-
ICMag and The Vault are running a NEW contest in October! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!
trick for controlling hormones on unstable strains
- Thread starter StankyBeamer
- Start date
guess someone deleted my post. shame, it was a good one. it's not about if plants communicate, it's about if authority is right. if we start observing plants as living creatures instead of commodities, start reauthorising the immediate experience of life and observation instead of reference, then the whole Big Swindle falls apart. yup, the B.S.
and we'd all hack up and eat the freemasons so we could crap them out instead of buy things from them and do what they suggest.
and we'd all hack up and eat the freemasons so we could crap them out instead of buy things from them and do what they suggest.
Seems like an easy test. Setup a test room and keep a male in isolation chamber. Point the outgoing HEPA filter on the isolation chamber directly next to females with tendency to throw lot of late nanners. If they don't develop nanners as usual then the idea has some merit.
It could also be tested to leave the male in the isolation chamber and just pollinate a few selective pistils and see if that suppresses the late nanners completely.
It could also be tested to leave the male in the isolation chamber and just pollinate a few selective pistils and see if that suppresses the late nanners completely.
I can imaging reversals happen for multiple reasons. I'd say its a compound effect caused by environmental factors. But obviously this could all be a thing of the past with non reversal as a breeding goal. Making sure autosomes remain active and consistent in a line should be a standard protocol for any breeder
I reckon 99 pct of plants I've grown are herms. I don't think there is any breeder out there that will put their plants through serious stress tests before breeding with it. IMO even if you need chemicals to induce hermaphrodism, the plant is a herma. So everything that is able to be selfed is a herma.
Regulation by ethylene extends to abscission, to flower formation and fading, and to fruit growth and ripening. Production of ethylene is controlled by auxin and by red light, auxin acting to induce a labile enzyme needed for ethylene synthesis and red light to repress ethylene production.
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC433312/
[/FONT]
it's my hypothesis that hermies happen when you fail to adjust the light cycle when flipping.
vegetative plants use mostly blue light and long hours of it.
when flipped they are suddenly exposed to much shorter hours of light and in a totally different spectrum, mostly red.
this will inhibit auxins which will in turn inhibit ethylene production and a lack of ethylene may signal recessive genes to manifest.
just musing.
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC433312/
[/FONT]
it's my hypothesis that hermies happen when you fail to adjust the light cycle when flipping.
vegetative plants use mostly blue light and long hours of it.
when flipped they are suddenly exposed to much shorter hours of light and in a totally different spectrum, mostly red.
this will inhibit auxins which will in turn inhibit ethylene production and a lack of ethylene may signal recessive genes to manifest.
just musing.
Great input everyone!
Tony, its just for sake of discussion man, just spitballing here.
I have often wondered if plants can decipher between pests. I understand they send signals to others they are under attack, but do they respond differently depending on what pest is attacking them? Would be hard to test that one. Plants fascinate me.
Carry on folks! Great conversation!
Tony, its just for sake of discussion man, just spitballing here.
I have often wondered if plants can decipher between pests. I understand they send signals to others they are under attack, but do they respond differently depending on what pest is attacking them? Would be hard to test that one. Plants fascinate me.
Carry on folks! Great conversation!
For years my favorite sativa made seeds starting at six weeks and by week thirteen would have about half the seeds it would have if pollinated. I put up with it and harvested at eight weeks.
Related technology, at twilight the sky is full of scattered far red light that we humans see poorly or not at all. Plants use twilight as a signal for night starting. Without this signal it takes the plant two full hours to realize it is night and begin Florigen production. Indoor plants need 12/12 to bloom while outdoor plants bloom at 14/10. some weeks before equinox.
Back to my favorite strain of hermie sativa, I put in a set of far red supplement lights and was going to reduce the time of darkness in 1/2 hour increments until budding quit happening. I expected two hours.
I changed the parameters after the first harvest. NO SEEDS, none.
I ran it through again, giving the sativa 13 weeks, again, no seeds.
I tried another known hermie and it did not seed either.
Five harvests with two different strains and the plants were stable, no miscellaneous seeds anywhere, even with long budding times.
Without twilight and its unique spectrum the plants literally do not know if it is day or night. This destabilizes to the point where any little stress at all or no stress will cause them to hermaphrodite and/or produce seeds.
Related technology, at twilight the sky is full of scattered far red light that we humans see poorly or not at all. Plants use twilight as a signal for night starting. Without this signal it takes the plant two full hours to realize it is night and begin Florigen production. Indoor plants need 12/12 to bloom while outdoor plants bloom at 14/10. some weeks before equinox.
Back to my favorite strain of hermie sativa, I put in a set of far red supplement lights and was going to reduce the time of darkness in 1/2 hour increments until budding quit happening. I expected two hours.
