—the Y allele—is transmitted exclusively to sons), X-hemizygous (the single allele of the father is transmitted exclusively to daughters; the sons get one allele from the mother only). See Methods for more information. C. sativa male and female plants pencil illustration by annarepp/Shutterstock.com.

edit:
ok, for the rest of the discussion... I think we're gatting a bit too far into thinking purposes/goals/why's, too much causation too little correlation. safer to stick with a bit more mechanical thinking I think.

so for the transposon thing, I think it's good to consider what transposons are. they're not a virus, they're just genetic elements, and the theory is they could be remnants of a virus, but in considering what they are now and what they do it doesn't matter a whole lot where they came from.

transposons are just bits of dna that can jump around and insert into other places. some need some help to jump, others are coding for everything they need to jump around themselves.
plants generally have plenty of transposons through their whole code. if those would all just be freely jumping around all the time that would be pretty harmfull, since a transposon inserting itself into a gene will break it, i.e. this is one way mutations happen.
so there are ways by which the transposons are suppressed from jumping around and causing havoc.

since the y chromosome is special in never having a similar partner it could recombine with, a tendency of Y chromosomes is to accumulate junk, mutated genes, transposon sequences, repeats etc.
and a marker that was previously found to be usefull to identify male cannabis plants was found to 'recognise'/target a transposon sequence.

and about the 50/50 xx/xy ratio.... well, it's a bit beyondd basic biology, but the fun thing about biology is that if you dive deep, exceptions to a lot of the rules you learned in basic biology start to appear. it's a beautifull chaos, so logical and structured yet so completely chaotic/full of surprises at the same time.
anyway, there's stuff like meiotic drive for example that can create exceptions to the typical mendellian ratios. so the true ratio can be a bit off from 50/50.

about the 'purpose', I think it's good to consider that thew simple 'it's good to outcross' is more nuanced. there are plenty of plant species which mostly produce only selfed seeds, no self-incomptibility mechanisms at all, and they can thrive as a species too. inbreeding depression is more a thing if you're an outbreeding species.
and if you then want to go into a more philosophical deep dive, look up the 'paradox of sex'...


but regarding the all cannabis being X/Y only, no X/X at all... I'm really skeptical. my mind is open, but that would not fit with anything I've read to date. so I'd love to see some references for that claim.

however I do get a clue from the mention it's from hungary. hemp breeders have been kind of obsessed with making varieties with only herms, since you can get better fiber from it (afaik, best fiber is from male plants at their optimum fiber harvest time. but a big problem in mixed male/female fields is that the optimum harvest time for best fiber quality will be a few weeks apart between the males and females. so whatever harvest time you choose, you'll have half your plants with lower quality fiber. having all herm lines makes them develop/mature more uniform, so you can just machine harvest the entire field at once when fiber quality is optimal).
so, the research from that region from some time ago that I've seen come past is more focussed on how to make (fiber hemp genetics) cannabis herm, instead of preventing it to herm. I don't think it tells us all that much about the genetics we work with and the goals we work towards.