WTF is w/feminized genetics,

[Dalaihempy]

Then stop making bullshit assertions that you damn well can't back up.
It is simple. By passing along bullshit you are doing the community no good whatsoever. That is why it is imperative that you be challenged each and every time you try to perpetuate the bullshit on this issue.

What good have you done for this community nil apart from filling peoples pm box's with hate and giveing negative red mojo all your good for you can call any thing that does not sit with your vues bull shit but what is bull shit is your attitude and ignorance to any one with a different vue to yours.

Time you fem seed supporters back your bull shit as you put it with real scientific research i found research that shows the real value of a male in a species you have posted jack shit that shows a female plant chemically turned to a male to then be breed to its self and seeds made is any way shape or form a valuable asset to this community or the genetics left find me that and i will stop posting if you cant then you can fuck off.

 

[Raco]

I would like to add my two cents form my point of view and location. Since fems started here tehre is not demand of regulars anymore at least here in Spain. Now new change comes with autoflowering and feminized. Hope people realise that wont be possible to keep moms nor even make seeds. But suposeddly is what people are demanding. So, hope you guys fridge all your male/female seeds. Times move so fast but looks like same attitude than Monsanto indeed, you have to buy and buy seeds every year. Its not what you like or not, here most already have not access to other type of seeds in the shops, so its what you can get, only fems and autos.

Sure there should be place for everything at the same time and everyone should be able to buy what they want but fact is that is not possible here unless you look in international shops. Guess demand created with marketing is been very sucessfull. Anytime you try to argue with friends in industry here you get same response, hei this is just a business. Never heard the word "cannabis" in industry, and most can sell cars, soaps or seeds and dont differentiate

enjoy in the meantime

well most plants stressed to max tend to show at least some nanas. As far as I know theres just male markers not females markers, correct me if I am wrong *, but some fine jobs are done and can be done in fem for sure. Only key as always is proper selection.

Agree C99, save them or wont germ in few years anymore but thats a personal choice, not industry.
best
*edited, seems not correct

there is not reason to keep intersexuals but only as an experiment, but not good at all to pass those genes
World is crowded now of seed sellers and seed "banks" just disssapear. I know of some big sellers here who dont and have never even smoked to test. Breed and sell are different worlds. Some lines are just used in new hybrids only for its firm sex when feminise, dont think many others criterias are used sincerelly.
best

charlie is a Pro...
hey folks,
keep it civil,please

 

[Tom Hill]

Is that right maybe you need to read more here some of value that shows the importance of a male.


Sex Involved In Plant Defense Why do some plants defend themselves from insect attacks better than others? New evidence shows that the difference might be due to whether they're getting any plant love.....
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0713201448.htm


Plants Spice Up Their Sex Life With Defensins— Since the beginning, plants and animals have deployed various mechanisms to fight pathogens. Proteins have always played an important part in this armoury, and a broad variety of defensin proteins have become part of the immune system of plants, insects and other animals except mammals. Now scientists from Regensburg discovered that those proteins also play a role in the "sex life" during the fertilization process of plants.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0601171711.htm

???

Hempy,

Regarding the "Sex Involved In Plant Defense" article. You have misinterpreted that too I'm afraid. It says nothing of males whatsoever, only sexual vs asexual propagation. It theorizes that sexual propagation due to "Sex shuffles up genes and allows individual plants to get rid of bad genes and keep good ones" may give them an upper hand against some type of insects. Well, sorry bud, but gynoecious (female) selection programs fall under this same sexual propagation category as m/f breeding. All that article is really saying is that plants that grow from seed, may do better than plants that grow from clone etc, regarding some insects.

The next article "Plants Spice Up Their Sex Life With Defensins" .... You do understand that corn is monoecious right? Both male and female flowers on the same plant? I guess maybe you don't, you're not helping your argument with that link either.

I don't know what to say man, your "research" methods leave a lot to be desired.

I am so sic of the half ass bull shit from some people

Me too Hempy, me too. -Tom

 

[darwinsbulldog]

???

