so the idea is that plant will produce female pollen for feminized seeds?

glockdoc said:

wow nice pics! looks like good stuff for hash making

Click to expand...

10x :) Yes but I need lots of good stuff to make a decent hash. This is only one male plant for seeds breeding. In this particular case the DNA is what matters.

GreenSpoon said:

so the idea is that plant will produce female pollen for feminized seeds?

Click to expand...

Sure, when female pollen is used to pollinate a female plant the seeds produced are feminised. :)

m y friend just got 1 of these males out of his larry og from dna/riserva privada

half baked said:

m y friend just got 1 of these males out of his larry og from dna/riserva privada

Click to expand...

tell him to keep it for breeding like the smart man RIPP. if bred right, you could see some high quailty potent potent offspring

i'll have to tell him to keep it around then :)

cheers bro;)

The new generation is on its way - SPG S1 (m) x SPG S1 (f). from seeds


;) I'm not sure actually whether it's S2 (reg.) or IBL (fem.)!

There is another theory, sort of, on this. That being and I believe mentioned earlier in the thread, testing the parents for intersex trait prior to stress. I feel that if you are working with a plant that has higher tendencies of showing intersex trait and you then stress her using methods above, there should be a much higher propensity of giving males/herms in the progeny. Given that cannabis as far as we all can tell is not a simple xy/xx sexual determination. Just my humble opinion.

Also on a side note Cali Con, maybe what they should be called, gave us not a single worthy specimen of Blackwater out of 12 seeds. Not a single plant. Suck!

Peace

confused as shit. heres a link with some good insight on S1 seeds. http://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=202197

I wouldn't use it for breeding that is asking for hermies and every problem with stability you can imagine. I wouldn't use s1 females for breeding either but that's just me being a purist. I want predictable and positive results, not unstable herm prone seeds.

fractal said:

I wouldn't use it for breeding that is asking for hermies and every problem with stability you can imagine. I wouldn't use s1 females for breeding either but that's just me being a purist. I want predictable and positive results, not unstable herm prone seeds.

Click to expand...

Hi fractal,

In order to answer your worries I would like to make a quote from issue published in high times magazine back in time. According to A. Grossman and breeder Steve (Spice of Life seed company) some strains for example Blueberry develop resinous males. It's all about the DNA and this is not necessarily a bad thing. As breeder Steve pointed out, "My absolute favorite knockout indica strain is Sweet Tooth. Steve's been breeding and improving the Tooth since 1995. The fourth generation of Sweet Tooth is now available to the world. "Sweet Tooth has evolved through many lines, and the current version number three is a third backcross to the Sweet Pink Grapefruit mother. It originated through the sacred union of my favorite clone, the Sweet Pink Grapefruit, and the most resinous male I had ever seen, a very special Blueberry specimen. This fourth-generation seed is much more like the original SPG mother; the Blue influence is much less than the first generation, which showed a lot more Blueberry traits, as do the inbred lines that are still the original 50/50." (BREEDING THE SPICE OF LIFE, Fri, Sep 13, 2002 12:00 am, HIGH TIMES)

Resinous males are preferable for such a great project. I'll continue to work with SPG because it's really simple. Firstly this particular SPG gene is very stable yeah I've already tested the plant under severe stress and the SPG show no sings of herms. Secondly when you cross-breed them with other strains "you can identify the plant with the most dominant Grapefruit aroma at the seedling stage. So this exclusive feature makes the breeding project less expensive and much more short. Finally, what is more predictable for any breeder than knowing exactly what the male plant will develop in the next generation/offspring.



redeye sorry for hijacking your thread;)

I agree you want a resinous, super stinky male plant I was just saying if you get a male in what was supposed to be feminized seeds I would not use that particular male for any further breeding. Or an S1 plant that is female but shows male flowers, both scenarios i wouldn't use for anything I was planning on sharing or giving out to other people. I think it's setting the stage for a future crisis in growing from seed if everybody is selfing plants left and right, using the products of reversing and hermie plants to produce new lines.

Congratulations on your SPG clone that is awesome. I never did see that one around in california I would like to give it a run someday.

Thank you for your advice fractal .

All the best:D

Ripp

fractal said:

I agree you want a resinous, super stinky male plant I was just saying if you get a male in what was supposed to be feminized seeds I would not use that particular male for any further breeding. Or an S1 plant that is female but shows male flowers, both scenarios i wouldn't use for anything I was planning on sharing or giving out to other people. I think it's setting the stage for a future crisis in growing from seed if everybody is selfing plants left and right, using the products of reversing and hermie plants to produce new lines.

Congratulations on your SPG clone that is awesome. I never did see that one around in california I would like to give it a run someday.

Click to expand...

well said. but if thats the case when would you use s1 seeds fractal? what if you used the s1 pollen to pollinate a completely different female that has no genetic relation to the s1.

