genetics & breeding q:
- Thread starter tommybomb
- Start date
Silky Shagsalot
Well-Known Member
i'm no breeder, but from what i've read, once you stray from the original beans, even if you use 1st generation beans, you get a lot of phenos.
Burnt Reynolds
Well-Known Member
Sure two or three phenos if youre lucky. Don't count on it though. You might think theres only a couple phenos until you get them in flowering. Then you realize theyre all different.
kmog33
Well-Known Member
Ime when crossing two strains that are stabilized the first generation usually has some that flower like mom, some that flower like dad, and some that look like a mix of both, its how genetics work, punnet squares and all that. The second generation you get crazy variations because they start to really mix up the genetics and different recessives start showing up. If, however, you cross two strains that were not stable to begin with, your first generation will have crazy pheno variance. But imo you should stabilize both strains before crossing them or your asking for even less stable offspring.
Sent from my LG-LS980 using Rollitup mobile app
bf80255
Well-Known Member
yes theoretically.... but probably not and if you did that would be a lot of work when you could easily pick up a pa k of c99 online.
and btw youd need a clone or seedling of a c99 for refrence while on this project
What would the proper term be instead of reverse engineering
Thank you. Ive got a good understanding of what your telling me. You've been a great deal of help.
Thank you.
racerboy71
bud bootlegger
surpringly, with those parents, i'd think the offspring would be pretty stable.. c99 is a super worked line, and great breeding material, which is why it's used tons... the princess75 i think is part of c99, the genius as well, both should also be super stable..
but like has been said, the f2's is where you'll see the crazy pheno's, all of the recessives show their ugly heads.. just back cross the winners to the parents..
but like has been said, the f2's is where you'll see the crazy pheno's, all of the recessives show their ugly heads.. just back cross the winners to the parents..
bf80255
Well-Known Member
really racerboy? you think a polyhybrids f2 would be somewhat stable? i beg to disagree, whats considered "well worked" in the cannabis world is kind of a sad excuse in the agricultural world at large wouldbt you agree? i do agree with that last bit ive found some pretty funky stuff hiding in the f2 generation of a couple projects, but that lends even more to my argument.... all im sayin is im pretty sure hell see lots of variation
bf80255
Well-Known Member
thats awesome im glad i could be of assistance bud, any thing else you need help with in regards to this subject ill be happy to try and help yah with.
racerboy71
bud bootlegger
c99 is one of the most stable plants out there, cubed, hence the 99, it's 99% the parent stock in genetics each and every time, what more could youa ask for?
princess 75 is 75 % of the parents each time.. and genius is another pretty stable strain as well, so yeah, although it's a poly x, the parents are all pretty stable on their own, so yeah, i'd say it's a pretty stable cross, as far as polys go, especially most of the rest of subs gear..
racerboy71
bud bootlegger
all 3 of those strains are siblings based all around jack herer, which is shiva skunk x nl5 x haze, and both skunk and nl5 are pretty stable lines as far as cannabis is concerned, so yeah, i still stand by my statement earlier..
Sativied
Well-Known Member
When you cross two strains, the number of different phenos (plants that don't all have the same traits...) depend a lot on whether the genes for a particular trait/pheno are dominant or recessive and homozygous or heterozygous. The common ratios posted across the boards apply to each and every individual trait. Point is, the less true bred the parents are, the more traits hence the more variation you get in F1, and the more you get in F2. I frequently see people looking for gems / pheno hunting in some F1 hybrids they bought while crossing those to F2 opens up a much larger choice of variety, both positive and negative.
Some traits will be the same on all plant, fortunately, else there'd be no point in doing it.
SS x ss = Ss, all the same phenotype and genotype. Appears stable but isn't bred through and will not create stable offspring.
Ss x Ss = 25%AA, @25%aa, 50% Aa (AA and Aa genotypes being the same phenotype, so you "see" 75% - 25%
Ss x ss = 50% Ss and 50% ss (two different genotypes, two different phenotypes.
