Science on loss of vigor over generations of clones?

  • Thread starter Ne Obliviscaris
  • Start date
  • Tagged users None
T

thedude79

1
1
first, it's not a myth that genetic mutations will occur eventually. that will happen in the mother from see plant too, eventually, though.

it is a solid maybe, and likely for either. so, you won't get a solid answer that can apply to your specific situation. you can observe and react, or if it came from somewhere else, you can query that source for information that may or may not help.

because of this unpredictability caused by numerous factors mentioned already in this thread, anecdotal evidence (a.k.a. a logical fallacy) can easily be found supporting both sides of the argument. it should be ignored. that's why it's a logical fallacy. it is meaningless on its own and at best correlates but does not cause a thing. not that sharing anecdotal information isn't a good thing, but it can lead you astray easily.

genetic flaws accumulate over time for various reason. it doesn't even have to be x-rays (lol!). Also, without meiosis, you do not get any genetic recombination, either. allowing this to be the root for reproduciton avoids many of the potential problems, but adds randomness to what your end product will be -- even if its from a hermaphrodite.

yes, it is a clone, but it's the same age as the original mother plant. it's about how many times each cell has gone through mitosis. each time is an opportunity for a mutation. think about dolly the clone. it died young relative to its inception. it was old for its age based on various quantitative metrics. that's because it was essentially as old as the adult it was cloned from the moment it formed in a testube -- as far as age-related problems. this is less of a problem for plants than animals in similar contexts.

age matters... time matters. clone of a clone of a clone is not a sapling or young plant. the real question is whether regrowing from a cutting has an affect on mutations over time? if not, then it simply won't matter if it's from the mother or not... it's the same age realtive to # of times through mitosis (cell reproduction), which will be the same # as the mother from seed.

best way to predict is to know how old a plant can get... that'd tell you how robust it's 'kids' could potentially be.. but not it's cuttings, because again, the cutting are as old as the original mother from seed plant.

it will be a bit of genetics and pure random luck as far as how many generations you can go before you run into genetic mutations and degredation of the actual genetic infrastructure -- the physical parts over time -- that cause problems that matter. they are inevitable, if given enough time.

So, even the mother plant needs to reproduce. if hermaphroditic (?) reproduction, you'd want to limit the number of consecutive generations you did that too. not quite like dog breeding, because plants are simpler and can be inbred to a much greater extent than animals. meoisis will provide enough genetic variation for a while, i would assume. anyway, they won't be clones, but you get the minimum changes possible from sexual reproduction that way. as before... cull the weak and keep the strong. rinse and repeat.

i don't have a degree, but basically a minor in biology and chemistry. i do have other degrees, in case that alluded to me being a drop-out. organic chemistry was just fun, so i took it and same with microbiology. talk to a phD and they can refine what was said, but it'll be the same stuff, because that's how science works. the natural world has rules... these rules add up to predictable outcomes. if our tech was good enough, we could predict the future because all of life is one cascading domino of rections that have to turn out the way they turn out given all other factors -- which are also barreling through time in the same manner, lol, coincedentally interacting, or seemingly so to the human eye. free-will is a construct of your brain :p

anyway my guess is that the clones will run into problems roughly the same time as the mother plant starts to show problems -- variations will naturally occur and likely widely ranging lengths of time, even so.

best way to avoid... just don't clone a sickly looking plant -- whether mother or clone of a clone. you'd want to reproduce a new mother before genetic mutaions occur, too.... otherwise you are cloning problems.

if a mother looks sickly and a clone looks healthy, make a new mother from that healthier looking clone and kill the mother with the genetic mutation with potential problems.

no matter what, eventually it's getting plant alzheimercancer... :p
 
Last edited:
Judaz

Judaz

476
93

A recent article claims to support the hypothesis and observations that I have made throughout the years of cloning the tops of plants is better than cloning from the random branches of a mother plant and practicing the recommended cloning act of taking the lower branches. It argues that the best way to protect your strain from genetic mutations over time is to take the clone from the apical meristem because it forms a sort of germline that protects the plants genetics. It has the least amount of cell division of all branches.

