topping clones??why??

[tedsprogz]

I was sitting in my lil room, stoned, and I started to notice that the plants grown from clone only produced 1 branch at the nodes where my seeded plants have 2.....went and did a bit of googling to find out why that is...Its because it only has genes from the mom. so this got me to thinking....why do people top clones?(besides for height/space control? You cut the top branch, only to wait for the node under to play catch up...

 

[notfromhere]

I top mine where 2 or more nodes are at a similiar height. This way they both try and grow to be the top. It also makes everything underneath the top grow faster. Even out the canopy and grow a bush. Spreads out the hormones in the plant. More so than just tying it down.

 

[LexLuthor]

Naw bro, clones have alternating nodes because they are mature, thats what happens to plants from seeds once they are about 5 weeks old. So a clones that was taken off a 4 week old mother then rooted and grown at your house for another 3 weeks is gonna be 7 weeks old, which is more then enough time for the nodes to start alternating. It happens to all cannabis plants and it just means they are mature enough to flower.

You top clones for the same reason you top seedlings, to get more bushy plants so more bud sites have even light. Thats why I top , because its easier to tie down branches and create an even canopy.

 

[notfromhere]

I apology. I was just saying that I top mine because I like a bush. I actually was just answering the part about. Besides height/ space control. I agree that they throw alternating nodes because of maturity.

 

[squiggly]

Its because it only has genes from the mom.

This is incorrect.

Clones have the full chromosome set of the parent plant which (unless feminized) contains genes from both parents.

 

[notfromhere]

What confuses me now that I read your post is again is how can it be that a plant only has jeans from a mom? That would mean it is fem seed. As in the male is gone and a female is subed.

 

[notfromhere]

Beat me to it. Lol

 

[LexLuthor]

I apology. I was just saying that I top mine because I like a bush. I actually was just answering the part about. Besides height/ space control. I agree that they throw alternating nodes because of maturity.

Its cool bro, I wasn't even responding to your post and everything you said is right. I was responding to the OP's 1st post.

 

[tedsprogz]

By mom i mean mother plant the cutting is from...the cutting only has the genes from the mother plant correct?
It doesn't have a new father to generate new genotype possibilities.
Although it does still have the mother plant's father genes, it just cant pull the slot machine lever and get another set of genotype possibility.
It doesn't get to do the punnet square process, its the exact square the mom(mother plant, not the mother plants mom) had. Otherwise you could keep cloning and get diff pheno every time.

clones have alternating nodes from the start(assuming you cloned a mature plant).
Its counter intuitive to top a clone(unless you don't have room to train, then i just call that pruning)
It wont make it bush, just designate the next apical node to become the top(which is only 1 branch)
if it were from a seed, you could top early enough where its not giving alternating node and you will see the apical node shoot 2 branches off, creating the bush.

source:
http://books.google.com/books?id=ucilIjrex5cC&printsec=frontcover&dq=handbook of plant science&source=bl&ots=MNxtBgcHsU&sig=OA5_xTBzyuqO2oefolPxAiTbxuo&hl=en&sa=X&ei=RQMmUMvLDcWe2AXj1IGwDg&ved=0CDsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=handbook of plant science&f=false

search for Decussate Phyllotaxy

 

[tedsprogz]

Naw bro, clones have alternating nodes because they are mature, thats what happens to plants from seeds once they are about 5 weeks old. So a clones that was taken off a 4 week old mother then rooted and grown at your house for another 3 weeks is gonna be 7 weeks old, which is more then enough time for the nodes to start alternating. It happens to all cannabis plants and it just means they are mature enough to flower.

You top clones for the same reason you top seedlings, to get more bushy plants so more bud sites have even light. Thats why I top , because its easier to tie down branches and create an even canopy.

Not saying your wrong but my mothers from are over a year old and have a decussate phyllotaxy structure.
When i take a clone from said mother, the clone starts an alternate phyllotaxy structure.
I understand about the hormone distribution, but topping is a very destructive way of going about it.

 

[LexLuthor]

I just topped 3 of my clones and 2 of them have 2 new tops that are the same height. 1 of them just did what you said and has 1 long top and 1 short top, but how is it destructive?? Does it explain that in the link you posted??