Hempy,

Regarding the "Sex Involved In Plant Defense" article. You have misinterpreted that too I'm afraid. It says nothing of males whatsoever, only sexual vs asexual propagation. It theorizes that sexual propagation due to "Sex shuffles up genes and allows individual plants to get rid of bad genes and keep good ones" may give them an upper hand against some type of insects. Well, sorry bud, but gynoecious (female) selection programs fall under this same sexual propagation category as m/f breeding. All that article is really saying is that plants that grow from seed, may do better than plants that grow from clone etc, regarding some insects.

The next article "Plants Spice Up Their Sex Life With Defensins" .... You do understand that corn is monoecious right? Both male and female flowers on the same plant? I guess maybe you don't, you're not helping your argument with that link either.

I don't know what to say man, your "research" methods leave a lot to be desired.



Me too Hempy, me too. -Tom

yup, it's not the male that's important, it's the occurrence of recombination in the chromosomes of the progeny that is important and increases survival as mutations are removed from the gene pool via natural selection/recombination in sexual recombination as opposed to asexual reproduction (cloning) where recombination doesn't occur.

the formation of gametes occurs through a cell division process that leads to reduction of the chromosome number. this is called meiosis (mitosis is the other form, but this replicates the cell exactly, forming 2 daughter cells). meiosis is the process whereby the 20 chromosomes (2n - 10 pairs, 10 from dad, 10 from mum) are first replicated, undergo recombination, and then are split into 4 cells, each of 10 chromosomes. these gamete cells of 1n - 10 single chromosomes which include a sex determining chromosome Y or X making them male or female, they go to form pollen (half X, hald Y) or an ovule (all X) and when the two combine, they produce a 50% female, 50% male zygotes of 2n, the 10 paired chromosomes from both parents.

this process is exactly the same when it comes to creating feminized seeds through hermaphroditism. meiosis occurs thus recombination happens and gamete are formed. though because the pollen has been produced by the mother (XX) 100% of the pollen will be X = female sex chrome, subsequent zygotes will be XX = female. this is technically asexual reproduction, but it's equivalent to sexual reproduction, it's not the same as cloning due to recombination occurring.


lol at the end of the day it's the females that're important, not the males, we're just here for a good time!

hope that helps clarify things for anyone. if i'm wrong feel free to correct me, but i just finished my undergrad and am doing my post grad in this area and off the top of my head am fairly certain that's how it works. anyway have a nice one guys!

 

[englishrick]

WHAT EXACTLY ARE YOU ALL AFRAID OF???????????

The widespread view that all flowering plants arose from a common hermaphrodite ancestor (Cronquist, 1988) suggests that much of the floral developmental program is common to all species. The conservation of this basic program in the taxonomically distinct species Arabidopsis and Antirrhinum tends to support this notion (Coen, 1991). It is also reasonable to speculate that the great diversity in floral form and structure and certain modes of sexuality are modifications superimposed on this basic developmental pathway.

Despite the numerous floral adaptations to promote allogamy, many plant species breed almost exclusively by self-pollination (autogamy). Self-pollination may be advantageous under certain circumstances because the energy cost of separating sexes and its cost in overall reproductive success may be high, especially under conditions that favor rapid
reproduction, as is seen in annual weed species. This may explain why some degree of bisexuality is widespread among flowering plants.


The ability to reverse the sex determination mechanism by hormonal treatment suggests that the floral primordia, even when lacking vestiges of the inappropriate sex, are still sexually bipotent and that sex determination genes regulate alternative programs of sexuality, possibly through a signal transduction mechanism that modifies endogenous
levels of auxins and cytokinins.


In summary, sex reversal by hormone application indicates that in some plants, genes required for the development of the androecium or gynoecium are functional but suppressed.

The action of particular hormones in feminizing or masculinizing flowers appears to be species dependent.

 

[Karma Genetics]

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Spain is where proberly 80% of the feminised seeds come from, And there is new companies every day. Most are shit Yes i grow everything from everybody. My persenol expiernce with femmed seeds are bad with most. from the grows i did maybe 10 % was i happy with, And those where all from the same breeder.

So yes i believe with PROPER selection and you dont have as much choice as with treu males in your selection. it can be done.

