Mr. Nice Forums  
Home History Strains Media Web Community Medical Marijuana Contact us Auctions

Go Back   MNS Forums > MNS strains and grow diaries > 6. Breeders support and information

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #131  
Old 12-26-2010, 11:40 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 114
Default

"I disagree with Tom Hill, that 1:1 breeding is going to wind up deletariously limiting the genepool, especially since Marijuana is so much more complex genetically than other crops. This is ridiculous"

It is the fact that marijuana is much more complex than other crops that is the reason Tom makes that statement. Outbreeding crops like cannabis have far greater amounts of deleterious genes than inbreeding crops like peas, wheat, beans etc. Therefore much more care is needed not to fix them into the population.

"Using purely open pollination for breeding is akin to taking all of your seeds, and storing them in the same container, on the one hand, that container might have a higher level of genetic diversity, but on the other hand, you won't really know what you have."

In this thread the term "open pollination" is being misinterpreted to signify no selection. Not a lot of breeders Tom Hill included that argue for breeding with pure open pollination as this is not breeding it is open pollinating. Open pollinating groups of heavily selected plants is what they are promoting i.e. grow out 500 plants select a small portion of the population that most closely reach your goals to be "open pollinated" and this is base for the next generation. these can be progeny tested as 1:1 seedlots prior to open pollination or the seeds from the ones that tested the best mixed prior to carrying to the next generation. Keep in mind the deep chunk seed run that Tom had a thread on was the final end of the breeding program and for certain he did not reach that end by doing full open pollination each generation. In fact he has argued with hyb against this.

I thought this thread was on "breeding techniques" anyways not whether nevil or anyone else is hurting the gene pool. Keeping to the "breeding techniques" topic I find it amazing that anyone is arguing that selecting two individuals of an outcrossing plant species from each generation of a inbreeding program is a more sound technique than using multiple parents. For the final mating to be marketed this is a different matter altogether imo and for sure I agree with Nevil's reasoning for doing so. However if you are talking about a multiple generation inbreeding program (which I believe we were)where potency, disease resistance, yield and flavour are the traits being selected for, 1:1 simply makes no sense as these are all traits that are not controlled by individual genes so not likely you are going to carry ALL of the relevant alleles from generation to generation based on two plants per gen especially early in a breeding program.

I guess the real question is whether Nevil is basing his 1:1 strategy to produce his "bottle neck of quality" as part of a one time selection program or for multiple generations. If it is the latter I could not disagree more.

Last edited by ortega_seeker; 12-26-2010 at 11:44 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 12-27-2010, 12:46 AM
joshuahazen's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,546
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ortega_seeker View Post

....In this thread the term "open pollination" is being misinterpreted to signify no selection. Not a lot of breeders Tom Hill included that argue for breeding with pure open pollination as this is not breeding it is open pollinating. Open pollinating groups of heavily selected plants is what they are promoting i.e. grow out 500 plants select a small portion of the population that most closely reach your goals to be "open pollinated" and this is base for the next generation. these can be progeny tested as 1:1 seedlots prior to open pollination or the seeds from the ones that tested the best mixed prior to carrying to the next generation.

I guess the real question is whether Nevil is basing his 1:1 strategy to produce his "bottle neck of quality" as part of a one time selection program or for multiple generations. If it is the latter I could not disagree more.
Well that sounds more reasonable. Thanks for clarifying. To me "Open Pollination" means open pollination. Using say 10 progeny tested male plants to pollinate one female would be referred to as breeding on a 10:1 ratio would it not?
Anyway that sounds more like a breeding program to me than simple open pollination. However, don't you think you would have more trackable results if you did 10 1:1 breedings, than say a simple 10:1 breeding. Sure it would be more time consuming but in the end you would much better be able track your results allowing for more effective selection, inevitably leading to superior typology. Now you have 10 seperate lines from the same female, paired with male from the same stock. Now when you start inbreeding these lines, at some point down the generational line you can start crossing these seperate lines together, thus preserving genetic integrity and fixing desirable traits.

And hence we are starting to get somewhere in understanding exactly why Nevil's Plants seem to be superior to everyone else's in the dutch scene and in fact, have much fewer genetic defects and problems.

So please continue Nevil, because I am here to learn, and if I am going to learn something from a breeder I might as well learn from the guy who has the best shit, plain and simple.
__________________
.







Hi Friends,
Check it out:
http://www.mrnice.nl/forum/showthread.php?t=5345
The Bonsai Sultan Method: Typological Breeding for the Non Breeder, Beginner, or Pro with Little Space.
_______________________________________________
"The secret of improved plant breeding, apart from scientific knowledge, is love." --Luther Burbank
Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 12-27-2010, 02:03 AM
Hazy Lady
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pack it in!

Quote:
Originally Posted by joshuahazen View Post
I read the thread at Icmag, thanks Azra'eill. I disagree with Tom Hill, that 1:1 breeding is going to wind up deletariously limiting the genepool, especially since Marijuana is so much more complex genetically than other crops. This is ridiculous. Look at humans for example. We are the most genetically complex creatures on the planet, yet how do we reproduce ourselves? you got it, on 1:1 ratio, so Tom hills argument doesn't really hold water in my opinion. If you look at the higher species on this planet, from insects all the way up to us humans, you will see that we share one thing in common when we reproduce sexually... that's right, we all reproduce according to a 1:1 ratio. Also it appears that Tom hill makes the mistake that most beginners make as a breeder, and for someone who has been breeding as long as he has, I would think he would have outgrown this simple Prejudice, He culls his plants according to the shape of the leaf.
That is really sad.

Using purely open pollination for breeding is akin to taking all of your seeds, and storing them in the same container, on the one hand, that container might have a higher level of genetic diversity, but on the other hand, you won't really know what you have.

If you are breeding for typology, generally speaking, a 1:1 breeding ratio is truly the way to go. There are many techniques you can use in your program to eliminate deletarious alleles and insure that your strains don't become inbred.

It seems evolution has singled out species that use a 1:1 breeding ratio for greatness(take me and my dogs for example).

Perhaps we can learn something from mother nature and help our plants take this apparently superior evolutionary path.
First you need to do two things, throw a bucket of cold water on the hard-on you have for Tom Hill, it's getting really boring and only blinkers you!

Second, you need to study the wonderful world of nature, there are many asexual life forms who gave up 1.1 matings long ago if they ever used them at all?.

F*** me Joshua, you didn't know what a 1.1 mating was a day or two ago, now you know more than a proven breeder who forgot more than you'll ever know!
Here, do a little research on these subjects,
# Single gene inheritance
# Mitochondrial inheritance
# Chromosome abnormalities
# Multifactorial inheritance

You might discover it's your post that has no merit!.
But then it was only written to have yet another dig wasn't it!.
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 12-27-2010, 02:14 AM
Hazy Lady
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I asked Tom Hill to explain a little about his latest project, I am sure it won't interest Joshua but anyone with 1/2 a brain can see the method in his madness, not sure where this talk of selecting on a bloody leaf came from? anyway,

Quote:
First, this is an F2 in the most classical sense, expect it to be variable. Expect it to yield the classic Mendelian ratio. In other words, 25% Haze, 25% DC, and 50% somewhere in between - for all traits.

This is a segregating population, a recombination generation of incredibly distant lines and I am looking for some deal of what we call transgression. IE, I am looking for a line within that has phenotypic values laying outside of either parental population. More frosty than DC, more cerebral than Haze, that type of thing.

This is truly where breeding begins, not ends, and I have tried to price it accordingly. I consider this a part of my breeding program that I happen to have some extra seed of, and I want folks to experience it with that understanding - that it is a beginning, not an end.

The ped reads (F1) 2 outstanding DC phenotypes (2 of 144) pollinated by 10 resinous Haze males. F2 gen was approx 50 F1's left to open pollinate.

The next move (call this generation zero - G0) is planting 3000 F2 seed to finish out 300 females and isolate 15 for genotyping and further breeding. I hope that you all will follow along regardless if you buy any, fun it will be, hopefully educational as well - Tom.
Reply With Quote
  #135  
Old 12-27-2010, 03:36 AM
Green 4 Good's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 104
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazy Lady View Post
... not sure where this talk of selecting on a bloody leaf came from?
I'm not sure of the reference he speaks of either, but I found this one....
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.ph...4&postcount=22
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHill View Post
If I could grow just one (in my current situation) it would be this next release (DCxHaze F2), and that's exactly what I intend to do. I'll be culling many of the broadleaf leaning phenotypes early on. Further, I intend to create a somewhat homozygous line from it using reversals, and progeny testing, for this is by far the most efficient tech, imo. And sorry if I rambled. -Tom
He goes on to clarify in a later post
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHill View Post
"I'll be culling many of the broadleaf leaning phenotypes early on." I have been informed that some are misinterpreting the value/meaning of the above comment. So let's have a sidebar, and discuss it. While it is accepted that vegetative structure will have zero correlation with quality of smoke, it is undeniable that other correlations do exist. This line will be specifically bred for both indoor growing, as well as large plants outdoors. In both scenarios, we want a plant with (among other things) excellent light penetration deep into the canopy. All other things being equal, this is the way to go ime. An example: Let's say that we can evaluate 300 females max. x2 (M/F) is 600 plants for sexing. Assuming the typical Mendelian ratio then, x4. So, if we sprout 2400 seedlings, then only allow 600 with the desired (narrow) vegetative structure to survive for further evaluation, that leaves us with 300 females to evaluate regarding other important traits, after selecting for a known desirable parameter early on. Anytime a breeder can take advantage of selection decisions available to him revolving around traits that are expressed before pollen distribution, he should. All while still maintaining his maximum allowable numbers for evaluating other traits under selection.-Tom
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.ph...6&postcount=27

Last edited by Green 4 Good; 12-27-2010 at 04:16 AM. Reason: added Tom's explanation of his comment about culling based on leaf shape
Reply With Quote
  #136  
Old 12-27-2010, 04:57 AM
Hazy Lady
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Thanks G4G
Reply With Quote
  #137  
Old 12-27-2010, 05:57 AM
Nevil's Avatar
Breeder
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,125
Default

If you are trying to stabilise an indica sativa hybrid and you believe the pheno you are looking for is the narrow leafed type, then culling broad leafed types is a perfectly valid tool.
Selecting females for next years crop from open pollinated fields is traditional farming practice. There is little or no selection with males but this is compensated by being able to pick the best females out of often tens of thousands of plants.

Modern growers, limited by prohibition are not able to grow in these kind of numbers, nevertheless, the results achieved by small scale operations has out stripped those achieved by their traditional counterparts. IMO, it is precisely the extreme narrowing of the gene pool which has caused these rapid advancements. It is rare for more than the single best female to get used for breeding each generation. Small numbers allow for much more attention to be given to males.
Bottlenecking is a negatively laden term for intense selection, we call it the latter if it is successful and bottlenecking if we wish to imply that it's not. Heavy inbreeding is the way pure strains are created, not that I see the market flooded with pure strains.

Skunk#1 is a classic case of a heavily inbred strain. I wonder how many 1:1 matings is behind that strain. It has it's problems, but it is still an industry standard. My own skunk line was the result of 5 or 6 generations brother to sister matings. The Early Pearl I used for breeding has been inbred for more than 20 years, starting from about 40 seeds, probably siblings to start with.

Anyone who considers 1:1 F1 hybrids with two unrelated strains bottlenecking, doesn't really know what they are talking about. There is a huge difference between F2s of hybrids and pure strains.

Most of the work I did was with batches of 40-50 seeds at a time. Space constraints did not allow for more. The best plant out of 20 females will be pretty close in quality to the best out of a 1000. Many of my cuttings, still considered elite, came out of similar sized batches.

The fact is that intense selection of small numbers of plants over many generations is what has caused rapid advancement in cannabis genetics and the fixing of type.
N.
Reply With Quote
  #138  
Old 12-27-2010, 07:09 AM
kashrocks's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Sweetzebland
Posts: 1,164
Default

Fiat Lux...

Peace.

K.
Reply With Quote
  #139  
Old 12-27-2010, 10:07 AM
kashrocks's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Sweetzebland
Posts: 1,164
Default

Does this ring a bell?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevil
Theoretically, there is someone out there growing better stuff than I am using my seeds. Why? Because tens of thousands of plants are being grown with my stock. Selection from tens of thousands gets phenomenal results, while I can only select from a few hundred. I'm not holding back anything. Any grower in America can experiment with the same stock I do.
It was the last sentence of the "Inside Cannabis Castle!!!" HT article published in March 87.

Peace.

K.
Reply With Quote
  #140  
Old 12-30-2010, 12:03 PM
JessE
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kashrocks View Post
Does this ring a bell?

.
Hi Kash,
Sounds like the Nevil I know! Or is that a yet unnamed Mr. Nice regular poster posing as the true King of Cannabis? lol

Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 09:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
All rights reserved, MR NICE SEEDBANK, NL