Deleted user 97766655
Active member
If Texas is smart they would be able to grow most anything down Corpus Christi or where all kids Spring break at Padre Island area
-
ICMag with help from Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest in November! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!
"Male hermies arent bad"
- Thread starter Redrum92
- Start date
Deleted user 97766655
Active member
Grafting might solve few riddles huh might have to do some pre treatment but plants can take grafting so… what you think? Meant grafting still getting used to software with site sorry
Last edited:
Mudballs2.0
Active member
Ive spit alot of what i think...lets hear some other vibes
Cerathule
Well-known member
Bro, I wonder who came up with that term "trifoliate"? I've first read that at another forum not so long ago and now everyone uses that lol... (which is not correct). I take it you are refering to seedlings starting out with 3 cotyledons? (These also grow more sideshoots but later loose that once alternate-distichous growth sets in...)
These are called "tricotyl" and that is a recessive trait linked to late-blooming and cold weather when the seeds form in the mother.
***
Maybe a link to this thread is warranted, it covers alot of your questions @Ecor1 @Mudballs2.0 and links to a large number of relevant studies.
Heritability of Intersex Traits
(if this beginning seems out of place, it's because it was pulled from another thread to help keep the original thread on topic) In Central America, farmers come across Mango trees that won't produce. Before they cut them down, they'll beat the hell out of the trunk with a baseball bat while...
www.icmag.com
Cheers
Mudballs2.0
Active member
Ok well someone had to call it something...im sure they meant well. My journey never saw mention of tricotyl. Just aneuploid, extra branching gene.
I dont see how i can keep calling the above plant a tricotyl and im not typing out whorled phyllo everytime...we're sticking with trifoliate...yes?
Deleted user 97766655
Active member
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
? Not sure what’s your opinion or don’t think it has merit?
Mudballs2.0
Active member
Yeah that was my conjecture...they are always hermies and i think some signaling, whether a simple hormone or actually methylation of dna, telling it "you are a male for now".
You cant remove the hermi trait, ever, only sensitivity to the freakout...so logic states;
Always male and female, both are present , then something is stopping one sex from displaying.
@CreeperStipule really? You're gonna volunteer me like that?
Ok, here we go, sound bites only, I've typed this stuff out in detail in my threads: evolution, 3 plus 3=?, 4+4=?, Bruised Nuts, and God knows how many more.
The term trifoliate was coined by Bushy Old Grower "Bog" who saw them cropping up once in a while. I prefer the term trifoliar, but then I'm British, and we prefer the "ar" sound to the "a" sound. See terms such as asshole v arsehole. Anyway, getting away from the point.
They are not aneuploids, at least I haven't seen anything that would even suggest that.
The presence of either a mutated Lea13 gene, or an additional, intact copy within the same chromosome is the most likely explanation.
However, I also suspect a connection with the causes of fasciation, due to plants with 2,3 and 4 cotyledons being stable, (right the way through flower in many cases). Seedlings starting with 5 on the other hand, will fasciate, always.
As for the sex det stuff, Sam put up a superb paper on X to auto, some time back, maybe 1-2 years. The hemizygous stuff is still mystifying to me, but for there still to be confusion about active Y, I'll leave you banging your head on that wall.
Perhaps regions would be handy.
I work with indicas, mainly of Afghan decent. They are all active Y mechs. I believe X to auto is common in the Thailand region, I have no idea where you'd find this third mech though.
Ok, here we go, sound bites only, I've typed this stuff out in detail in my threads: evolution, 3 plus 3=?, 4+4=?, Bruised Nuts, and God knows how many more.
The term trifoliate was coined by Bushy Old Grower "Bog" who saw them cropping up once in a while. I prefer the term trifoliar, but then I'm British, and we prefer the "ar" sound to the "a" sound. See terms such as asshole v arsehole. Anyway, getting away from the point.
They are not aneuploids, at least I haven't seen anything that would even suggest that.
The presence of either a mutated Lea13 gene, or an additional, intact copy within the same chromosome is the most likely explanation.
However, I also suspect a connection with the causes of fasciation, due to plants with 2,3 and 4 cotyledons being stable, (right the way through flower in many cases). Seedlings starting with 5 on the other hand, will fasciate, always.