I am no profesor, Iam a hobby grower who loves what he does i just like to do my own thing dont care about all the money making hype's I keep my eye on my own lovning project's

Most femmed seeds have a comercial VIBE Because of how and why there made, thats why i dont like them.

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ all they care about

 

[Dalaihempy]

???

Hempy,

Regarding the "Sex Involved In Plant Defense" article. You have misinterpreted that too I'm afraid. It says nothing of males whatsoever, only sexual vs asexual propagation. It theorizes that sexual propagation due to "Sex shuffles up genes and allows individual plants to get rid of bad genes and keep good ones" may give them an upper hand against some type of insects. Well, sorry bud, but gynoecious (female) selection programs fall under this same sexual propagation category as m/f breeding. All that article is really saying is that plants that grow from seed, may do better than plants that grow from clone etc, regarding some insects.

Well don't sexual species use a male to reproduce.

The findings are important steps to learning more about how plants have evolved defenses against insect herbivores, says Dr. Marc Johnson, assistant professor of plant biology at NC State and the lead author of the research paper.

"The variation in sexual reproduction has a large impact on the ability of plants to evolve defenses against herbivores," Johnson says.

In the study, the researchers performed both lab and field experiments on evening primrose (Onagraceae) plants, a plant family that has 259 different species – 85 percent of which reproduce sexually with the remainder reproducing asexually – to gauge the effects of plant sex on defense mechanisms. The researchers found that so-called generalist herbivores – those that eat a variety of plants – preferred to feed on the asexual species and lived longer while doing so.

Johnson says the nuanced results make sense.

"Sex shuffles up genes and allows individual plants to get rid of bad genes and keep good ones," he said. "That helps them evolve defenses against generalist herbivores. Though there are short-term benefits to asexual reproduction – populations can grow more rapidly and propagate even when pollination is not possible – losing sex puts plants at a long-term disadvantage.

It also says losing sex puts plants at a long-term disadvantage.
Dont that mean males role tom.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090713201448.htm

The next article "Plants Spice Up Their Sex Life With Defensins" .... You do understand that corn is monoecious right? Both male and female flowers on the same plant? I guess maybe you don't, you're not helping your argument with that link either.

I don't know what to say man, your "research" methods leave a lot to be desired.



Me too Hempy, me too. -Tom

— Since the beginning, plants and animals have deployed various mechanisms to fight pathogens. Proteins have always played an important part in this armoury, and a broad variety of defensin proteins have become part of the immune system of plants, insects and other animals except mammals. Now scientists from Regensburg discovered that those proteins also play a role in the "sex life" during the fertilization process of plants.

Tom i know what corn is mate but what i am pointing out here is the importance proteins that have become part of the immune system of plants, insects and other animals except mammals. that scientists from Regensburg discovered that those proteins also play a role in the "sex life" during the fertilization process of plants that would mean a male to correct.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/06/100601171711.htm


Here is am interesting Article also.

Enzyme Helps Males Make Up For Their X Chromosome Shortage

In species ranging from insects to humans, sex chromosomes, the famous X and Y, are responsible for determining gender. Females have two copies of the X chromosome while males have one X and one Y. This could mean that females produce twice as many proteins from the genes carried on the X chromosome as males.

Now researchers from the lab of Asifa Akhtar at EMBL and the groups of Nick Luscombe and Paul Bertone at EMBL-EBI have uncovered how one component of the MSL complex, an enzyme called MOF, ensures that the activity of only male X chromosome genes get ratcheted up. MOF relaxes the structure of chromatin -- tightly packaged DNA, to allow the transcription machinery to access genes on the DNA

"We were very surprised to find MOF bound not only to the X chromosome in males, but also to all the other chromosomes in the nucleus. This suggests the enzyme as a universal regulator of transcription that has evolved to play a specific role in dosage compensation," says Akhtar.

A closer look revealed that MOF binds differently to chromosomes from males and females. On autosomes, chromosomes that are not involved in determining sex, and the X chromosome in females, MOF binds mostly to the beginning of a gene where transcription starts. On the X chromosome in males, however, MOF binds also towards the end of the gene. Most likely MOF opens up the DNA towards the end of the genes and ensures that transcription is completed successfully.

