geologic
Old Pharmer
Supporter
- 1,912
- 263
You "slipped",
(that's what they usta call it [back in the bulletin board daze]--
you posted while I was editing...
Looks a bit like what duckfoot mutation has with all blades/leaflets.
I don't know if fused leaflets on palmate compound leaves has a name in botany. Unless it creates them consistently it's usually not a genetic mutation. Esepcially with the second and third set of leaves it's not very uncommon. It then happens during development and isn't necessarily a mutation in the blueprint.
@Toaster79:
I've never grown or bred autos but the auto genes being recessive seems to be widely spread info. Could be many parrotting each other based on crossing pure autos with others, but for example it's on wiki too: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoflowering_cannabis#Breeding
Crossing photo x auto should then be all photo. And then takes 3 generations to make all autos. F1 all photo, F2 25% auto, and two of those make all auto in F3. It's a good example of why recessive traits can be easier to breed for; they only show up when homozygous, and crossing two of them (or selfing one) will make all autos, true bred for that strain.
That is IF photo was homozygous for the dominant photo genes, which doesn't always has to be the case.
Breeding the auto genes out (and thus preventing the trait from showing up in later generations) is then harder than breeding out the auto trait in the first generation. Roughly half of that F2 (given a large population) would be photos but still carry the auto gene. If you cross two of those, you will get some autos in the resulting generation again. You would have to pick two of the 25% homozygous photos to breed out the auto, but they aren't phenotypically different from the heterozygous photos.
If the photo is not homozygous for the dominant photo genes, and auto is recessive, you would get roughly 50-50 photo-auto in the F1. With those percentages and a relatively small amount of plants the actual results can be very different.
Not all photogenes are necessarily exact duplicates even if they visibly perform the same function. It posssibly depends a lot on what you cross it with. For example, Afghanicas and indicas are more triggered by the photoperiod than an equatorial sativa that sort of auto flowers under its normal lightschedule (vegs and flowers on a day length of roughly 12 hours).
So your miles may vary, but the first and second generation will give enough insight. If auto is in your cross fully recessive, none of the F1 will be auto but will all carry the gene and you can simply pick the best plants for the next generation to create plants where those auto genes recombine.
So basically, I pop the seeds I get (F1), keep the autoflowers, maybe even do an open pollination to keep the phenotypically variety. Then pop those F2's and do the same and finally F3's are all autos. And with F3's pick some of the best girl and give them some coloidal silver treatment to get autofems. Should be doable in 12 month window.
I always thought--
Cannabis sativa sativa
Cannabis sativa indica
Cannabis sativa ruderalis
[fast forward to now]
Cannabis sativa afganica
Cannabis sativa ???...
The evergreen x AW now:
Besides the necrotic spots I think I can get all that yellow to turn green.
That's me...I do that frequently, come across as rude that is, I heard it's called dutch directness
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?