 

[tedsprogz]

Take the word destructive for face value. You cut the top you lose it.
I suppose you could make it a clone, but its still destructive from the mother's POV as its no longer a part of her.
LST or adding side light accomplishes the same thing without losing the top.
even the "kyle kushman"(wierd fellow) technique will achieve the same result if practiced & perfected.
even on seeded plants i prefer these methods to topping for this reason...but thats veering off the subject....
I cant seem to find where I read about the genes effecting phyllotaxy and how if there was a new father to produce a new phenotype, there would be a decussate phyllotaxy. it also said that the change of phyllotaxy was due to environmental conditions and if grown under the right conditions it will maintain phylotaxy reguarless of age.
Im horrible at remembering which sources contained what.....prob because i mostly look at laboratory and field studies and they are layed out similairly and i get them mixed up. i should keep a diary of what i read.

are the 2 even tops at the same node or is one higher up the stem than the other?

 

[Yellowjacket]

"I cant seem to find where I read about the genes effecting phyllotaxy and how if there was a new father to produce a new phenotype, there would be a decussate phyllotaxy. it also said that the change of phyllotaxy was due to environmental conditions and if grown under the right conditions it will maintain phyllotaxy regardless of age."

Find that source cause I for 1 would be very interested in reading it and seeing the credentials of whomever wrote such a tale. Probably the same 1 that gave you "decussate phyllotaxy". Decussate means crosses in an X pattern.

Sorry but pot plants branches don't cross. They grow out opposite sides of the main stalk unless it's a trifoliate which would then grow 3 at approximately 120 degree separation.

I ain't no expert but I know better than that!

YJ

 

[notfromhere]

If you add another father to a female plant doesn't it make seed? That's always a different genotype than the original.

 

[notfromhere]

By mom i mean mother plant the cutting is from...the cutting only has the genes from the mother plant correct?
It doesn't have a new father to generate new genotype possibilities.
Although it does still have the mother plant's father genes, it just cant pull the slot machine lever and get another set of genotype possibility.
It doesn't get to do the punnet square process, its the exact square the mom(mother plant, not the mother plants mom) had. Otherwise you could keep cloning and get diff pheno every time.

clones have alternating nodes from the start(assuming you cloned a mature plant).
Its counter intuitive to top a clone(unless you don't have room to train, then i just call that pruning)
It wont make it bush, just designate the next apical node to become the top(which is only 1 branch)
if it were from a seed, you could top early enough where its not giving alternating node and you will see the apical node shoot 2 branches off, creating the bush.

source:
http://books.google.com/books?id=ucilIjrex5cC&printsec=frontcover&dq=handbook of plant science&source=bl&ots=MNxtBgcHsU&sig=OA5_xTBzyuqO2oefolPxAiTbxuo&hl=en&sa=X&ei=RQMmUMvLDcWe2AXj1IGwDg&ved=0CDsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=handbook of plant science&f=false

search for Decussate Phyllotaxy

No the cutting has genes from both parents. Cuttings or Clones are gentic copies. If you took away the fathers genes it wouldnt be the same plant, therefore it can't be a clone.your razorblade or scissors don't remove genetic material.that would be very counterproductive from what you are trying to do. You clone to keep those perfect genetics you like instead of rolling the punnett square dice everytime you make seed.

It doesn't have a new father to make a new genotype unless you give it a male to make new seeds.

 

[tedsprogz]

re-read the first sentence of my post you quoted....of course the cutting has genes FROM THE MOTHER PLANTS PARENTS!!!!!! the point i'm making is that there isn't a new father(or even the original, that not my point) to generate a new pheno...come on....truly you must not be reading my posts in their entirety.

it needs to come from seed to play out the punnett squares again...every clone is exactly the same HENCE THE NAME CLONE. i never said that the MOTHER PLANT'S father's genes were removed.

let me re-iterate...

lets say i have a plant and i wanted another(another not meaning copy just another plant, for you post manipulators)....now i have 2 options....
1)pollinate the female with a male(doesnt matter what strain for arguments sake)
2)clone

1) the seeds created will grow nodes with a decussate phyllotaxy. this is because there is a FATHER(the pollen donor) and a diff pheno is created.
2) this will be an exact copy of the mother...this will grow nodes with a distichous phyllotaxy...it has the genes from the mother plant's mother and father...not just the mother. re read my posts and you'll never see me declare such nonsense.

 

[LexLuthor]

Hey tedsprogz, I'm not gonna comment on this clone discussion, but earlier you said topping a clone will not make it bushy and that is false. It does not matter if its from seed or clone if you take away the apical dominance it will cause auxins to redistribute into side branches. You also said LST will get you the same results without taking the top away and that is also false because when you LST an untopped plant you have to bend the stem over and it takes longer to veg because it never gains more branches so you still have the same amount of budsites. When you top a plant it creates 2 new stems that grow at the same rate as an untopped plant so you have twice the branching with the same amount of veg time and they can easily be bent away from each other and you will end up with alot more even budsites compared to an untopped plant within the same veg time, trust me I have done it before with the same strain and the topped LST'd plant yielded twice as much as the untopped LST'd plant. Like I said I tried both ways and the topped plant was way easier to train and yielded way more and science doesn't lie when you cut off the apical dominance the auxins will redistribute to other branches, regardless of being a clone or seed. Other then that I understand what you meant about the clone only having mom genes, you just worded it wrong in your 1st post. So have you ever topped clones and seeds with different LST methods??

