F
Farmer Jon
Premium Member
Supporter
- 412
- 18
20 years ago there wasn't a huge population of people growing marijuana.....
FJ
FJ
Oh, I SO disagree with that. Are brussels sprouts illegal? How about Boston Terriers? Forcing cannabis growing underground has done a lot to harm breeding efforts. The war on drugs and the efforts put behind that to eradicate cannabis completely got the ball rolling. The current status of cannabis breeding leaves us with a few problems; genetics being mixed up in such a way as to cause an almost complete homogenization; selection methods used by some breeders; and what's happened to the total cannabis genome as a consequence?Did the breeding of brussel sprouts destroy the kale industry? Does the existence of Boston Terriers mean that the wolf population is in danger?
It's ridiculous to assume that artificial selection is harmful to the process of natural selection that created the parent species.
The introduction of hybridized lines into a pure landrace strain environment could be temporarily harmful, but as long as the natural biological pressures of the given environment remains the same then the artificially bred characteristics will certainly be squeezed out of the gene pool.
This.i think we should just have caution and try to preserve our landrace genes, for the same reasons we need to do the same with our food supply genes
Oh, I SO disagree with that. Are brussels sprouts illegal? How about Boston Terriers? Forcing cannabis growing underground has done a lot to harm breeding efforts. The war on drugs and the efforts put behind that to eradicate cannabis completely got the ball rolling. The current status of cannabis breeding leaves us with a few problems; genetics being mixed up in such a way as to cause an almost complete homogenization; selection methods used by some breeders; and what's happened to the total cannabis genome as a consequence?
Landrace strains are landraces because they were able to be grown in sufficient numbers and because they (the farmers) were able to select plants that naturalized best in their given environment. Everything else is muddied up and muddying up the genetic waters.
And for further evidence of how artificial selection can really fuck things up for subsequent progeny, I give you several breeds of goldfish (celestial eye, bubble eye, ryuku), wait, actually now that I think about it there isn't one breed of goldfish except what is known as the pond comet that ISN'T so incredibly physically convoluted and screwed up that it can't live in the wild without a lot of special support from the humans that created it in the first place.
And then we can talk about dogs.
This.
Did the breeding of brussel sprouts destroy the kale industry? Does the existence of Boston Terriers mean that the wolf population is in danger?
It's ridiculous to assume that artificial selection is harmful to the process of natural selection that created the parent species.
The introduction of hybridized lines into a pure landrace strain environment could be temporarily harmful, but as long as the natural biological pressures of the given environment remains the same then the artificially bred characteristics will certainly be squeezed out of the gene pool.
It is my strong belief that breeders have weakened the gene pool. The fact that 20 years ago I never saw powdery mildew, never saw or heard of anyone with spider mites. Now there is an epidemic of these things. It is a direct result of feminizing which takes out the male gene thus making the plant weak and susceptible to disease and pests. I stress that it is not the breeders fault but the growers demand for all female seeds.
as far as overbreeding, propagation of mutagens, under-culling of potential weak links, it comes down more to structure of the seed market than the individual breeders themselves. (<- which ultimately boils down to prohibition and the resulting lack of regulation, etc, but that can get to be a lengthy digression.)
i tend to think that the indiscriminate use of stuff like pesticides, fungicides, antibiotics, antivirals, and weed-killers in the agriculture industry (among others) has a lot to do with our problems too. Supermolds and superfungi are being bred right alongside superbugs. The pm we see now isn't the same pm, even as 10 years ago. I've seen shit happen overnight that would have required a week of neglect in yesteryears.
Along w/ mj's old buddy DuPont. Type Dupont in Search Fieldmonsanto is the problem
Right on! That's forward thinking in my book. Synthetics have served their purpose, (and then some.) Time to move on and clean up. 90% of Cuba's produce is grown in urban areas using permaculture techniques.buy organic
grow organic seed
Goddam LA houseplants.Because 20 years ago everyone mostly grew outside. The boom of the indoor market caused these problems not breeders.
(The nortorious So CAL Spidermite).
When I make seeds, I make a very specific effort to include as much of the available genetic material as I can. Why? Because, I lack a good sense of smell, haven't been growing long enough to really have an idea of what I should be selecting out for, and want to preserve as much genetic variation as I possibly can. So, to that end I ALWAYS keep all males, mix their pollen and do 'open pollination', i.e. I pollinate all the girls with this mixed pollen. I keep records on the females so that is known.Isnt there enough old seed stock being held on to by some breeders?
What breeding practices need to be done?
Ive pollen chucked and have thought about breeding more, My thoughts are if Im going to sell seeds, Id want to make my own ibl that is stable, well tested, and results that will be what people want. Not just cross this with that, here you go. Problem with that is, you do all the work, then breeders grab your work and spit out crosses. LOL
Also, I disagree with the notion that it's pesticide use moreso than poor selection methods that has allowed the proliferation of pests and disease on a scale not previously experienced. I personally believe that it's the selection methods the majority of breeders are using, whereby plants are selected for appearance, high, smell, flavor *instead of* being selected for vigor and growth habits as well.
We see this in other organisms humans breed selectively, dogs for instance. It is well known that certain breeds are prone to certain problems or types of problems, including but not limited to both physiological (form, conformation) and disease occurrence and resistance (cancers, etc). Why not with cannabis? In fact, we do see it with cannabis. If I recall, isn't it known that some Chemdog D lines carry mosaic virus?
I hope I'm qualifying my statements well here, I'm not saying I'm right and others who believe differently are wrong, just that I disagree and have this different idea.
1) The CEO/Board's ancestors would have to start out life w/ a smaller silver spoon? (Oops, I forgot. That's dollars/euros/yen etc)the plants never were or will be immune to mites or fungi
Though i NEVER want this to happen, Monsanto/Dow/Dupont could probably do something about it.
but at what a cost? [and i don't mean dollars]