As for the sex det stuff, Sam put up a superb paper on X to auto, some time back, maybe 1-2 years. The hemizygous stuff is still mystifying to me, but for there still to be confusion about active Y, I'll leave you banging your head on that wall.
Perhaps regions would be handy.
I work with indicas, mainly of Afghan decent. They are all active Y mechs. I believe X to auto is common in the Thailand region, I have no idea where you'd find this third mech though.
Deleted user 97766655
Active member
Yes that’s the way my I think it happens but now try to prove it.
Mudballs2.0
Active member
Aneuploid karyotypes. Aneuploidy occurs when the number of chromosomes of a particular pair is unbalanced.
So...we can't call them trifoliates eh?! hmmm
how bout we use the actual fucking scientific terminology then that nobody in this fucking thread seems to know a fkn lick about!
they are trisomic aneuploids.
Last edited:
Mudballs2.0
Active member
im not sure how that would happen...some discovery many moons from now will tell us. I'm still leaning towards methylated DNA within the plant. Sometimes plants wont reveg after flowering...that's permanently changed DNA.
caveat: the flowering system is local as i mentioned, so it could come down to what branch was cut for cloning and when that determines if you grabbed unchanged DNA or not.
CreeperStipule
Active member
I think the DNA stays the same in each plants genome but they share epigenetic information via epialleles, so although the graft my change it's expression via DNA methylation (silencing the genes) via sRNA which target the transposons.
It still is what it was.
There's a member into grafting here but think you already know that.
Anyway apologies for posting.
CreeperStipule
Active member
Look you find me arrogant, yet you or igrowone cannot explain where the Y chromosome would come from, you know the very thing that makes a male a male, you seem ignorant to this fact, you don't seem to understand that if something expresses maleness it doesn't make it a male.
They have found these types at a rate of 1 in 500 or such in female XX populations ( this is documented). Why they express I don't know perhaps there's signals so they know there's no males and allocate like this to reproduce?
Anyway last post as really can't be arsed with drama bullshit.
Too arrogant? Tough shit.
Last edited:
Deleted user 97766655
Active member
We know dang well the plant is able to change morphology in major ways depending on stressors and such. I did experiment with clone of a Lao and put some in pots and DWC which everything gets a little wonky. Anyway the plants had some issues but I digress. All females in pots all grew to maturity and flowered for about 20 weeks or so and where done. The DWC didn’t stop. I fed the plant in a solution of about 120 20 120 with balanced micros and such with ammonium nitrate to buffer the solution to keep within a range. This female type kept flowering while I ran a few more experiments on a number of other plants throughout their whole cycles all the while watching this flowering Thai flower not stop and sport new branches ever so often and grow new flowers. I also observed how the morphology of the bracts changed even on each branch and the buds having subtle changes within groups. Some buds within these groups had very frosty buds all the way to some having seeds and no trichomes. I am thinking I have something monoecious but still acting dioecious on other branches or more female and another branch more male.
I finally called it for it got too big in my make shift lab. This was very early in growing experience but I knew something had touched me and I was hooked hehe. Anyway the point is I took cuttings from the females and the stems all grew roots from the cuttings why? (Rhetorical). What mechanism or mechanisms told the cuttings they need to grow roots and why. Maybe I am trying to justify why I think the theory or theories have something that gave a little glimpses of what I may have seen in various forms of what we are talking about. Up real early so might have to erase these rants and go back to sleep 3 am so I can blame it on that. I had to touch base and see what rest of crew was doing. I feel like I am selling water by the river bank. But these discussions are well on point or pointing to something so…
I am probably going to do another experiment since I saved the genetics of this female and also pollinated some of the other branches with a male that I had from same batch of seeds. Not sure what my point was.
Last edited:
Cerathule
Well-known member
How do you know this? You're thinking genes way too mechanistically. E.g. plants do have multiple copies in the autosomal regions which they can use to build anything they want, with the sex chromosomes just act as suppressor (or lack thereof) of the expression of specific genes. The explanation is that perhaps previously, something during Meiosis failed and some chromosome got pushed into the background to form a part of the autosomes...(?) (Maybe someone with more knowledge could chime in here, I faintly remember this but not the precise wording or the reference where it is from.... @djonkoman maybe, please)
Plus, most of what plants create is just a copy, or an altered copy of, the 3 basic plant building blocks, that is roots, shoot axis and leaves. With the shoot axis being divided into a nodal + internodal region, and leaves having a petiole. At the nodes sit the meristems, which is where all this replication gets initialised.
