Hybrids-Quantity versus Quality

I was reading a book called Eco-Farm by the late Charles Walters of Acres magazine and I read something about corn hybrids and I wondered if it would pertain to Cannabis or other vegetable hybrids.
In discussing Open Pollinated corn versus hybrid corn, two samples were taken by a farmer from his field and showed the OP corn contained 19% more crude protein, 35% more digestible protein, 60% more copper, 27% more iron and 25% more manganese than the hybrid sample.
When his OP corn was compared to 4000 samples of hybrid corn from 10 midwest states in a single year, his OP corn contained 75% more crude protein, 875% more copper, 345% more iron, and 205% more manganese. The same trend has also been seen in the content of calcium, sodium, magnesium, and zinc. It could be said that the OP corn contained an average of 400% more of these nutrients.
Further testing confirmed the failure of hybrid corn to uptake certain mineral nutrients. Spectrographic testing at the laboratory of Armour's Institute of Research in Chicago revealed the hybrid short of nine minerals. The hybrid failed to pick up cobalt and any other trace minerals. The core of vitamin B-12 is Cobalt and a lack of Cobalt is implicated as a cause of undulant fever and brucellosis and Cobalt is the cure.
In the opinion of this writer, hybrid corn merely masks poor farming by producing bins and bushels without the nutrient goodies that are really corn's reason for being. In other words, quality versus quantity.
What this has to do with other vegetables or Cannabis for medicine or Cannabis Hemp is beyond my education. It does give pause that a hybrid may not have all the medical value it could have compared to a pure variety such as the Mexican, Columbian, Thai, etc and if the products made from the medicinal Cannabis and the oils and seed products from Hemp are deficient in vitamins and nutrients. Maybe I'm like Don Quixote and out chasing windmills that look like dragons, but it did peak my curiosity. Any comments?
so sativa and indica crosses are not as good as pure strains, sorry im not super smart but thats the story if it was corn right?
I was just wondering if it would affect things like the thc ration to cbd that medical users are interested in. In the last High Times they were talking about a strain from Spain that was nearly 1:1 ratio of thc and cbd. Dancehall or something, my memory fails me. I realize Cannabis is different than corn, but if you gain something from hybridizing pure landrace strains, couldn't you therefore lose something, also? It's over my head, that's for sure. I would like to hear from the breeders, tho. I'm just curious. Thanks for the replies.
As far as making oil like Rick Simpson or other edibles, wouldn't the elemental makeup and intake of nutrients affect the finished product?


Living dead girl
That's a very interesting question you've put out there, plant-lover. But the very first thing that's coming to my own mind are the other variables with the corn. First, how often is OP corn grown without the presence of glyphosate (Round-Up)? How often is the other corn grown in absence of glyphosate? That alone can, and should, cause mineral (i.e. nutrient) content of the plant material to go down. This makes sense, given that that's how glyphosate works (by binding vital minerals).

However, northone is also making a good point in that perhaps this isn't such a good corollary because we aren't typically consuming cannabis for its nutrient content, but for its other properties. I have no idea if these properties (cannabinoids, terpenes, etc) are affected by soil and/or hybridization in this manner. But it does make me wonder, like I think you are, perhaps "old" is better.

I also read Acres, but only recently discovered it. I lent out my March issue and now need to re-read some articles.
I believe the farmer who made these test grew his crops without poisons and I think that's why there's such a difference between the samples from the 10 midwestern states. That's what Acres is all about. It's a great magazine and I miss Charles Walters, because he told it like it was and backed it up. I'm just curious. There is an epidemic of alzheimers, autism and cancer and I believe it's caused by the adulteration of our food and the vaccines and flu shots with poisons and even tho my doctors disagree, I no longer take the flu shots. 4 people in our little country church have recently been put in nursing homes with alzheimers and I believe it's related to all the meds the doctors are giving them.
I think there are too many other variables in play to attribute this entirely to the fact that the corn was OP. Comparing corn that was grown by what sounds like a smaller, organic farm, to the crap mass produced in the mid-west is a logical fallacy. In order to really tell if it was the OP that did it, hybrid corn would have needed to be grown at that same farm at the same time under the same conditions, which it was not. Otherwise you are comparing "apples to oranges" which tells you nothing, so frankly, I find Walter's conclusion very questionable.