If you're just trying to find some new flavors to puff on that's cool, just don't base your seed business on creating new lines with selfed plants and reversed pollen. That's all I'm saying, bottom line. You could end up with nice plants to grow for product, but it would be a good idea to keep those plants to yourself and not let them out because then people will want to be making hybrids with them if they are dank.

Many very knowledgable breeders disagree about fems and s1ing and isolating traits through femming and actually believe it to be thebest way to lock in desirable traits.. very few still fear proper reversals and have pretty much all acknowledged it's no worse than f2ing.

homebrew420 said:

Given that cannabis as far as we all can tell is not a simple xy/xx sexual determination. Just my humble opinion.

Click to expand...

These little dudes aren't as different from us as you might think. The truth is there is no such thing as simple xy/xx sex determination. This is a very complex process in any organism. I'll try to walk through my understanding of it from a biochemical standpoint and maybe that can help to shed a little light.

For all intents and purposes, CBF has it right--and that sort of leads us into questioning ,"well how is it that an organism without the genetic information to be a male is a male?" This should seem like a weird question, and one that sort of answers itself.

The answer is that females have all of the genetic information they need in order to be a male in their chromosomes already. This is also true for humans. In truth, we all start off with ovaries--and as "females". What the Y chromosome does is it flips on enzymes and pathways which were already present but inactive or at reduced activity. The Y chromosome turns on pathways which inexorably lead to the ovaries descending and becoming testis. This is where the problem of "undescended" testis comes from.

This effect for humans is mostly interpreted as a difference in estrogen and testosterone levels. What is important to note is that both of these chemicals are present in both of us.

If you have XX (and are a female) you have twice as many enzymes and twice the expression of those female genes--and you have a low but non-zero expression of the male genes which reside on either chromosome.

If you have XY (like me) you not only have half the operating capacity of the female genes, but you have these new pathways which flip on testosterone production--but this is done through activation of the X (female) chromosome's existing pathways. Furthermore, some of these "switches" actually suppress the dominantly female pathways of the X chromosome--like estrogen production.

We can sort of probe how these effects play out by giving humans hormone therapy--like estrogen or testosterone. I won't bore you guys by explaining away how this works in detail. Essentially you give a dude estrogen and he's growing breasts, you give testosterone to a lady and her voice deepens and she's gettin' hairy.

If we were to do this in utero to a person--we could turn them into a hermaphrodite (and this does happen naturally). What we're seeing with cannabis is basically no different--except that the plants are less "stabilized" in their sex characteristics at later times in life than we are. They are constantly growing at a highly elevated rate (new growth, not replacement growth like what we do most of our lives). This opens up their pathway to hermaphroditism significantly.

It's quite literally the same type of system that we're playing with here in the plants, they just are more plastic in the way they can grow--and so we can herm out just a part of a plant. This is mainly an effect of how plants do a large bit of localized metabolism. The plant does ship stuff around--but they aren't so much like us in that everything you put anywhere on or in them is going to makes its way everywhere.

Either way, yes--it is true that an individual which does not have a "Y" chromosome, cannot pass one down to offspring even if it does pass down mutations which automatically suppress/activate these various functions on an "X" chromosome. chromosomes don't just form--but they can mutate, and that's what we're seeing here.

I'm not an expert squiggly, but I believe that this SPG is not a mutant of any kind.
Take a look at the picture below, here we have the same strain SPG S1 (m) in veg. before environmental stress added.

It's certainly possible to get these traits out without a mutation--because of the way genes can rearrange themselves during meiosis. This strain may also have a certain trait which can be set off by various environmental conditions (even ones which would usually be normal).

It's important to remember, though, that a mutation can be as small as one changed base pair. This is not something that you can always pick out with a picture--you'd need to run a genome on the thing (and its lineage) to say it's not a mutant.

For an idea of the scale of this--the human genome is about 3 million base pairs long. There are probably hundred of thousands of positions in that sequence where changing the base pair could result in death or terrible deformation. There are also places where changing one will see you looking normal--but still on your way out the door, or disabled in some fashion.

An almost incomprehensibly tiny thing can have an effect which is amplified a million gajillion times beyond its scale when it comes to DNA and proteins. I can't say if that thing is a mutant any better than you can--but it is a valid point to say its possible to get there without a mutation.

now that i understand! thanks for insight!

I totally agree with you but if I want to preserve the original plant this is the only way to do it. I don't think that hybridization will keep the original gene. The point is that I'm unable to keep this plant in veg for too long and the only choice that I have seems to be self-pollination.
In addition there was cross-breeding with another strains (one fem and one reg) in order to see what will happen. I'm just curious to see the new generation, there are strong evidence to belive that it may be much better.

I'll update asap. Currently I'm expecting seeds form BigBud (Sam d'Skunkman reg.) x SPG S1(m) /pics included/ as well as Jack Herrer (GH, fem.) x SPG S1 (m).





Cheers