That's almost enough info to be able to differentiate and categorize a plants architecture and we now can see, if we compare the e.g. trifoliate leaf of an orange to your tricotylic cannabis plants, that in the case of the orange the petioles combine and then a single petiole is attached to one node. Seen reversed in time that means this structure (which are either 3 leaves [=trifoliate] or a single leaf showing 3 leaflets) have been grown by, and support, a single SAM (shoot axis meristem). Which will give rise to another internode --> node/SAM and that is of great importancy as it totally dictates the "branchiness" of a given plant species.
Now in your tricotyl Cannabis case we see 3 leaves each having an own (noncombined) petiole and each will give rise to another internode, so that plant architecture will develop WAY more branchy than is the case with the trifoliate orange that doesn't even alter the shoot axis architecture - it "just" develops more leaves (as in comparison of the unifoliate orange)
Sorry I'm no expert here at this but as can be seen by a quick google search sometimes the plants just defy any ordering we'd like to put them into... I'm either missing something paramount or actually don't really agree to the definition of the trifoliate orange leaf categorization as that would rather render the leaf into a having 3 leaflets instead of just 1. Because a leaflet "is just a smaller copy of an actual leaf" from the standpoint when you look at how leaves develop in Cannabis at an early stage (or after revegging) you see the first "true" leaf is "one-bladed" where the next will show 3,5,7 etc pp (up to 13 in my experience) where each leaflet is actually just a copy of the single leaf that now just has become a leaf-blade/leaflet. It's not different genetics at work, if you put these under a microscope you see the internal microstructure is identical.
Now in my experience Cannabis can alter the number of leaflets mostly in response to the available photon flux density (and maybe spectrum) but usually never less than 3 in a low-light scenario, in veg. If it's just 1 then something is hormonally off....
@Mudballs2.0
Bro, your pics are awesome, you have some that show these tops, too. I'm interested if they maintain an unusual node-to-fanleave/internode ratio. I've seen this already happen (DJ Short's work) but usually, the tricotyl plant will just loose its whorled phyllotaxis (I belive that denomination would be more correct to be used when a plant fasciates....) and returns to normal. And tbh I've never read the species refered to being "difoliate" or "monofoliate" (which is both true for seedlings at various stages...) so maybe because of Cannabis ability to alter that a generalization cannot be made... (?). Though it may be useful to describe this as it may hint at the sexual maturity of a Cannabis plant.
Glossary of leaf morphology - Wikipedia
Last edited:
you're blurring separate conversations together
I posted that male appearing plants pop from feminized seeds occasionally
some are reported to be fertile males by some growers
I'm just a simple pollen chucker looking to make better crosses
where's the Y coming from? that's what I'd like to know
Mudballs2.0
Active member
We generalize all the time dude.. strains vs. cultivars...are landraces cultivars? No, they haven't been cultivated by man...we could use some give and take..
Cerathule
Well-known member
The somatic mutations exist but it would be a far reach to say they have so much power to oftentimes void a sex chromosomes expression effectiveless... There's sex determination, and expression. The male is identified by XY and a slender structure, less sideshoots, longer internodes... but it's AFAIK up to the fourth, or fifth, internode where a given plant still "has some options free", given the environmental influences, to what sex organs it's later going to build.
Cerathule
Well-known member
It's a wrong idea steming from simplifications (in grower forums) that the Y contains the genetic material to build male sexual organs.
H e d g e
Well-known member
So without lab equipment the only way to know if you have a true xy male is the gender ratio of his/her offspring? What are the parameters for this? I guess if it’s a 50:50 ish split displaying full male or female characteristics in the offspring you know the farther must’ve been xy but if you’re growing an equatorial variety that only produces one male in ten then is this definitely xy? Would an xx displaying as a male always produce something between 1 in 100 to 500 xx plants displaying male? Is there a maximum ratio of xx displaying male offspring an xx displaying male pollen sack can produce?
Last edited:
