CSI humboldt thread

[blowincherrypie]

too stoned to bother reading the entire story here, but for what it's worth i think ppl with mental strain libraries like nspecta, meangene, bodhi, kevin jodrey and other large outdoor croppers who go way back, even ppl who go back to forums like overgrow would be the best keepers of accurrate and relavant information like all the various expressions and the likely lineages involved based off their solid foundation and sheer number of plants they've seen. how this information gets disseminated for history sake is happening right before our eyes. places like this. communtiy driven things like the potcast. sure it takes some effort on the next persons part to gain this knowledge, but things like phylos are inherently waek as without context it doesn't add up to much for anyone beyond those same ppl in the previous group. if anythings it gives the general public and the novice a false sense of reliability on things that require much more to understand. things i read other ppl already point out.
peace and stay stoned
testing is a good thing, it's a tool for the toolkit, it shouldn't be overstated tho

I feel what you're saying but you should have read my post because it explains the context lol.

If I send two identical cuts in to phylos and say one is TK and one is OG they can tell they're the same and put them in the same group. I respect the OG breeders etc. but there's no way even they can guarantee the cut they were given as "A" is actually that.. You can give two growers the same cut and they can appear to be completely different strains at the end.. One can be grown terribly and the other perfectly and they would be unrecognizable as being genetically identical.. However, if you send cuts of each to phylos they will be grouped together because they share the same genetic makeup.

Nspecta sent in an S1 of chem I believe and phylos put that in its own group because it is not genetically identical to the mother.

Personally, I'll trust the science over what is essential stoned anecdotes (mental strain library).. hell, just look at the legend of chemdog. You can get three people who were actually involved, in the same room, and get 3 different stories

Honestly, I dont even give a damn and thought we were putting this shit behind us lol Whether its called OG or TK the cut has the possibility of being great if grown properly.. and just as likely it can be unrecognizable if not.

 

[outliergenetix]

I feel what you're saying but you should have read my post because it explains the context lol.

If I send two identical cuts in to phylos and say one is TK and one is OG they can tell they're the same and put them in the same group. I respect the OG breeders etc. but there's no way even they can guarantee the cut they were given as "A" is actually that.. You can give two growers the same cut and they can appear to be completely different strains at the end.. One can be grown terribly and the other perfectly and they would be unrecognizable as being genetically identical.. However, if you send cuts of each to phylos they will be grouped together because they share the same genetic makeup.

Nspecta sent in an S1 of chem I believe and phylos put that in its own group because it is not genetically identical to the mother.

Personally, I'll trust the science over what is essential stoned anecdotes (mental strain library).. hell, just look at the legend of chemdog. You can get three people who were actually involved, in the same room, and get 3 different stories

Honestly, I dont even give a damn and thought we were putting this shit behind us lol Whether its called OG or TK the cut has the possibility of being great if grown properly.. and just as likely it can be unrecognizable if not.

given what you just wrote i didnt miss the context and i think i addressed it even. i pointed out the benefits of testing and its a tool for reasons like you said, but because of the other factors you stated regarding expression the gowers like nspecta, jodrey etc, become more valuable because they have seen all the expressions. they can tell if something has an afghani origin most likely or at least atribute certain anomolies and pheno expressions as being form X lineage. phylos does zippo to address this much more 'relevant to the farmer' info. so while you can tell if someone mixed up plants on you with phylos there is less value in actual application of the info you can infer from it. if phylos had existed before the war on drugs polluted the worls gene pool then it be a great tool but we are starting in a random plot on the graph with no way to reconstruct early records and for this reason phylos will never be as useful as it sounds. its biggest benefit atm is public domain protections from ppl who want to copyright cannabis
and to be clear when i said i didnt read the whole story i didnt mean your comment, i read that, i meant i didnt go back thru the entire thread to see where the convo as a whole was at

 

[blowincherrypie]

given what you just wrote i didnt miss the context and i think i addressed it even. i pointed out the benefits of testing and its a tool for reasons like you said, but because of the other factors you stated regarding expression the gowers like nspecta, jodrey etc, become more valuable because they have seen all the expressions. they can tell if something has an afghani origin most likely or at least atribute certain anomolies and pheno expressions as being form X lineage. phylos does zippo to address this much more relevant to the farmer info. so while you can tell if someone mixed up plants on you with phylos there is less value in actua application of the info you can infer from it. if phylos had existed before the war on drugs polluted the worls gene pool then it be a great tool but we are starting in a random plot on the graph with no way to reconstruct early records and for this reason phylos will never be as useful as it sounds. its biggest benefit atm is public domain protections from ppl who want to copyright cannabis

What?? "they have seen all the expressions"?? I think you're giving these guys too much props.. There's no way they can just look at a plant and tell it's origin. If you showed them the two cuts from my last example (one being grown perfectly and one not so much) there's no way they would be able to say that they are genetically the same.. whereas if you send the cuts to phylos they would be able to definitively tell you they are genetically identical.

" so while you can tell if someone mixed up plants on you with phylos there is less value in actua application of the info you can infer from it."

That's exactly what we're talking about and is the exact value.. Phylos can tell if two submitted cuts are genetically the same (like the cut Nspecta sent in as TK) in a way that NO person would be able to.

 

[outliergenetix]

What?? "they have seen all the expressions"?? I think you're giving these guys too much props.. There's no way they can just look at a plant and tell it's origin. If you showed them the two cuts from my last example (one being grown perfectly and one not so much) there's no way they would be able to say that they are genetically the same.. whereas if you send the cuts to phylos they would be able to definitively tell you they are genetically identical.

" so while you can tell if someone mixed up plants on you with phylos there is less value in actua application of the info you can infer from it."

That's exactly what we're talking about and is the exact value.. Phylos can tell if two submitted cuts are genetically the same (like the cut Nspecta sent in as TK) in a way that NO person would be able to.

not individually lol. but as a sum total yes i would say they have seen more than phylos has. some of these guys see thousands per season and 10's of thousands per year in some cases. this means in say nspectas case he has seen every possible expression of urkle short of random mutation and many other strains and others would have the same experience with other "strains". guys like jodrey and mandelbrot prior were doing this so long they are the best source for where th esource material came from because it is all muddled now in thos countries. so only those ppl can really attest whats an afghani whats a columbian etc. even phylos means nothing without their knowledge to apply to it. the columbianfrom 1970-80 was more true to columbian than suppsoed landrace current breeders source form the country. so in that sense guys form the era invlved in large black market ops are the only source for what these regional cultivars look lik and act like in their true form.
imo, and prolly theirs, i would disagree that they cannot pick out strains they are familiar with in any conditions. i gaurantee you nspecta can pick an urkel out in any grow environment stressed or not. maybe he will check in and let us know, that be awesome, but really you can listen to him or mean gene say as much on the potcast and meet the breeder
you have to realize these guys stress their plants and observe them in diff grow mediums and regiments etc on purpose to gather this data. you cannot think of hhow you or i do it. they arent just soil guys or just hydro guys and they definitely are not keeping optimal grow environments for this veryy reason. actually mean gene was just on a panel explaining how he does this

 

[Chronic811]

What?? "they have seen all the expressions"?? I think you're giving these guys too much props.. There's no way they can just look at a plant and tell it's origin. If you showed them the two cuts from my last example (one being grown perfectly and one not so much) there's no way they would be able to say that they are genetically the same.. whereas if you send the cuts to phylos they would be able to definitively tell you they are genetically identical.

" so while you can tell if someone mixed up plants on you with phylos there is less value in actua application of the info you can infer from it."

That's exactly what we're talking about and is the exact value.. Phylos can tell if two submitted cuts are genetically the same (like the cut Nspecta sent in as TK) in a way that NO person would be able to.

They can tell exactly which cut is the original. They aren’t all the same they just grouped them all together because they were getting ready to start a seed company. Why give their competition free information? It would also give Phylos less of an edge when it comes to putting the real og in seed form. If they posted the real info when they first discovered it then all the seed breeders would be a couple years ahead right now

 

[blowincherrypie]

not individually lol. but as a sum total yes i would say they have seen more than phylos has. some of these guys see thousands per season and 10's of thousands per year in some cases. this means in say nspectas case he has seen every possible expression of urkle short of random mutation and many other strains and others would have the same experience with other "strains". guys like jodrey and mandelbrot prior were doing this so long they are the best source for where th esource material came from because it is all muddled now in thos countries. so only those ppl can really attest whats an afghani whats a columbian etc. even phylos means nothing without their knowledge to apply to it. the columbianfrom 1970-80 was more true to columbian than suppsoed landrace current breeders source form the country. so in that sense guys form the era invlved in large black market ops are the only source for what these regional cultivars look lik and act like in their true form.

lol alright man.. I see why you started this off by saying you're too high because your shit doesn't make any sense. You think Nspecta would be able to identify a terribly grown urkle better than genetic testing because they've "seen every possible expression"? That would be like telling a child support judge you dont need a dna test because you cant be the dad because you have 1000 kids already and none have blue eyes.. If Maury says "you are the father".. guess what? that blue eyed baby is yours regardless of what you believe or have seen in the past.

"so only those ppl can really attest whats an afghani whats a columbian etc. even phylos means nothing without their knowledge to apply to it. the columbianfrom 1970-80 was more true to columbian than suppsoed landrace current breeders source form the country. so in that sense guys form the era invlved in large black market ops are the only source for what these regional cultivars look lik and act like in their true form"

You think just because someone smoked old school columbian they can identify things as columbian and knows its genetic makup? I'm just gonna stop with this one.. maybe you can come back when you're not "too high" and we can have a logical discussion. It almost feels like I'm having a debate with a climate change denier or something lol I suggest reading up on phylos and see what they do and dont do.. cuz somethings just being lost in the translation

They can tell exactly which cut is the original. They aren’t all the same they just grouped them all together because they were getting ready to start a seed company. Why give their competition free information? It would also give Phylos less of an edge when it comes to putting the real og in seed form. If they posted the real info when they first discovered it then all the seed breeders would be a couple years ahead right now

Im gonna leave you guys to it.. yall clearly know more, and understand it better, than I do

 

[outliergenetix]

They can tell exactly which cut is the original. They aren’t all the same they just grouped them all together because they were getting ready to start a seed company. Why give their competition free information? It would also give Phylos less of an edge when it comes to putting the real og in seed form. If they posted the real info when they first discovered it then all the seed breeders would be a couple years ahead right now

i think more to the point is real og and alyhting like that is too subjective by nature because of the war on drugs as i stated before. also ppl like greenhouse seeds polluting ancient cultivars in ther strain hunters ventures stemming back to the early 90s wa sa huge fucking problme. stealing the unaltered cultivars in remote areas for 1000 years then they lock em in their vault and hand the old farmers $50 and "better' seeds... poof there goues 1000 years of cultivation. this happened al over the world from the 70's on. greenhouse is just a documented example we can see today. the entire idea of strains is flawed so a data base categorizing a flawed idea is inherently flawed. first off a strain isnt even a friggin scientific term for plants lol, it is for fungi and viruses. plants don't get divided by strain this is an result of an ignroant community operating pre internet in a black market environment for 50+ years. ther eliterally is no strains we have no way to verify landrace or ancient cultivars because of the mass crossing of commercial genetics to these reomte areas. this all adds up to this shit is for the birds lol. of course there is some value as blowing cherry pie and i pointed out like is this plant the same cut despite different pheno expression. but that is sych a narrow scope. th eother value as i said is public domain ip law

 

[outliergenetix]

lol alright man.. I see why you started this off by saying you're too high because your shit doesn't make any sense. You think Nspecta would be able to identify a terribly grown urkle better than genetic testing because they've "seen every possible expression"? That would be like telling a child support judge you dont need a dna test because you cant be the dad because you have 1000 kids already and none have blue eyes.. If Maury says "you are the father".. guess what? that blue eyed baby is yours regardless of what you believe or have seen in the past.

"so only those ppl can really attest whats an afghani whats a columbian etc. even phylos means nothing without their knowledge to apply to it. the columbianfrom 1970-80 was more true to columbian than suppsoed landrace current breeders source form the country. so in that sense guys form the era invlved in large black market ops are the only source for what these regional cultivars look lik and act like in their true form"

You think just because someone smoked old school columbian they can identify things as columbian and knows its genetic makup? I'm just gonna stop with this one.. maybe you can come back when you're not "too high" and we can have a logical discussion. It almost feels like I'm having a debate with a climate change denier or something lol I suggest reading up on phylos and see what they do and dont do.. cuz somethings just being lost in the translation

yes i do because a genetic test cannot tel you if it is an urkle period. i think you misunderstand how it works. all the phylos could tell better than nspecta in this example is the two plants in question are clones of each other aka the same plant literally. as for if it is likely an urkle the database cannot provide enogh info because of the lack of a starting point. the other issue is phylos doesnt vet submitters of the plant material so literally i can submit a chem and say its urkle they would be like huh that makes no sense yet it cannot tell you who is right because phylos doesnt have the ancient cultivar and landrace data at all

 

[blowincherrypie]

yes i do because a genetic test cannot tel you if it is an urkle period. i think you misunderstand how it works. all the phylos could tell better in this case is if it was a clone. as for if it is likely an urkle the database cannot provide enogh info because of the lack of a starting point.

if phylos has an actual cut of urkle in its database it will it will be able to tell if another cut is urkle MUCH better than a person.. I dont think YOU understand how this works bro lol

if the urkle cut was sent in as girl scout cookie and then 4 people send in the same cut as urkle, that first "girl scout cookie" cut will be put in the "urkle" group. Then if someone sends that same cut in as Gelato, that "gelato" cut will be in the "urkle" group because it is genetically identical to the other cuts that were sent in. They can look completely different, to the point that no person would be able to visually tell they are genetically the same, but phylos will group them properly based on their DNA.

With that, Im actually out.. you guys apparently know so much more than I do.. I'll just go sit in the corner for a while

Yall have a great day!

 

[outliergenetix]

if phylos has an actual cut of urkle in its database it will it will be able to tell if another cut is urkle MUCH better than a person.. I dont think YOU understand how this works bro lol

if the urkle cut was sent in as girl scout cookie and then 4 people send in the same cut as urkle, that first "girl scout cookie" cut will be put in the "urkle" group. Then if someone sends that same cut in as Gelato, that "gelato" cut will be in the "urkle" group because it is genetically identical to the other cuts that were sent in.

again tho anyone can supply that cut so to say if phylos had a cut is the problem. nspecta could submit a cut the community considers authentic yet another person also can. its a race to who submits what first. if you cannot see the flaws are gaping after all i said there is no real point to continue
this is not about cuts man we are moving beyond the elite cut paradigm. phylos cannot tell you if this seed is green crack or that one is even if both came in a pack of bx green crack.

if you had 2 ancestors one generation back, 4 two generations back, ..., 2n" role="presentation">2n (not necessarily distinct) n" role="presentation">n generations back. So plants certainly cannot be descended from evry other plant in the ancestral population if less than log2;N" role="presentation">log2N generations have passed. (N" role="presentation">N = population size, which for simplicity I assume to be stable.) In a freely mixing population under the very simplest assumptions, you will eventually decay exponentially towards complete coverage with a half-time of one generation.
^^this is why you cannot use phylos beyond clones to tell you jack about a strain. that and as i said there is no such thing as a strain scientifically, literally!!! and it doesnt even take extinction of lineages into account

 

[blowincherrypie]

again tho anyone can supply that cut so to say if phylos had a cut is the problem. nspecta could submit a cut the community considers authentic yet another person also can. its a race to who submits what first. if you cannot see the flaws are gaping after all i said there is no real point to continue

its.. a.. genetic.. database. as more cuts are submitted it will be able to tell you a little bit more. It's not about who's first, they name the group based on which name has been submitted the most.. I literally just explained this. I really feel like you're just responding without reading my god damned posts or something lol