"One can imagine the transcriptional machinery moving along the DNA like a train on a railway track. When the tracks are blocked the train could derail, resulting in incomplete transcription," explains Juanma Vaquerizas of Luscombe's lab, who contributed to the analysis of Akhtar's data. "It appears that MOF clears the tracks throughout the male X chromosome, while on a female X obstructions are more likely to occur."

More complete transcription results in more proteins produced from the single X chromosome in males than from either of the two X chromosomes in females, thereby balancing out their excess. MOF is the first enzyme in the MSL complex to behave differently according to whether the target gene is located on the sex chromosome versus other chromosomes in males.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/080529121210.htm

 

[Dalaihempy]

Why Choose Asexual Reproduction?

Perhaps the better question is: Why not?

After all, asexual reproduction would seem a more efficient way to reproduce. Sexual reproduction requires males but they themselves do not produce offspring.
Two general explanations for the overwhelming prevalence of sexually-reproducing species over asexual ones are:

* Perhaps sexual reproduction has kept in style because it provides a mechanism to weed out (through the recombination process of meiosis) harmful mutations that arise in the population reducing its fitness. Asexual reproduction leads to these mutations becoming homozygous and thus fully exposed to the pressures of natural selection.
* Perhaps it is the ability to adapt quickly to a changing environment that has caused sex to remain the method of choice for most living things.




Purging Harmful Mutations

An asexual population tends to be genetically static. Mutant alleles appear but remain forever associated with the particular alleles present in the rest of that genome. Even a beneficial mutation will be doomed to extinction if trapped along with genes that reduce the fitness of that population.

But with the genetic recombination provided by sex, new alleles can be shuffled into different combinations with all the other alleles available to the genome of that species. A beneficial mutation that first appears alongside harmful alleles can, with recombination, soon find itself in more fit genomes that will enable it to spread through a sexual population.

Rapid Adaptation to a Changing Environment

As we have seen (above), populations without sex are genetically static. They may be well-adapted to a given environment, but will be handicapped in evolving in response to changes in the environment. One of the most potent environmental forces acting on a species environment is its parasites.

The speed with which parasites like bacteria and viruses can change their virulence may provide the strongest need for their hosts to have the ability to make new gene combinations. So sex may be virtually universal because of the never-ending need to keep up with changes in parasites.

 

[DocLeaf]

Even a beneficial mutation will be doomed to extinction if trapped along with genes that reduce the fitness of that population.

In nature genetic anomalies (like albinism) and mutations (like abnormal sexuality), do not normally survive to persist within lineage in high numbers (black rabbits are rare). Mutations will however more readily survive when cultivated within artificial environments (like white mice).

It is interesting to observe that within the effective population then male plants tend to release pollen sooner than plants with mixed sexuality / hermaphrodites. In wild populations this means that a high % of the early flowering females will be fertilized by early male plants. A high percentage of the seed will then be normal. Later flowering plants and hermaphrodites will no doubt persist in the line as they release pollen and seed the later flowering females... but not in high enough numbers to affect the genetic frequency of the overall seed population in the next generation.

Food for thought...

 

[Gerrit]

Good morning all,

Had a few hours of sleep and some coffee so let's see if that helps getting this thread back to an open discussion based on ratio.

I get the impression that there are several discussions going on in this thread, that are although somewhat linked, still about different things.

One is about the level of ethics and professionalism within the seed industry, which is not to great but that does not make it much different to any other industry.
After all, there is money to be made, and sales men like to stock what sells good, they will care less about the quality and/or integrity as long as the majority of customers is happy with the product and the margins are good.
We can't really blame them for that, it's their job/objective to get the best figures possible.

Another one is about the negative influence that the popularity of feminised seeds might have on the availability of regular seeds.
This could indeed make the average grower more dependant, or somewhat forced to buy more seeds.
But I do not share the opinion of some that this is a primary goal for the seed companies, it's at best a side effect that they have no problem with, an added bonus so to speak.