 

[tedsprogz]

i said if you cut the top, theres only 1 branch per node to bush.
I never said it wouldnt bush, just that its more effective to lst or train a clone.
Lst does end up with MORE branches than topping, apical dominance is determined by distance to light THATS IT...
when you top, you are changing what nodes are closer to the light.
same for when you lst...but guess what you can keep your branch.
when you LST you get branches from the nodes no differently than if you were to top.
A TOPPED PLANT HAS TO RECOVER SO HOW ARE THE VEG TIMES SHORTER?
also in your experiemnt the 2 branches you got was because IT WAS FROM SEED YOU DONT GET 2 BRANCHES PER NODE FROM A CLONE HAVE YOU NOT READ ANYTHING I POSTED???
i swear sometime im typing to a wall.

I have 6 mothers 3 from seed and 3 clones from those 3(one from each).
i dont top...i lst. same effect lower stress.
the 2 branches you get when you top is only from a plant grown from seed and before it stops growing nodes with a decussate phyllotaxy.
if you were to bend that top over insted of topping it, those same 2 branhes would grow, and youd have the LST'd top still, more budsites.

the only point im making is that topping a clone is counter intuitive
i dont think a 3 month grow log is in order to deduce what simple logic can.

you are highly mistaken about how LSTing effects plants...i suggest research and research and more research.
"You also said LST will get you the same results without taking the top away and that is also false because when you LST an untopped plant you have to bend the stem over and it takes longer to veg because it never gains more branches so you still have the same amount of budsites. "
LOL

 

[LexLuthor]

Yo you are so lucky I can't upload pics because I could easily prove you wrong. I have 2 clones that I topped and they do have 2 new branches. It won't be from the same node but the nodes on my clones are only an inch apart (at the most) and the 2 branches that grew from those 2 nodes are the same height. So its basically the same thing as topping a seed because through my experience it has the same effect whether from seed or clone.

You can do all the research you want but I'm going by my experience. If you top a young seed or clone it will only take a day or 2 to recover so veg time is barely effected and it creates an extra stem which will create more budsites. I don't know what makes you think 1 stem will have the same amount of branches compared to 2 stems, its simple math. 1 stem with 20 branches = 20, but 2 stems with 15 branches each = 30, so more branches from a topped plant (seed or clone) will produce more budsites if trained properly. There is no need to get aggrevated and talk down to me with your comments about "typing to a wall" and "LOL" about my reply. You started this thread so don't get mad when people are trying to have a conversation and they don't agree 100% with what you say.

I'm not saying topping is always better then LST because in order to make a topped plant produce more you have to LST it anyways to create an even canopy. IMO it's just easier to LST a plant after its been topped and everybody has there own grow so for me its better to top, but for people like you it may be better to LST an untopped plant. So for you to say its counter intuitive to top a clone you have to have indisputible evidence that shows a topped clone produce the same or less then an untopped clone over the course of multiple experiments, then IMO that will prove its counter intuitive.

 

[tedsprogz]

im not talking down to you in particular when i say im talkin to a wall its just that ive had to say the same thing 3 times now.
you're misconception stems from you not knowing that when you LST a plant, the nodes grow branches...what were once budsites now grow an apical meristem.
you also seem to think there is difference between a stem and branch?
there are 2 type of branches lateral and apical.
lateral branches receive a growth inhibiting hormone.
again the "two stems" you speak of are still achieved with LST, and perpendicualr to those two stems is the ex-apical top.
it is now receivin the growth inhibiting hormone.
Let me draw you a picture....

FIRST PIC:
a plant grow from seed that was topped
notice the "two stems"

Second PIC:
same plant from seed LST'ed
notice your "two stems" this is where LOL came from

Third Pic:
Clone LST'ed
see how all the lateral's become apical?

now for the kicker:
Topped Clone
see how only the top node beame apical

yes if nodes are tight you may have 2 nodes that share dominance, but still the fact is that there would be 2 shoots per node if the phyllotaxy was decussate which has been the point from the beinning.
Hopefully now you see where lst still has the same effect as topping without losing the top
(you do know that where you cut the stem NOTHING grows from that right??)