"there is no real point to continue".. at last we can agree on something my friend!

again tho anyone can supply that cut so to say if phylos had a cut is the problem. nspecta could submit a cut the community considers authentic yet another person also can. its a race to who submits what first. if you cannot see the flaws are gaping after all i said there is no real point to continue
this is not about cuts man we are moving beyond the elite cut paradigm. phylos cannot tell you if this seed is green crack or that one is even if both came in a pack of bx green crack.

if you had 2 ancestors one generation back, 4 two generations back, ..., 2n" role="presentation">2n (not necessarily distinct) n" role="presentation">n generations back. So you certainly cannot be descended from everyone in the ancestral population if less than log2⁡N" role="presentation">log2N generations have passed. (N" role="presentation">N = population size, which for simplicity I assume to be stable.) In a freely mixing population under the very simplest assumptions, you will eventually decay exponentially towards complete coverage with a half-time of one generation.
^^this is why you cannot use phylos beyond clones to tell you jack about a strain. that and as i said there is no such thing as a strain scientifically, literally!!!

You win!!

 

[outliergenetix]

its.. a.. genetic.. database. as more cuts are submitted it will be able to tell you a little bit more. It's not about who's first, they name the group based on which name has been submitted the most.. I literally just explained this. I really feel like you're just responding without reading my god damned posts or something lol

"there is no real point to continue".. at last we can agree on something my friend!





You win!!

it cannot tell you more no matter how many cuts because there is no submission criteraia that belies accuracy. and again a strain is not frickin' real, its a made up term regarding cannabis plants, it is not scientific at all. your assuming quantity is gonna overide human error and misinformation and if you can undertsand the formula i laid out mathmatically you would understand why.

 

[Chronic811]

Since the announcement of the new phylos seed bank I doubt they’ll be getting any new cuts

 

[blowincherrypie]

Since the announcement of the new phylos seed bank I doubt they’ll be getting any new cuts

... you think people have been sending in cuts? like little rooted clones or something lol

On another note, here's a little more info from Jodrey.. kinda gives a little insight

https://phylos.bio/blog/the-wonders-of-kevin-jodrey

 

[outliergenetix]

Since the announcement of the new phylos seed bank I doubt they’ll be getting any new cuts

yea i didnt know they started a seed bank. ppl i respect tout phylos but those same ppl are benefiting greatly in ways they admit so i take no isssue with them, but phylos the company is shady. i have confronted them and had thorough dialogue directly with phylos and the lawyer they use fo IP case law on insta, private messages and even via email. they were very nice i want to say but they are up to no good and doing so in disguise of doing good. first off their public domain approach while semi valid is a huge concern given the lawyer they hired has direct conflict of intersts regarding his other clients and the fact he has won patents for specific strains alread yet claims to be fighting against this with phylos. we left our dialogue on good terms but i remain convinced this lawyer is a huge problem, even phylos admitted to me in a direct email my concerns are very valid and my comments had led to some serious movement on the matter. what thta meant idk, but i pointed out and cited this guys conflict of interest to them. now that you say they have a seedbank i feel further concerned and a little vindacated in saying they are shady and a mole in the community
i want to clarify instead of edit. i meant i confronted the open source cannabis project and their lawyer who are using phylos database as a tool for public domain IP protections

 

[outliergenetix]

... you think people have been sending in cuts? like little rooted clones or something lol

On another note, here's a little more info from Jodrey.. kinda gives a little insight

https://phylos.bio/blog/the-wonders-of-kevin-jodrey

kevin jodrey is one of the ppl i just eluded to in a new post. he just said in a recent panel he gets a deal of all deals from them as he pushes a retarded amount of clients thier way, kevin also relies on their other services like testing terps and sex in veg. the point tho is he openly admits his bias so you cannot really cite him regarding the phylos database, as he is usually using their other services. kevin is also not against IP regarding strains and i am as i think you should be. so while he garners my highest respect he is not a person that validates phylos the company as far as ehtics. he has allot to gain and he gets pricing a fraction of what others do simply because he markets them hard. knowing this you have to realize he isnt objective on the matter