There are other more obvious reasons why some have stopped producing them, it's simply way less lucrative at this moment.

But is this really an added threat to the cannabis gene pool/diversity?
Or more of a threat than the common practice that a lot of companies (not just in Spain but world wide) use the same "prize cut" or elite to produce their (regular) seeds?

I don't think so, on top of that, what is offered by commercial seed companies (including myself) has little to no value at all in terms of preservation, regular or not.
It's not intended for that purpose either, it's intended (or at least it was in my case) for people that want to grow their own smoke, nothing more, nothing less.

It amazes me that most people that have a mouth full about the importance of diversity and preservation, put very little effort in that themselves, they mainly get stuck at telling others how it should be done.

@Elmanito, not meant as an attack but more to make my point, I have a question aimed at your concious:
You seem to be very concerned about preservation, but tell me.
How many seed-lines have you produced last year, and how many of those where pure lines bred in a responsible way, and how many where hybrids?
I guess without knowing for sure that the majority are hybrids and very few are pure lines.
I also dare to claim that if you did make any pure lines, it did not happen in a large scale open field situation, now did it?

It's easy to tell other people how things should be done, but fact is that doings things properly or the way it should be done is a lot more difficult in practice.

Back on the feminised issue, there can be many arguments/points to claim the existence or market dominance of feminised seeds is a bad development, and I will probably agree with most of them.

But what I speak up against, is the claim that feminised are inferior to regular seeds, only because the are feminised.
Some might be, I'm sure that the rush/hurry most companies had to introduce them has had a bad influence on selection and testing.
But that's about proper breeding practice or better said quality control. and not the result of the feminising process itself.

So again hempy, please give me a reason/fact or at least a well founded/under-build theory why feminised seeds are inferior to regular as a rule.
And that is in regards to their intended use of course, I'm not talking about ideal breeding material, just some seeds that are relative uniform/stable in producing a decent smoke.

@ Karma, we all are trying to make a buck or to survive there is no reason to deny or to be ashamed of that.
You have lost your "hobby" status the moment you started to sell your seeds.
What I was pointing out was that the full page advertisement you where flaunting, was just that, advertisement.
It has nothing to do with "fighting for the cause" but is simply marketing, just aimed at a different section (niche) of the market.

I respect that you keep on producing regular seeds, I will do the same as long as enough people show interest.
But I don't see why there would be more of a "commercial vibe" to feminised seeds than to regular seeds, they both are sold at a price, aren't they?

Criticise the impact of commerce within our "hobby" is fine, but lets keep it based on facts, and not allow emotion to take over.
I have respect for every "breeder" or seeds-man that produces his own and has at least grown some of it him/herself so they know what they are selling, whether its feminised or not.

Sadly there is a lot of "brand engineering" going on as in buying bulk and re-pack/label, but even in that case, the companies are putting their own reputation at risk in case they buy a bad batch.
Each to its own.

We could do with a little less marketing hype, but as long as that is what most customers fall for, it will be what salesmen use.

 

[darwinsbulldog]

yup, it's not the male that's important, it's the occurrence of recombination in the chromosomes of the progeny that is important and increases survival as mutations are removed from the gene pool via natural selection/recombination in sexual recombination as opposed to asexual reproduction (cloning) where recombination doesn't occur.

the formation of gametes occurs through a cell division process that leads to reduction of the chromosome number. this is called meiosis (mitosis is the other form, but this replicates the cell exactly, forming 2 daughter cells). meiosis is the process whereby the 20 chromosomes (2n - 10 pairs, 10 from dad, 10 from mum) are first replicated, undergo recombination, and then are split into 4 cells, each of 10 chromosomes. these gamete cells of 1n - 10 single chromosomes which include a sex determining chromosome Y or X making them male or female, they go to form pollen (half X, hald Y) or an ovule (all X) and when the two combine, they produce a 50% female, 50% male zygotes of 2n, the 10 paired chromosomes from both parents.

this process is exactly the same when it comes to creating feminized seeds through hermaphroditism. meiosis occurs thus recombination happens and gamete are formed. though because the pollen has been produced by the mother (XX) 100% of the pollen will be X = female sex chrome, subsequent zygotes will be XX = female. this is technically asexual reproduction, but it's equivalent to sexual reproduction, it's not the same as cloning due to recombination occurring.


lol at the end of the day it's the females that're important, not the males, we're just here for a good time!

hope that helps clarify things for anyone. if i'm wrong feel free to correct me, but i just finished my undergrad and am doing my post grad in this area and off the top of my head am fairly certain that's how it works. anyway have a nice one guys!

hey all, i'm just going to update what i said previously in the above comment.

after having done a little research into this tonight i'd say that self-pollination/fertilization is a bit of a gray area when it comes to whether it's sexual or asexual. i'd now say it's not asexual, and can be seen as technically "sexual" reproduction.

I spoke to both my parents about this, both of whom were once biology/genetics lecturers at my university, and they believe that it’s both and neither.

i looked up the definitions for sexual/asexual/reproduction etc and found that the definition changes depending on the source.

if you wiki reproduction and look under asexual reproduction - "Asexual reproduction is the process by which an organism creates a genetically similar or identical copy of itself without a contribution of genetic material from another individual."

Though if you wiki asexual reproduction it states that "Asexual reproduction is reproduction which does not involve meiosis, ploidy reduction, or fertilization. Only one parent is involved in asexual reproduction"

www.biology-online.org defines sexual reproduction as "A mode of reproduction involving the fusion of female gamete (ovum) and male gamete (spermatozoon), which forms a zygote that potentially develops into genetically distinct offspring."

Though wiki states that sexual reproduction is “Sexual reproduction is a biological process by which organisms create descendants that have a combination of genetic material contributed from two (usually) different members of the species. (Self-fertilization requires only one organism.)”

at the end of the day it depends on how you want to define each term. if one believes the defining feature of sexual reproduction is having two separate organisms involved mixing their genetic material, or if the defining feature is the presence of meiosis and subsequent formation of gametes. Likewise with asexual reproduction, if it’s defining feature is the progeny having come from a single parent, or if it must not involve meiosis/gametes.

It’s a bit of a confusing/gray area, in the end i guess it doesn't really matter if it’s asexual or sexual because we're arguing about the definition of those terms, the biology of the plant stays the same. My folks say it should be referred to as neither sexual/asexual repro but as “self-pollination / self-fertilization” as it’s own category, but I think if I had to choose I’d say it’s sexual reproduction, if i see gametes/zygotes as the most important feature, with asexual reproduction not being able to involve these features. i just get stuck up on their not being two parents of differing sexes involved in the reproduction. it's all semantics.

let me know what you guys think.


darwin

 

[elmanito]

Good morning all,

@Elmanito, not meant as an attack but more to make my point, I have a question aimed at your concious:
You seem to be very concerned about preservation, but tell me.
How many seed-lines have you produced last year, and how many of those where pure lines bred in a responsible way, and how many where hybrids?
I guess without knowing for sure that the majority are hybrids and very few are pure lines.
I also dare to claim that if you did make any pure lines, it did not happen in a large scale open field situation, now did it?

Well if i tell you i am working for a long time with Chinese genetics from the Yunnan region, still have seeds from the nineties, but i work in large quantities with mostly pure landraces.Also i am working with some pure lines from Denmark, but also some hybrids, but most of them are pure lines

When we talk about larger scale than a average breeder well what can i say about this test field.

Just look into my album, but different seedlines last year appr.25 perhaps more.

Namaste

 

[Gerrit]

Hi Elmanito,

Chances are that you put in more effort than most commercial seed companies indeed.
But still, large quantities?
Relative large maybe, but not that much to make it much more valuable in terms of genetic diversity.

Not to discredit your work, at least you give it the best you can given the (restrictive) circumstances, but in the end, it's still an attempt at sculpturing using a slash hammer.
It's good to have pride in what you do, but I don't see the point in making it seem much bigger than it is in reality.

I'm done with this thread, as it seems to be more about protecting egos and image than discussing the plant.

