G
Guest
lol @ pops.
I think they ate the cannabis for stomach comoplants...
I think they ate the cannabis for stomach comoplants...
-
ICMag with help from Phlizon, Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest for Christmas! You can check it here. Prizes are: full spectrum led light, seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!
joaquin386
Active member
How about the Thais and southeast? Are they still pure lines that you can find there or just like everything nowadays it is a mixture.
B
Bluebeard
Yeah, as always I agree with hempy. I don't think anyone here is suggesting that testing offspring isn't important or there are any shortcuts around testing offspring and combining abilities, but without any selection criteria your population size is limited by what you can test. But, if you have selection criteria which have been proven time and time again, you can grow much larger populations. After selecting the plants which are most likely to pass on desirable traits from that large population, you then test the offspring. Offspring testing is the most time consuming aspect of breeding, and without any proven selection criteria, population improvement is limited substantially or even causes a decrease in quality unless the breeder is capable of testing hundreds or thousands of test crosses before proceeding to the next step.
My basis for male selection is to select for potency and only traits regarding potency (overall strength, ceiling, intensity) until a high percentage of the males are capable of producing a high frequency of glandular trichomes which is easier than most breeders think.
On a number of occasions I've dry sieved full melt hash from the cheese cutting, and I have no question that a well selected haze male might not be as potent with one or two hits or taste as good, but is unquestionably capable of getting me higher, with a more intense effect, than hash made from the cheese cutting or any other skunk for that matter.
One of the primary problems with the male selection techniques of most, is that many breeders do not understand the importance of males. That is why lines like northern lights, skunk 1, and haze have declined so rapidly over the years. Heterosis did play a factor, but poor male selection was the ultimate downfall. So many breeders are commercial growers and as such really on the females they stumble upon during their commercial grows, and get caught in the line of thought that females are more significant since they are the commercially viable product. Sadly, breeding without putting more effort into male selection is comparable to walking up a hill with one leg. Maintaining potency is an uphill battle since the species "wants" to return to low potency. Growers who select males based on vigor without placing more emphasis on potency, are encouraging this return to the feral state. Vigor is after all, the primary criteria that nature selects for in feral populations.
In almost all dioecious annual species, the males tend to be much smaller than the females. So when breeders select for vigor in males using the same criteria as would be used to judge vigor in a female, they may very well be selecting for size as opposed to what is actually vigor, since the natural form of a male is more than likely much smaller than a female. In essence, if you take a potent female and magically replace one of the X chromosomes with a Y, then the stems should be replaced with smaller and floppier stems, the nodes should be replace with nodes that are more delicate, and the size should be significantly more on the petite side.
So, if random male selection is like walking up a hill with one leg, then male selection where emphasis is primarily based on vigor is like having one leg walk up a hill and another leg walking down the hill. When a breeder tests a batch of males that were selected based on vigor, more than likely they are testing the worst of the bunch. At the very least they're adding to the number of traits they have to select for, and any way you cut it they will have to test the offspring of more males to find one that is as potent as one selected from a batch of males chosen at random.
The other problem, with relying too heavily on testing to find your parents is that it limits the number of parents that can be used to create the next generation. Personally, I believe that incrossing using one well selected female which stands out from a population to one well selected male which stands out from the population isn't the best route. It does tend to increase the genetic potential of the best individuals, but it also seems to make good individuals more difficult to find. Djshorts seeds or the dutch hazes are a good example. You can find some amazing plants, but it is hard to fix traits into a large percentage of the offspring when you use plants that stand out from a population using 1X1 incrossing. Populations are not easily sustained for many generations using this method of inbreeding due to excessive bottlenecking, requiring the breeder to accomplish their goals in relatively few generations, and causing unnecessary reductions in heterosis by eliminating genes which have little to no bearing on desirability or even consistency.