 

[blowincherrypie]

kevin jodrey is one of the ppl i just eluded to in a new post. he just said in a recent panel he gets a deal of all deals from them as he pushes a retarded amount of clients thier way, kevin also relies on their other services like testing terps and sex in veg. th epoint tho is he openly admits his bias so you cannot really cite him regarding the phylos database, as he is usually using their other services. kevin is also not against IP and strains and i am as i think you should be. so while he garners my highest respect he is not a person that validates phylos the company as far as ehtics. he has allot to gain and he gets pricing a fraction of what others do simply because he markets them hard. knowing this you have to realize he isnt objective on the matter

Wait.. are we talking about phylos ethics? or whether they can tell if two submitted cuts are genetically identical? Or are you implying their results may not be ethical? He explains what he uses the genetic testing for.. bias doesn't (shouldn't) change genetic testing. Are we saying their plant sex testing is questionable also because Jodrey uses it and therefor has a bias? I mentioned this earlier but wonderland submitted one of the cuts that was genetically identical to Nspecta's TK.. That's all phylos should be used for at the time, but it appears to be able to reliably do just that. Nowhere am I saying phylos is able to tell you what your submitted sample is yet (i.e. columbian landrace... TK.. pre9, but they are very capable of telling you if someone has sent in sample that is genetically identical.

 

[outliergenetix]

Wait.. are we talking about phylos ethics? or whether they can tell if two submitted cuts are genetically identical? Or are you implying their results may not be ethical? He explains what he uses the genetic testing for.. bias doesn't (shouldn't) change genetic testing. Are we saying their plant sex testing is questionable also because Jodrey uses it and therefor has a bias? I mentioned this earlier but wonderland submitted one of the cuts that was genetically identical to Nspecta's TK.. That's all phylos should be used for at the time, but it appears to be able to reliably do just that. Nowhere am I saying phylos is able to tell you what your submitted sample is yet (i.e. columbian landrace... TK.. pre9, but they are very capable of telling you if someone has sent in sample that is genetically identical.

ethics was seperate issue that came up in my reply to the other guy not you, i only cited that other comment because i also used kevin as an example of a person who i respect that uses phylos and why you cannot use him as an objective person. phylos ethics have zip to do with the other stuff. i wasn't trying to tie them together. seprate issues all together. i just wanted to give the other guy some info regarding what they really want this database for and it aint to help the community

you also inferred more than i was saying. i am saying the tests like veg terp and sex testing is a 100% usefull and legit tool especially on the scale of his nursery op. so he touts phylos for the discounts on these tests not because he believes they are this god send for chronicalling history via some strain database. he literally said this on the panel

 

[Chronic811]

Wait.. are we talking about phylos ethics? or whether they can tell if two submitted cuts are genetically identical? Or are you implying their results may not be ethical? He explains what he uses the genetic testing for.. bias doesn't (shouldn't) change genetic testing. Are we saying their plant sex testing is questionable also because Jodrey uses it and therefor has a bias? I mentioned this earlier but wonderland submitted one of the cuts that was genetically identical to Nspecta's TK.. That's all phylos should be used for at the time, but it appears to be able to reliably do just that. Nowhere am I saying phylos is able to tell you what your submitted sample is yet (i.e. columbian landrace... TK.. pre9, but they are very capable of telling you if someone has sent in sample that is genetically identical.

If your main intention was to start a seed company. Would you be telling ppl which og is the original years before you got lisenced? It’s easy just to throw them all in the same group then the mystery is still there and ppl send more cuts. And phylos makes out like bandits

 

[blowincherrypie]

If your main intention was to start a seed company. Would you be telling ppl which og is the original years before you got lisenced? It’s easy just to throw them all in the same group then the mystery is still there and ppl send more cuts. And phylos makes out like bandits

nobody sends in cuts bro.. from what I understand its a small piece of stem or leaf or some plant material, not cuts (clones)