It goes on to claim that scientists are also finding evidence that different parts of plant branches have different tendencies to mutate and change over time. Just Ike trees. While it has not been proven yet, the evidence is sure pointing towards that direction and may soon overturn the old dogma of the genetic drift concept.

If you think about it’s usually the strongest and healthiest shoot that receives the most light. Given that it’s not burned ofcourse.
 
Last edited:
Judaz

Judaz

476
93
first, it's not a myth that genetic mutations will occur eventually. that will happen in the mother from see plant too, eventually, though.

it is a solid maybe, and likely for either. so, you won't get a solid answer that can apply to your specific situation. you can observe and react, or if it came from somewhere else, you can query that source for information that may or may not help.

because of this unpredictability caused by numerous factors mentioned already in this thread, anecdotal evidence (a.k.a. a logical fallacy) can easily be found supporting both sides of the argument. it should be ignored. that's why it's a logical fallacy. it is meaningless on its own and at best correlates but does not cause a thing. not that sharing anecdotal information isn't a good thing, but it can lead you astray easily.

genetic flaws accumulate over time for various reason. it doesn't even have to be x-rays (lol!). Also, without meiosis, you do not get any genetic recombination, either. allowing this to be the root for reproduciton avoids many of the potential problems, but adds randomness to what your end product will be -- even if its from a hermaphrodite.

yes, it is a clone, but it's the same age as the original mother plant. it's about how many times each cell has gone through mitosis. each time is an opportunity for a mutation. think about dolly the clone. it died young relative to its inception. it was old for its age based on various quantitative metrics. that's because it was essentially as old as the adult it was cloned from the moment it formed in a testube -- as far as age-related problems. this is less of a problem for plants than animals in similar contexts.

age matters... time matters. clone of a clone of a clone is not a sapling or young plant. the real question is whether regrowing from a cutting has an affect on mutations over time? if not, then it simply won't matter if it's from the mother or not... it's the same age realtive to # of times through mitosis (cell reproduction), which will be the same # as the mother from seed.

best way to predict is to know how old a plant can get... that'd tell you how robust it's 'kids' could potentially be.. but not it's cuttings, because again, the cutting are as old as the original mother from seed plant.

it will be a bit of genetics and pure random luck as far as how many generations you can go before you run into genetic mutations and degredation of the actual genetic infrastructure -- the physical parts over time -- that cause problems that matter. they are inevitable, if given enough time.

So, even the mother plant needs to reproduce. if hermaphroditic (?) reproduction, you'd want to limit the number of consecutive generations you did that too. not quite like dog breeding, because plants are simpler and can be inbred to a much greater extent than animals. meoisis will provide enough genetic variation for a while, i would assume. anyway, they won't be clones, but you get the minimum changes possible from sexual reproduction that way. as before... cull the weak and keep the strong. rinse and repeat.

i don't have a degree, but basically a minor in biology and chemistry. i do have other degrees, in case that alluded to me being a drop-out. organic chemistry was just fun, so i took it and same with microbiology. talk to a phD and they can refine what was said, but it'll be the same stuff, because that's how science works. the natural world has rules... these rules add up to predictable outcomes. if our tech was good enough, we could predict the future because all of life is one cascading domino of rections that have to turn out the way they turn out given all other factors -- which are also barreling through time in the same manner, lol, coincedentally interacting, or seemingly so to the human eye. free-will is a construct of your brain :p

anyway my guess is that the clones will run into problems roughly the same time as the mother plant starts to show problems -- variations will naturally occur and likely widely ranging lengths of time, even so.

best way to avoid... just don't clone a sickly looking plant -- whether mother or clone of a clone. you'd want to reproduce a new mother before genetic mutaions occur, too.... otherwise you are cloning problems.

if a mother looks sickly and a clone looks healthy, make a new mother from that healthier looking clone and kill the mother with the genetic mutation with potential problems.

no matter what, eventually it's getting plant alzheimercancer... :p

I totally disagree with you. New evidence is showing that the apical meristem aka the main shoot and tops of plants holds a germ line that protects the plant from mutations.

check out this article by John Brunstein he claims that genetic drift is a factor of accumulated changes encountered through epigenetic factors from the environment and have more chances of expressing them if it’s not kept in ideal health and exact environmental conditions from which the plant originally started from.