Since males are more elusive as to what feminine traits they are capable of passing on to their female offspring, every cannabis breeder whose goal is breeding for female floral traits should spend significantly more time studying males than they do females, simple as.
British Hempire, Excellent, informative post. However cannabis was being smoked in southern Africa way way before 1880. Slaves from southern Africa had already introduced the smoking of cannabis to the new world well before the 1600's. There was a steady influx of new genetics to southern Africa from India from the 13th century to present day and possibly even earlier. The late 19th century was one of the peaks of this influx of genetics and was the major event in the British importation of Indians and their genetics by proxy but was by no means the first or last direct importation of cannabis genetics to southern Africa. Richard Burton also described extensive Cannabis use in southern Africa a few decades before 1880.
The word Hottentot word Dagga as a reference to cannabis appears to be to it being a type of tobacco placing the word's origin from after the arrival of tobacco, but the Zulu don't use this word, or at least didn't until fairly recently.
Cannabis was probably first brought to the Continent before the creation of Islam, making is impossible for Muslims to be the first to bring it to the continent. More than likely it was first brought across the Red Sea before the birth of the prophet Mohammed. Now, for Southern Africa, it could have been Muslims to bring the plant, and it was likely to be Arab trading. However, Arab doesn't mean Islamic. The Cannabis using cultures in Southern Africa, likely to be the oldest have no influence of Islam in their use of Cannabis. Many archaeological sites of Arab trading colonies in Southern Africa predate Islam, so it is certainly possible, that the plant was introduced by people who weren't Islamic. It also could have been introduced by Chinese or even Indian traders. The Maritime history of which is little understood.
My basis for male selection is to select for potency and only traits regarding potency (overall strength, ceiling, intensity) until a high percentage of the males are capable of producing a high frequency of glandular trichomes which is easier than most breeders think.
On a number of occasions I've dry sieved full melt hash from the cheese cutting, and I have no question that a well selected haze male might not be as potent with one or two hits or taste as good, but is unquestionably capable of getting me higher, with a more intense effect, than hash made from the cheese cutting or any other skunk for that matter.
One of the primary problems with the male selection techniques of most, is that many breeders do not understand the importance of males. That is why lines like northern lights, skunk 1, and haze have declined so rapidly over the years. Heterosis did play a factor, but poor male selection was the ultimate downfall. So many breeders are commercial growers and as such really on the females they stumble upon during their commercial grows, and get caught in the line of thought that females are more significant since they are the commercially viable product. Sadly, breeding without putting more effort into male selection is comparable to walking up a hill with one leg. Maintaining potency is an uphill battle since the species "wants" to return to low potency. Growers who select males based on vigor without placing more emphasis on potency, are encouraging this return to the feral state. Vigor is after all, the primary criteria that nature selects for in feral populations.
In almost all dioecious annual species, the males tend to be much smaller than the females. So when breeders select for vigor in males using the same criteria as would be used to judge vigor in a female, they may very well be selecting for size as opposed to what is actually vigor, since the natural form of a male is more than likely much smaller than a female. In essence, if you take a potent female and magically replace one of the X chromosomes with a Y, then the stems should be replaced with smaller and floppier stems, the nodes should be replace with nodes that are more delicate, and the size should be significantly more on the petite side.
So, if random male selection is like walking up a hill with one leg, then male selection where emphasis is primarily based on vigor is like having one leg walk up a hill and another leg walking down the hill. When a breeder tests a batch of males that were selected based on vigor, more than likely they are testing the worst of the bunch. At the very least they're adding to the number of traits they have to select for, and any way you cut it they will have to test the offspring of more males to find one that is as potent as one selected from a batch of males chosen at random.
The other problem, with relying too heavily on testing to find your parents is that it limits the number of parents that can be used to create the next generation. Personally, I believe that incrossing using one well selected female which stands out from a population to one well selected male which stands out from the population isn't the best route. It does tend to increase the genetic potential of the best individuals, but it also seems to make good individuals more difficult to find. Djshorts seeds or the dutch hazes are a good example. You can find some amazing plants, but it is hard to fix traits into a large percentage of the offspring when you use plants that stand out from a population using 1X1 incrossing. Populations are not easily sustained for many generations using this method of inbreeding due to excessive bottlenecking, requiring the breeder to accomplish their goals in relatively few generations, and causing unnecessary reductions in heterosis by eliminating genes which have little to no bearing on desirability or even consistency.
Since males are more elusive as to what feminine traits they are capable of passing on to their female offspring, every cannabis breeder whose goal is breeding for female floral traits should spend significantly more time studying males than they do females, simple as.
British Hempire, Excellent, informative post. However cannabis was being smoked in southern Africa way way before 1880. Slaves from southern Africa had already introduced the smoking of cannabis to the new world well before the 1600's. There was a steady influx of new genetics to southern Africa from India from the 13th century to present day and possibly even earlier. The late 19th century was one of the peaks of this influx of genetics and was the major event in the British importation of Indians and their genetics by proxy but was by no means the first or last direct importation of cannabis genetics to southern Africa. Richard Burton also described extensive Cannabis use in southern Africa a few decades before 1880.
The word Hottentot word Dagga as a reference to cannabis appears to be to it being a type of tobacco placing the word's origin from after the arrival of tobacco, but the Zulu don't use this word, or at least didn't until fairly recently.
Cannabis was probably first brought to the Continent before the creation of Islam, making is impossible for Muslims to be the first to bring it to the continent. More than likely it was first brought across the Red Sea before the birth of the prophet Mohammed. Now, for Southern Africa, it could have been Muslims to bring the plant, and it was likely to be Arab trading. However, Arab doesn't mean Islamic. The Cannabis using cultures in Southern Africa, likely to be the oldest have no influence of Islam in their use of Cannabis. Many archaeological sites of Arab trading colonies in Southern Africa predate Islam, so it is certainly possible, that the plant was introduced by people who weren't Islamic. It also could have been introduced by Chinese or even Indian traders. The Maritime history of which is little understood.
C
cway
Bluebeard you also are a wealth of knowledge.. Love reading your posts brother... Always so informative
treeborion
Member
this is an excellent thread keep up the good work!!!
Bluebeard,
"That is why lines like northern lights, skunk 1, and haze have declined so rapidly over the years. Heterosis did play a factor, but poor male selection was the ultimate downfall."
Real Skunk #1 is maintained by clones and has not changed in 20 years, the male clones were first selected from 10,000 males, and the first selects progeny tested before keepers were selected, good luck trying to smoke them all to test potency. Before that Skunk #1 was grown from seed each year and lots of males were grown each year, from just the best females from the years before, I think Skunk # 1 got better, but what do I know.....
Unless you are refering to all the Skunk copies, seeds that are made using unknown skunk females and males, and sold to mostly unknown growers?
You mention that: "My basis for male selection is to select for potency and only traits regarding potency (overall strength, ceiling, intensity) until a high percentage of the males are capable of producing a high frequency of glandular trichomes which is easier than most breeders think."
I am curious how you determine the Cannabinoid contents of the males or is it just relative potency you test for? How can you tell what the Cannabinoids are at all, beside THC? Or does it matter?
I am curious what was the variety and what was the number of plants per year and how many growing seasons to fix the trait of resinous males? Did it really increase the females resin yield or THC%? How much increase?
I often agree with your posts, but I do have a few questions this time.
BTW, I find males grown from seed to often be taller then females of the same variety in general.
-SamS
"That is why lines like northern lights, skunk 1, and haze have declined so rapidly over the years. Heterosis did play a factor, but poor male selection was the ultimate downfall."