SS x SS = SS, dominant trait stable in offspring, single phenotype and genotype
ss x ss = ss, recessive trait stable in offspring, single phenotype and genotype
In theory... in practice there is also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominance_(genetics)#Incomplete_and_semi-dominance
Cross two sativa with indica and obviously one is not completely dominant over the other, you get a mix. If you cross that mix back to the sativa, you get a mix of the mix x sativa, which is closer to the sativa. That's not the case for all traits though, and doesn't equal stabilizing a strain (you could call it stabilizing a cross I guess).
).
Exactly, it all comes down to the punnett square results, which of cause depend all on the input, the alleles. The results you describe differ per trait.
Some traits will be the same on all plant, fortunately, else there'd be no point in doing it.
SS x ss = Ss, all the same phenotype and genotype. Appears stable but isn't bred through and will not create stable offspring.
Ss x Ss = 25%AA, @25%aa, 50% Aa (AA and Aa genotypes being the same phenotype, so you "see" 75% - 25%
Ss x ss = 50% Ss and 50% ss (two different genotypes, two different phenotypes.
SS x SS = SS, dominant trait stable in offspring, single phenotype and genotype
ss x ss = ss, recessive trait stable in offspring, single phenotype and genotype
In theory... in practice there is also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominance_(genetics)#Incomplete_and_semi-dominance
Cross two sativa with indica and obviously one is not completely dominant over the other, you get a mix. If you cross that mix back to the sativa, you get a mix of the mix x sativa, which is closer to the sativa. That's not the case for all traits though, and doesn't equal stabilizing a strain (you could call it stabilizing a cross I guess).
Backcrossing is opposed to popular believe not really a means of stabilizing a cross into a new strain. Can be uniform enough for growing (the first in the list above for example), but not necessarily for breeding in a way that the amount of phenos / trait variation becomes predictable. That would require breeding the individual traits true, as in homozygous. That in turn requires testing by crossing with stable strains (or more specifically, a stable trait) to test the inheritance of the traits you want to breed in. Whether it's a back or in cross isn't that relevant once you figured those out (which is the tedious part). The backcross itself doesn't create an advantage of some sort, it can be convenient because you obviously already have offspring of that plant you cross back to so you have an idea of how its traits inherit.
Homozygousness (that should totally be a word
).
kmog33
Well-Known Member
I agree. Theres also codominants to worry about lol. But in perfect situation you should not get more than 3 phenos when crossing two stable strains. And i mean like dj short blueberry stable.When you cross two strains, the number of different phenos (plants that don't all have the same traits...) depend a lot on whether the genes for a particular trait/pheno are dominant or recessive and homozygous or heterozygous. The common ratios posted across the boards apply to each and every individual trait. Point is, the less true bred the parents are, the more traits hence the more variation you get in F1, and the more you get in F2. I frequently see people looking for gems / pheno hunting in some F1 hybrids they bought while crossing those to F2 opens up a much larger choice of variety, both positive and negative.
Exactly, it all comes down to the punnett square results, which of cause depend all on the input, the alleles. The results you describe differ per trait.
Some traits will be the same on all plant, fortunately, else there'd be no point in doing it.
SS x ss = Ss, all the same phenotype and genotype. Appears stable but isn't bred through and will not create stable offspring.
Ss x Ss = 25%AA, @25%aa, 50% Aa (AA and Aa genotypes being the same phenotype, so you "see" 75% - 25%
Ss x ss = 50% Ss and 50% ss (two different genotypes, two different phenotypes.
SS x SS = SS, dominant trait stable in offspring, single phenotype and genotype
ss x ss = ss, recessive trait stable in offspring, single phenotype and genotype
In theory... in practice there is also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominance_(genetics)#Incomplete_and_semi-dominance
Cross two sativa with indica and obviously one is not completely dominant over the other, you get a mix. If you cross that mix back to the sativa, you get a mix of the mix x sativa, which is closer to the sativa. That's not the case for all traits though, and doesn't equal stabilizing a strain (you could call it stabilizing a cross I guess).