In my experience cannabis breeds pretty differently that corn and other vegetables. It tends to destabilize fairly easily and quickly and is very prone to inbreeding depression. It also is one of the most varied and complex plants known to man from a genetic perspective. Therefore it is more difficult to create an inbred line of cannabis without losing potency or vigor or succumbing to inbreeding depression and destabilization of the strain compared to corn and other veggies.

Without lab testing it is impossible to say for sure but I really doubt that hybrid cannabis strains lack the medicinal properties that a "pure" strain would. It might piss of a few old timers to say so, but in my opinion the old school "pure" strains are crap. I think that fond memories rather than objectivity are what drives the claims of them being better than modern strains. Older strains never have the quality, the potency, the vigor, or the yield that modern strains do. Time after time when I have grown or smoked them I have been unimpressed on all levels. I think that they old pure lines are good to keep around for breeding and preservation purposes, but that is about it. For medical purposes they are a joke in my experience - the modern strains are far superior.

Even when I look back at my seed stash from 10 years ago I can see a big improvement over what was available then and what is available now. The goal of any good breeder is to create and superior strain, and those breeders have been quite successful over the last 30 years in doing just that. Though this has led to a dilution in the gene pool due to short-sighted constant hybridization, in general, there has been a continual improvement in the development of new cannabis strains.

In fact in my experience, the best plants I have grown have always been hybrids. When I look back at last year guess what was the most potent strain I did? An F1 hybrid. What was the highest yield and the most vigorous? An F1 hybrd. What had the best quality? An F1 hybrid. What was the best for medicinal purposes? An F1 hybrid. The hybrids win every time. In fact the only downside to the hybrid is that you do sometimes lose the recessive traits that first generation, but those can be brought out again in future generations. So I might be a little biased, but for medicinal purposes, quality, and production, the hybrid strains are the way to go most of the time in my opinion.
Y'all know more about this than I do. In the initial test, the farmer did compare an OP corn and a hybrid grown in his own fields and then followed up with the mass crap as you call it from the other states. The older landrace strains, especially the Sativas take longer to reach maturity, put out less bud and are not as strong as the current hybrids. The newer hybrids flower faster and put out a superior product, but some of the best strains I ever smoked was a pure Thai stick in the early 70's and some Santa Marta Gold from Columbia and I believe it was R in High Times or someone else who pointed out that a sample of Columbian tested at 13% THC and that was from goverment testing. Which counters their suggestion that the old time strains were only 2 - 4 % THC. In the classic on breeding Cannabis by Robert Clarke he points out that a lot of the strains imported were contaminated and mixed with a lot of different genetics. Maybe the fondness of some of the older smokers relates to someone's first time with a lady. The first lady that pops your cherry is always special. At least, my first lady was. Thanks for all the feedback.
To answer your question plant-lover68,yes you lose something in breeding. Everything is in life is a trade off. Landraces have evolved to survive in their region of the world. When we start breeding with them we do not care about the traits that are best for survival in that location. We care about yield, potency, bag-appeal, aroma, flowering time, etc. We alter the cannaboid ratios to what we like. Generally that is high THC content and no CBD. We have shortened flowering times and increase flower size. As Blaze has pointed out, todays strains are better, for the traits we perfer. I don't think anyone would argue that the strains we grow today for medicine would survivie in the wild better than landraces. So really with breeding you have to ask what are you breeding for? Some of the old strains may be better to some who don't like as high a THC content, maybe have a preference for other constituents. These people may truely find old strains better. However, I would say that on average and for the average user, todays strains are better than old.

Same goes with corn. Corn is mainly breed for starch or sugar. Todays corn has a lot more starch than older strains. You could pick any mineral, or chemical to increase, but corn breeders have choosen starch. Old varieties were higher in protein that is fact. We do not breed corn for high protien, we breed soybean for high protien and oil content. Therefore todays soybeans are higher in protein and oil and very low in starch compared to older varities. This can be applied to all organism we actively breed. Whether it is cows, bacteria, or cannabis. Breeding will always have tradeoffs, you just have to know what you want and what you are willing to trade to get it.