I changed the parameters after the first harvest. NO SEEDS, none.
I ran it through again, giving the sativa 13 weeks, again, no seeds.
I tried another known hermie and it did not seed either.
Five harvests with two different strains and the plants were stable, no miscellaneous seeds anywhere, even with long budding times.
Without twilight and its unique spectrum the plants literally do not know if it is day or night. This destabilizes to the point where any little stress at all or no stress will cause them to hermaphrodite and/or produce seeds.
Attachments
ima try this! corroborates my hypothesis fairly well. thnx
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/303/5660/1003
^^^^good fukin info^^^^^
Applause™
Applause™
G`day TR
Yes if the veg was T5 or MH , then switched to HPS .
Blue to red . But ... Lots of folks use HPS for veg and flower . So your theory has holes in it .
Thing is once upon all plants were herms . Male and female plants is an evoloution . Some still have the ancestral genetics .
There are many degrees of hermaphrotism . From Females that look female , to fmales that look to be completely male .
Still I don`t beleive the males in proximity theory .
Like I explained pre 1970s all pot had seeds . Seedless pot is a new phenomenon . Pre sinsimilla seeded pot and herms was the norm .
Thanks for sharin
EB .
I think reversals in growrooms are mainly to do with autosomes. Manipulation of autonomic activities rely on a multitude of factors and compound effects
Imho..the word hemaphrodite is not applicable to cannabis. The phrase we are searching for is monoceous specimens
Imho..the word hemaphrodite is not applicable to cannabis. The phrase we are searching for is monoceous specimens
IntelliGeneS
Member
There is an argument for Androdioecy.
I concur with Tony.
Rick been reading 
I believe we might well be at a dio state but inactivity of autosomes causes inderviduals to be mono
Actually,, I've not read anything since 2010
IntelliGeneS
Member
Bear in mind that I'm not declaring this to be the WayThingsAre(tm). I just threw that monkey wrench in the mix to stir up a little gray-area thinking.
Often I find that none of the single-word reproductive system descriptors fit perfectly in the real world.
If a population (because let's face it, there's a difference in trying to describe an entire species vs a population) displays separate male individuals and hermaphrodite individuals, the term for that system is androdioecy.
If we assume that male individuals do not produce pistillate flowers, then they can be considered male only. Yes, I know this is not necessarily true, there are some reports of success generating pistillate flowers on individuals which appear male, and in most cases the males are not kept around very long to provide relevant anecdotes.
If we consider all pistillate individuals (in the population) as actually being controlled by sex chromosomes with modification by gene(s) on autosomes possibly causing them to express as hermaphroditic, then it could be stated that all pistillate individuals are hermaphrodites, with varying levels of expression of staminate flowers (0% to 100%) when exposed to differences in environment. This population would then accurately be described as androdioecious. If some populations in the species display this system, you could extend the term to apply to the species in general.
The idea that all females are actually hermaphrodites seems to be a frightening one to many people, but it could be considered as valid given the seemingly widespread fears and reports of unintended staminate flowers, and the common practice of activating those autosomal sex-regulating genes by hormone manipulation to produce feminised seeds. If you look at the system this way, the breeding goal shifts from "eliminate all hermaphroditic tendencies" to a strategy of reducing by selection the chance that your population will produce staminate flowers on pistillate individuals to a level acceptable to your customers (the growers) under their range of reasonable environments.
Often I find that none of the single-word reproductive system descriptors fit perfectly in the real world.
If a population (because let's face it, there's a difference in trying to describe an entire species vs a population) displays separate male individuals and hermaphrodite individuals, the term for that system is androdioecy.
If we assume that male individuals do not produce pistillate flowers, then they can be considered male only. Yes, I know this is not necessarily true, there are some reports of success generating pistillate flowers on individuals which appear male, and in most cases the males are not kept around very long to provide relevant anecdotes.
If we consider all pistillate individuals (in the population) as actually being controlled by sex chromosomes with modification by gene(s) on autosomes possibly causing them to express as hermaphroditic, then it could be stated that all pistillate individuals are hermaphrodites, with varying levels of expression of staminate flowers (0% to 100%) when exposed to differences in environment. This population would then accurately be described as androdioecious. If some populations in the species display this system, you could extend the term to apply to the species in general.
The idea that all females are actually hermaphrodites seems to be a frightening one to many people, but it could be considered as valid given the seemingly widespread fears and reports of unintended staminate flowers, and the common practice of activating those autosomal sex-regulating genes by hormone manipulation to produce feminised seeds. If you look at the system this way, the breeding goal shifts from "eliminate all hermaphroditic tendencies" to a strategy of reducing by selection the chance that your population will produce staminate flowers on pistillate individuals to a level acceptable to your customers (the growers) under their range of reasonable environments.