 

[darwinsbulldog]

back on topic, i wanna know one day the comparison between using two individual different hermaphrodite females fertilizing each other, compared with if they fertilized themselves. someone needs to get to cloning a few lines, to then use to self for one treatment, cross fertilized for another, and have a control as males fertilizing the females of the same clone. would the cross fertilized fems be as viable/healthy as the control male x female clone?

 

[bombadil.360]

Ok guys, first, if we agree that Cannabis is X/Y Determined, we cannot posit then that intersex expression may have been the original expression and out of which the two distinct sexes became uniform.

if Cannabis is X/Y determined, feminized seeds are prone to miss a big chunk of genetic material carried in the Y chromosome.

feminized seeds are not ideal material to work with, specially when we consider the preservation of gene-pools and its genetic diversity.

I can see fem seeds being ok if what you want out of the seeds is strictly flowers (and even then, I have my reservations), rather than subsequent seeds or any type of preservation job.

what say you?

 

[darwinsbulldog]

you gotta remember bombadil that the feminized seeds aren't missing "a big chunk" because if feminized they're just XX, same amount of DNA as the XY, it's just that the X came from either the same female plant, or another hermaphrodite induced female. recombination is still occurring when a female plant uses meiosis to form both the pollen and the ovules. there will be no difference in genetic/gene pool health of any individuals in the population if the plant has been cross pollinated with another female to produce all feminized seeds, it's just that every pollen grain will be X instead of 50% X and 50% Y. if a female self-fertilizes instead of being cross-fertilized/pollinated then i think that's what you mean when you talk about the chunk missing, though it will have the same amount of DNA as any other seed it will have 100% of its DNA from it's mother, that has undergone recombination but of all the genes mum had, so they've just been reordered so to speak. compared with sexual repro between XY and XX or cross pollinated XX x XX where the progeny will be 50% of each parent and the sets of genes instead of being like one deck of cards in order being shuffled up, now it's 1/2 of the deck from dad + 1/2 deck from mum both in order then all shuffled up and shuffled together.

so there will be feminized seeds (2 parents, cross pollinated) that would be theoretically genetically healthier than feminzed seeds (1 parent, selfed), unless doing a breeding project with them you'd probably never realise/know. i'm wondering if we are able to find out anywhere which feminized seed making cross was used on different seeds for sale on seed bou/bank???

 

[Tom Hill]

(Hempy) "Well don't sexual species use a male to reproduce."


No, they use "male parts" (pollen), and "female parts" (egg), to create seed. "Male parts" do not have to come solely from a "male" to fit the definition of sexual reproduction.

(Hempy) "It also says losing sex puts plants at a long-term disadvantage. Dont that mean males role tom."

Again, no. It means that sexual reproduction may be advantageous to asexual (vegative) reproduction. Like I said before, "fem seed" do fall in the category of sexual reproduction.

(Hempy) "Tom i know what corn is mate but what i am pointing out here is the importance proteins that have become part of the immune system of plants, insects and other animals except mammals. that scientists from Regensburg discovered that those proteins also play a role in the "sex life" during the fertilization process of plants that would mean a male to correct."

Again, no, not correct. "Sex life" refers to sexual reproduction - "female parts" x "male parts" = "seed". There are MANY plants that are sexually reproduced that are not M/F dioecious Hempy, like the example in the very article that you are quoting. -T

 

[DocLeaf]

There's much confusion in this thread, between what people look for when breeding and the stuff they aim to avoid... although interesting.. how does this pertain to feminized seed genetics?

For us ignorant.. please explain

 

[Tom Hill]

It means that your comments are absolutely baseless when you say things like "female seeds are ok to grow but don't breed with them" - and you say that a lot. -T

 

[g0vnaa]

I`m a new grower and do outdoors.
That why I think fem seed will be a better choice because frankly it pisses me off to cary a very heavy bag with soil, dig holes, water frequently and then founding that the plant in the hole is a male :|

I`m not a breeder and I look only for the fem plants for buds (I`m sure most of the guys here are like me) so that`s my opinion.

Actually this year is my first grow so I don`t know much but I thought I should share my opinion