 
Judaz

Judaz

476
93
My observations through out the year has led me to believe that there is some sort of shielding effect when taking clones after pruning the tops of healthy plants in veg state and is a superior way of keeping the genetics of an old clone intact and with the least probability of mutations in the process. I had been shielding myself from this whole dudding phenomena that many growers have been fighting for many years and when this year one of my associates decided he was going to use a mother plant, he opened up Pandora’s box and introduced mutated clones into different grow rooms, which has left me scrambling trying to identify them early and weed them out and searching for answers as to why this may be and why this happened. Which led me to run into these recent papers that I’ve found.

Now I do have to admit that the mother went through some epigenetic factors that were stressful within her 6 month life span and was not treated in best conditions. Which may have been the reasons for why she mutated and started producing duds.

But if the hypothesis of the apical meristem being the shield for new generations proves true in the future then it may explain why cloning from the tops of healthy veg plants is the safest way to shield the genetics under standard mechanical propagation methods of branch cloning. Of course tissue cell culture is far superior but this would be the next best thing. And also a stable and sterile environment in veg room would also be the obvious factor as well to maintain an environment to produce no epigenetic outcomes.
 
DreamsOfDiesel

DreamsOfDiesel

1,593
263
I had mother plants from clone only chemdog &/or real nyc diesel from 90s that was still around in 2012 & produced amazing but she was sensitive & herm prone if you weren't careful. She may have been sensitive no matter how old. Still favorite smoke (taste & high combination was crazy) to this day. Currently trying multiple strains to find same weed even if I have to find different strains & cross it myself. Don't care if its exact same name, just same flavor & high combo lol
 
FlipFan

FlipFan

17
13
Maybe we should get someone to comment on a mom that they have had for a very extended period. Old school breeders probably still have some super old genetics kept around. I have heard that doing tissue culture can revive the vigor that the seed mother had. Not sure as I haven't done this before, but it makes sense if your regenerating your plant from the DNA of the mother rather than just a cutting. Interesting topic for sure!

Cheers,
Crom
I'm a little late to the party, seeing as this was written in 2011 but saw the thread and thought I'd chime in. I've been taking clones of clones of a Gorilla Glue #4 for almost 5 years now and it's still the same fantastic plant.
 
T

TeW33zy

31
18
Interesting topic! I have yet to see any solid science or data on this subject but clones do seem to loose vigor after being cloned multiple generations. I don't know why but many people have had this same experience and many people I know who have done this a lot longer than I have insist that keeping mother plants is the only way to go. Seems like it is some what strain dependent too- some seem to lose vigor faster than others.

I have always wondered why cannabis is more prone to these issues. Maybe because it is an annual and not really genetically wired to be kept alive like a perennial? As Jsan pointed out there are many fruit cultivars that have been cloned for hundreds of years. In the case of bananas it has been almost 10,000 years. So why is this not possible with cannabis?
I have did studies on this. I am a Sr. Biosystems Engineer, Algriculture. However, I am now a Executive Master Engineer after getting my Masters in EMEM
 
GNick55

GNick55

Staff
Supporter
10,556
438
I have did studies on this. I am a Sr. Biosystems Engineer, Algriculture. However, I am now a Executive Master Engineer after getting my Masters in EMEM
prove this..
because your very immature and your wrong with some of your info..
maybe you should of went to cooking school..
 
cannafarmer420

cannafarmer420

🐼 Fu
Supporter
2,439
263
Cells can only.replicate so many times before telomeres run out
 
cannafarmer420

cannafarmer420

🐼 Fu
Supporter
2,439
263
Clones don't lose vigor, Growers do...

Really folks, 99% of the growers on these forums don't have any growing skills whatsoever - stop blaming genetics, bugs, virus's, whatever - it's Grower Error.
Show some results then tree guy.....if we don't know what we are doing you should have wayyyy better bud
 
20230918 191213 resized
Last edited:

Latest posts

Top Bottom