Real Skunk #1 is maintained by clones and has not changed in 20 years, the male clones were first selected from 10,000 males, and the first selects progeny tested before keepers were selected, good luck trying to smoke them all to test potency. Before that Skunk #1 was grown from seed each year and lots of males were grown each year, from just the best females from the years before, I think Skunk # 1 got better, but what do I know.....
Unless you are refering to all the Skunk copies, seeds that are made using unknown skunk females and males, and sold to mostly unknown growers?
You mention that: "My basis for male selection is to select for potency and only traits regarding potency (overall strength, ceiling, intensity) until a high percentage of the males are capable of producing a high frequency of glandular trichomes which is easier than most breeders think."
I am curious how you determine the Cannabinoid contents of the males or is it just relative potency you test for? How can you tell what the Cannabinoids are at all, beside THC? Or does it matter?
I am curious what was the variety and what was the number of plants per year and how many growing seasons to fix the trait of resinous males? Did it really increase the females resin yield or THC%? How much increase?
I often agree with your posts, but I do have a few questions this time.
BTW, I find males grown from seed to often be taller then females of the same variety in general.
-SamS
Last edited:
G
Guest
Male selection is the key to breeding imho and without the use of GC, like Sam says, you don't know what cannabinoids are present in that male.
Yes you can smoke males, make hash from them, observe their visual traits and rub their stems, smell them, select particular stem types, yada yada yada but until you do the progeny testing , you have no idea what that male is really gonna pass on in terms of traits and cannabinoid profile. Sam grew out tens of thousands of plants doing progeny testing on the Skunk #1 line, I'm sure it took a huge ammount of work to identify the best Skunk males.
I haven't done anything like that amount of progeny testing but here is a good example is this Blueberry x Zamalhaze lady, this is clearly the BB pheno and has the same huge sweet berry taste and smell with an added tangyness from the ZH mother.
This is a Blueberry F3 fathered by the same F2 BB male as the BB x ZH above, you can clearly see the similarities. I've grown a few different plants fathered by this male now and it seems to me that he always passes on his huge sweet berry smell.taste and abundant floral production, he seems to increase the yield and potency of everything he touches. I need to grow out a lot more of his progeny to really get a handle on his breeding profile though. It's a lot of work to just identify ONE male. I first found this BB male 18 months ago and I've still not proven his worth fully as a breeding male.
I agree Sam, in fact, with most strains I've grown, the males are always taller. I find with some strains I can spot the males by their height and lack of side branching by the time the plants are 3 nodes tall. There are always exceptions, but as a rule of thumb, the tallest plants from a seed lot are always males in my experience. Sam, do you find that males tend to be easily spotted because they don't grow branches from their nodes like females do? I usually find females have developed side branches from their lowest nodes by the time they are 3-5 nodes high, whereas males grow tall and with very little side branching. Do you thin selecting a male because he has the same structure as the females of the same line is valud when one male has a female structure and the rest are tall, lanky and have no branching? I'm assuming the line in question is truebreeding for high THC already.
Yes you can smoke males, make hash from them, observe their visual traits and rub their stems, smell them, select particular stem types, yada yada yada but until you do the progeny testing , you have no idea what that male is really gonna pass on in terms of traits and cannabinoid profile. Sam grew out tens of thousands of plants doing progeny testing on the Skunk #1 line, I'm sure it took a huge ammount of work to identify the best Skunk males.
I haven't done anything like that amount of progeny testing but here is a good example is this Blueberry x Zamalhaze lady, this is clearly the BB pheno and has the same huge sweet berry taste and smell with an added tangyness from the ZH mother.
This is a Blueberry F3 fathered by the same F2 BB male as the BB x ZH above, you can clearly see the similarities. I've grown a few different plants fathered by this male now and it seems to me that he always passes on his huge sweet berry smell.taste and abundant floral production, he seems to increase the yield and potency of everything he touches. I need to grow out a lot more of his progeny to really get a handle on his breeding profile though. It's a lot of work to just identify ONE male. I first found this BB male 18 months ago and I've still not proven his worth fully as a breeding male.