Backcrossing is opposed to popular believe not really a means of stabilizing a cross into a new strain. Can be uniform enough for growing (the first in the list above for example), but not necessarily for breeding in a way that the amount of phenos / trait variation becomes predictable. That would require breeding the individual traits true, as in homozygous. That in turn requires testing by crossing with stable strains (or more specifically, a stable trait) to test the inheritance of the traits you want to breed in. Whether it's a back or in cross isn't that relevant once you figured those out (which is the tedious part). The backcross itself doesn't create an advantage of some sort, it can be convenient because you obviously already have offspring of that plant you cross back to so you have an idea of how its traits inherit.
Homozygousness (that should totally be a word
Sent from my LG-LS980 using Rollitup mobile app
Sativied
Well-Known Member
Well, as you said, it's all about the Punnett results. So let's put that perfect situation in an example. Imagine you got a haze and a skunk, and they are both entirely bred true / homozygous for every trait (the keyword here really, it's per trait). Perfectly stable. To keep this short-ish, let's hypothetically consider there are 5 traits in total. Yield, Height, Smell, Taste, flowerPeriod. And they are hypothetically all complete dominant.
Haze: yy, HH, SS, TT, PP
Skunk: YY, hh, ss, tt, pp
Cross: Ys, Hh, Ss, Tt, Pp
That's why a true F1 is a result of two stable IBLs (and why you recommended stabilizing them first). F1 a good example stable enough to grow (although environmental influences can tip the balance for some genes and express differently and still get different phenos for all practical purposes) but not at all stable as in true bred (i.e. the example cross above is completely heterozygous, but still all same phenotype).
And in that same perfect situation, F2 creates so much more variance than F1. That is not just because of recessive traits reappearing but because many traits inherit individually.
In reality we usually don't use perfectly stable IBLs. Instead, the cross above is more typical (and many breeder release that combi on purpose), but let's for example assume your example of dj short blueberry is very stable except for 2 traits. Dominant so they all appear stable as the same phenotype.
Blueb: yy, HH, SS, Tt, Pp
Skunk: YY, hh, ss, tt, pp
Cross pheno #1: Ys, Hh, Ss, Tt, Pp (Strong taste but long flowering pheno)
Cross pheno #2: Ys, Hh, Ss, tt, pp (no taste and short flowering pheno)
Cross pheno #3 Ys, Hh, Ss, Tt, pp (strong taste but short flowering)
Cross pheno #4: Ys, Hh, Ss, tt, PP (no taste but long flowering)
And that's still assuming one of the parents is a perfectly stable strain.
Theoretic example of course but the point is that in reality there are more than those 5 traits so it adds up quickly.
If we'd cross the Haze x Skunk from the first example into an F2:
SkunkHaze F1: Ys, Hh, Ss, Tt, Pp
SkunkHaze F1: Ys, Hh, Ss, Tt, Pp
SkunkHaze F2 phenos: Any combination of low/high yielding, short/tall, smelly/odorless, tasty/tasteless, short/long flowering
And that's why phenohunting is best done in an F2 created from a true F1 (stable x stable).
I don't necessarily agree with starting out by stabilizing the parent strains first. Instead, what I do/plan anyway, start with F1s from two strains, create F2s, phenohunt, stabilize (F3, F4, F5, possibly a backcross in there or instead), and then cross those two strains into an F1. Mostly just a preference to not first stabilize someone else's unfinished work, but still get the genes from it in my breeding stock.
The end.
kmog33
Well-Known Member
In reality maybe you don't use stable Ibls and i do that's the difference i suppose. When i cross my strains i have stabilized i get at max 3 phenos and ive been breeding for almost 10 years and have never had discrepancy except with unstable genetics.
Sent from my LG-LS980 using Rollitup mobile app
racerboy71
bud bootlegger
hey sativied, what genetics would you consider to be pretty stable and a good basis for a breeding project?
stuff like c99, deep chunk, skunk 1, nl5 and of course a few land races like kush pop to mind for me.
just curious as to your opinions.. ty kindly good sir..
stuff like c99, deep chunk, skunk 1, nl5 and of course a few land races like kush pop to mind for me.
just curious as to your opinions.. ty kindly good sir..
Similar threads
