"Male hermies arent bad"

[Crazy Chester]

Self incompatible (SI) vs. Self Compatible search results

Self-incompatibility - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Further reading

View attachment 18815373
Best picture in existence of a male flower WITH female stigma...this is textbook crazy biology discussed in links i spammed..according to what is accepted, this should not be able to produce a viable zygote (recombination) without a fem chromosome.

Such a cool photo! I've never seen that one before - mine was different because the female flowers it produced at the end were definitely all female. Likewise, the male flowers it produced were completely male.

 

[CreeperStipule]

not to add confusion, though it will
one aspect of feminized seeds are the occasional appearance of male plants
I've seen them and quite a few other growers have seen them
a simple XY model doesn't fit this data point very well

Round and round we go. They aren't males ffs.
Do you think when you reverse a female and it shows balls it's a male? If not then why would you think that's a male?

 

[Crazy Chester]

not to add confusion, though it will
one aspect of feminized seeds are the occasional appearance of male plants
I've seen them and quite a few other growers have seen them
a simple XY model doesn't fit this data point very well

I've seen it as well. I made some seeds with one - still got 'em - they are very old and have not germinated, but I think they may do so in tissue culture perhaps. When cracked open, the seeds have embryos that look like any other seed - so, I'm pretty sure they're not sterile seeds. It was a bad-ass male too - perhaps the most vigorous plant I've ever grown - he spewed pollen like it was snow in a blizzard! And - dammit - I tried to keep him around, but lost him. He came out of a pack of Jojorizo Trainwreck S1s - one male and the rest were nearly identical females.

 

[Mudballs2.0]

Such a cool photo! I've never seen that one before - mine was different because the female flowers it produced at the end were definitely all female. Likewise, the male flowers it produced were completely male.

It's a Florida Strawberries male clone sitting in my male shack as we speak

 

[Thcvhunter]

Over at breedbay if you search my name youll see me play around with trifoliates. The interesting take away from that would be the amount of trifoliates i saw in the amount of seeds i popped. That's where the rabit hole of aneuploidy started...it's just absolutely bonkers and bottomless.
Teachers already went in the deep end and we're just watching the new ones as they get in the water so nobody drowns.

Very cool, just opened a few windows to explore aneuploidy

I have a couple plants now that have whorled phylotaxy for a couole nodes as i put em in darkness fir a day ir two to help with sexing, then went back to 24hr light.
So, from the base, a few nodes normal, then a couole nodes of 3 branches, then back to normal nodes.

 

[igrowone]

View attachment 18815402

Round and round we go. They aren't males ffs.
Do you think when you reverse a female and it shows balls it's a male? If not then why would you think that's a male?

because they expressed as males with pollen sacs and no pistils
that is how we normally judge our plants
so were they 'true' males? maybe, maybe not
chester's experience is one I've seen from other growers
I can't explain it, but it seems to happen often enough

 

[CreeperStipule]

Over at breedbay if you search my name youll see me play around with trifoliates. The interesting take away from that would be the amount of trifoliates i saw in the amount of seeds i popped. That's where the rabit hole of aneuploidy started...it's just absolutely bonkers and bottomless.
Teachers already went in the deep end and we're just watching the new ones as they get in the water so nobody drowns.

@GMT one for you here.

 

[CreeperStipule]

because they expressed as males with pollen sacs and no pistils
that is how we normally judge our plants
so were they 'true' males? maybe, maybe not
chester's experience is one I've seen from other growers
I can't explain it, but it seems to happen often enough

They expressed so must be hmmmmmm, I have some beans to sell you.

 

[Thcvhunter]

View attachment 18815402

Round and round we go. They aren't males ffs.
Do you think when you reverse a female and it shows balls it's a male? If not then why would you think that's a male?

Lol, you remind me of MrSoul. He knew nothing of Feminizing. Then a buddy shows him how to do it, and a couple months later does keynotes at events saying that its impossible for fem seeds to produce a male.
For your inability to understand all this, what if cannabis does have M/F. What if its all just what it is, with varying levels of hormone-suppresants? What if when labs do sex testing, they are applying a previous preconception to the plant? Maybe thats why sex tests aren't 100% accurate

Honestly, your arrogance combined with arrogance and trolling is very... interesting

 

[CreeperStipule]

Lol, you remind me of MrSoul. He knew nothing of Feminizing. Then a buddy shows him how to do it, and a couple months later does keynotes at events saying that its impossible for fem seeds to produce a male.
For your inability to understand all this, what if cannabis does have M/F. What if its all just what it is, with varying levels of hormone-suppresants? What if when labs do sex testing, they are applying a previous preconception to the plant? Maybe thats why sex tests aren't 100% accurate

Honestly, your arrogance combined with arrogance and trolling is very... interesting

Trolling? Grow up ffs. How would a Y chromosome magically appear?

 

[CreeperStipule]

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:

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.

A good reply, thks. You may find this paper of interest, they class herms and mono as females XX.
They get about 45/55 m/f ratio from 8000 odd plants so not mendelian 50/50

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/365023748_High-throughput_methods_to_identify_male_Cannabis_sativa_using_various_genotyping_methods

I did have another reply but it went, so will reply again or edit this, but since I don't want to "troll" will leave the discussion.

Also from the paper you ref I read they used 6 males XY and 6 females XX and the Purple Kush as a XX ref? and not just the X on XY but may need to read it again

 

[Crazy Chester]

MrSoul. He knew nothing of Feminizing. Then a buddy shows him how to do it, and a couple months later does keynotes at events saying that its impossible for fem seeds to produce a male.

 

[Deleted user 97766655]

It's a Florida Strawberries male clone sitting in my male shack as we speak
View attachment 18815420 View attachment 18815421

You must be around 30* latitude huh. Must flower for 12+ weeks or not sure how flower time and latitude correlated but longer flowering = lower latitude but could find sweet in Florida or South Texas buy me a 100 acre farm got tractor and drill ready hehe. Great pics and male like big bull with all the heifers.

 

[Mudballs2.0]

You must be around 30* latitude huh. Must flower for 12+ weeks or not sure how flower time and latitude correlated but longer flowering = lower latitude but could find sweet in Florida or South Texas buy me a 100 acre farm got tractor and drill ready hehe. Great pics and male like big bull with all the heifers.

males autoflower friend

 

[Deleted user 97766655]

 

[Mudballs2.0]

I got a question? I have never done this but had my head hurts. Great info! My question is about grafting and some of the mechanisms involved for have something in back of my mind and maybe someone is picking up what I am thinking

You dont mean...graft a male onto a female...that's next level shit lol idk what that would do.
Edit, flowering system of short day plants are local. I dont think it would affect whole plant

 

[Deleted user 97766655]

males autoflower friend

 

[Deleted user 97766655]

You dont mean...graft a male onto a female...that's next level shit lol idk what that would do

 

[Mudballs2.0]

Haha I am so hard to understand meant your ladies or do they flower right away since 13.5 -14 hrs max so tropicals have more of chance to not flower from clone? Not important just side note but yea male ready to go all Marvin Gay on them hehe. Sexual Healing song if out of your genre but was joke.

Flowering is pheno, so it's a matter of when not where. So here in texas my 13.5 just starts earlier

 

[Deleted user 97766655]

Yes that what thinking tried it but had to go finish another project and thought would be neat trick . Maybe do it before either transition to puberty or you know what I mean yea!