Sam_Skunkman said:
I agree Sam, in fact, with most strains I've grown, the males are always taller. I find with some strains I can spot the males by their height and lack of side branching by the time the plants are 3 nodes tall. There are always exceptions, but as a rule of thumb, the tallest plants from a seed lot are always males in my experience. Sam, do you find that males tend to be easily spotted because they don't grow branches from their nodes like females do? I usually find females have developed side branches from their lowest nodes by the time they are 3-5 nodes high, whereas males grow tall and with very little side branching. Do you thin selecting a male because he has the same structure as the females of the same line is valud when one male has a female structure and the rest are tall, lanky and have no branching? I'm assuming the line in question is truebreeding for high THC already.
Last edited:
BH, I recently grew out 8 of Chimeras C-4 plants. I vegged them for 4 weeks under CFLs and 3 weeks under HPS. At that time, most were showing sex. I had 6 males and 5 of them were the tallest and had the most beautiful branching structure. One was shorter and had few branches. I only wish my 2 remaining females had such a beautiful structure. Unfortunately,my med patients didn't care for the celery taste and we had other strains that were better meds, so I dumped the strain.
G
Guest
Hmm, interesting. I have a landrace called Dark Kush that I'm flowering for the second time currently. First run of 5 seeds i had 3 males that were all tall and lanky with long internodes and no branching, and two short, squat well branched females. Second run of 8 seeds I had 4 plants that were all tall and no branching so I tossed them thinkingthey were males. Of the four left, one showed sex and was also male, one were female but died (it's a bastard to grow) and I am left with one female. I was surprised to have a male that looked exactly like the females when all the other males were the same - tall, lanky, no branches. I had the same thign with the Purple Afghans, the males were all tall, lanky, no branching except one which was identical in height, structure and branching to the females.
G
Guest
Yup I have to agree, anyone who has a very basic understanding of Biology should be aware of this.
Seems only natutral that males get taller than females and flower earlier to ensure that pollen will really be everywhere by the time females start flowering. But dont know, havent grown fields of cannabis, ever. But it sounds right.
G
Guest
These are the three Dark Kush males I referred to:
Here you can see the two females in front, males behind, you can clearly see the males are much taller, longer internodes and don't have any side branching.
Here is the Purple Afghan male I mentioned taht had the same structure as the females, as you can see he has unusually well developed branching for a male:
Here you can see the two females in front, males behind, you can clearly see the males are much taller, longer internodes and don't have any side branching.
Here is the Purple Afghan male I mentioned taht had the same structure as the females, as you can see he has unusually well developed branching for a male:
J
jimbroker
Sam: 10,000 male selection! WOW! The logistics of managing that many plants seems incredible.... let alone analyzing them.
Did you have a GC/MS when you were making those selections?
Did you grow the 10,000 plants all in one season.. at one time?
Even with a GC/MS... the amount of work it would take to analyze 10,000 samples seems daunting. I am not for sure how you process the plants for GC/MS but I would imagine it involves some kind of extraction of sample from plant material.
You must of had quite the staff when you were making Skunk.
No wonder Skunk #1 is a classic!
Did you have a GC/MS when you were making those selections?
Did you grow the 10,000 plants all in one season.. at one time?
Even with a GC/MS... the amount of work it would take to analyze 10,000 samples seems daunting. I am not for sure how you process the plants for GC/MS but I would imagine it involves some kind of extraction of sample from plant material.
You must of had quite the staff when you were making Skunk.
No wonder Skunk #1 is a classic!
Yes 10,000 at one time. I only analyzed the males that were selected by eye, from the 10,000.
-SamS
-SamS
You still smoking those males isn't it?? 
G
Guest
I know Sam has many better examples but I really like Skunk cos you can rely on it to always produce.
Skunk #1
Skunk #1
Almost ready!
Skunk #1
Almost ready!
