Welcome to UK420

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more!

This message will be removed once you have signed in.


stoner

Gorilla Glue not flowering after 7 weeks

41 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

32 minutes ago, brock1 said:

Putting any plant that as been in veg for 10 weeks under 12hr of light with start its flower sycle. The mutation know as auto flowering is the result of 2 damaged genes being past from 2 p1's (parent plant's) These damaged genes are not ressesive but dominant genes. When you cross a photo to a auto you get a gene repair because the damaged auto genes is the older in the genome and for that reason no f1 photo x auto will ever be a auto unless the photo as a auto gene that as been repaired in f1-5 after that you pretty much back to auto. However the loose labelled semi auto's are not always full auto but a f2+ repair to reduce the photo sensitive of the photo strain used. These plant are photoperiod sensitive and won't revert back to veg after flowering starts unless put under 24hr light and then only a very small %. I have breed some strange almost unbelievable thing's with auto's genetics in the past. I have had f5 Lowryder auto crosses that could reveg under 24hr. Grow as a photo under 18 and not flower. Yet put in the dark for a 3 day shock or 12/12 for a week they would flower under 18hr of light. It's crazy what you can do with a plant indoor when you dont care about the plant only what you can make it do. Wish i still had the freedom to grow indoor like I did 10yr ago.

Not if it's a pure autoflower it won't they are not light dependant, their lifespan is predetermined by time. The only way 12/12 will induce flowering if something is paired shaped somewhere with the genetics which it could be. Semi autos are just term fur long flowering autoflowers coined by one breeder, basically unstable genetic, he didnt even breed then to f3s let alone f4s, they were a crap shoot. That's my take on it but good to hear what over people think :)

Edited by nudger36

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, nudger36 said:

Not if it's a pure autoflower it won't. 

Theirs no such thing as pure auto. Auto=gene damage. It's not a ressesive gene. Once the gene hit a photo strain it is auto from the f1. Yet not a single seed from a photo auto f1 cross auto's or are classed as auto. Genetically all are auto. 

Share this post


Link to post

Posted (edited)

10 minutes ago, brock1 said:

Theirs no such thing as pure auto. Auto=gene damage. It's not a ressesive gene. Once the gene hit a photo strain it is auto from the f1. Yet not a single seed from a photo auto f1 cross auto's or are classed as auto. Genetically all are auto. 

I think that's just a termanolgy issueIt is when it gets to f4 its fully auto or what I would call pure auto. No an f1 photo to auto needs working to f4 before it's fully auto. I've crossed loads of photos to autos, just ended up with a few fast phenos

Edited by nudger36

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, nudger36 said:

It is when it gets to f4 its fully auto. No an f1 photo to auto need taking to f4 before it's fully auto. I've crossed loads of photos to autos, just ended up with a few fast phenos. 

That's not true at all. Autoing phone can be sellected at f2 to breed a auto population by selfing or breeding m/f. But even at f1 the population is 100% A genetic auto population because the auto mutation is a old dominant damaged gene in the cannabis genome. It is almost like a rhesus gene. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

Posted (edited)

But the offspring are not 100% auto are they youve selected the autoflower from a rough 25% you would use it to make f3s we are not on about making s1s and it's not done like that to be sold on the market. Autos to photos f1s are classed as fast photoperiods - 1s and do not autoflower they are photoperiods light dependant. To be a stable auto they need breeding the right way to f4 imo. Anyway don't think we've helped with the issue there lol I'm sure she will start flowering soon :)

Edited by nudger36

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, nudger36 said:

But the offspring are not 100% auto are they youve selected the autoflower from a rough 25% you would use it to make f3s we are not on about making s1s and it's not done like that to be sold on the market. Autos to photos f1s are classed as fast photoperiods - 1s and do not autoflower they are photoperiods light dependant. To be a stable auto they need breeding the right way to f4 imo. Anyway don't think we've helped with the issue there lol I'm sure she will start flowering soon :)

Yes they are select any random seeds from the f1 and breed random to. All will revert to auto in future generations. You can't breed away from it because 100% of the f1 though don't express auto are carrying a dominant auto gene. 100% of any cross are auto weather they auto flower or not. Fact.

Share this post


Link to post

Posted (edited)

If auto trait was dominant you would see it in f1.. no chance of finding a photo in a pack of autos unless a mistake has been made during packing..

G1- photo photo  x auto auto = 100% photo auto

g2- photo auto x auto auto = 50% auto auto 50% photo auto

or g2- photo auto x photo auto = 25% auto auto 75% photo auto

or g2- photo auto x photo photo = 25% photo auto 75% photo photo

 

the only way to be sure you have bred auto out of a photo would be to cross it with an auto to see if you get 1/2 autoflowering offspring in the first generation.. it is possible to breed the auto out of a photo but you would need to take this step in order to be sure you had achieved it.

You will know if you’ve bred the photo out of an auto because it will autoflower. An autoflowering plant cannot carry a photoperiodic tendency as P is dominant and would stop it autoflowering.. but a photo could carry an autoflowering trait without  autoflowering. two autos can’t make a photo.. but two photos with a recessive auto trait could make an auto.. 

cut a long story short.. it’s not a photo.. it’s just late. :smokin:

Edited by Era
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

Posted (edited)

10 hours ago, Era said:

If auto trait was dominant you would see it in f1.. no chance of finding a photo in a pack of autos unless a mistake has been made during packing..

G1- photo photo  x auto auto = 100% photo auto

g2- photo auto x auto auto = 50% auto auto 50% photo auto

or g2- photo auto x photo auto = 25% auto auto 75% photo auto

or g2- photo auto x photo photo = 25% photo auto 75% photo photo

 

the only way to be sure you have bred auto out of a photo would be to cross it with an auto to see if you get 1/2 autoflowering offspring in the first generation.. it is possible to breed the auto out of a photo but you would need to take this step in order to be sure you had achieved it.

You will know if you’ve bred the photo out of an auto because it will autoflower. An autoflowering plant cannot carry a photoperiodic tendency as P is dominant and would stop it autoflowering.. but a photo could carry an autoflowering trait without  autoflowering. two autos can’t make a photo.. but two photos with a recessive auto trait could make an auto.. 

cut a long story short.. it’s not a photo.. it’s just late. :smokin:

Who said a auto trait is not dominant? I said the auto gene is not only dominant but breeds like a rhesus gene. 100% of a f1 auto x photo cross as the auto (MUTATION) gene dominant. You can't just breed the auto back out sorry to tell you.

 

If you breed.

Auto x photo. Selected for none auto (photo) you would have a 100% of the population selection. Yet select any and breed f2 and get 25% breed none auto from the f2 and again a higher % will auto untill all auto. Because it is dominant over the full generation of f1.

 

The only way to breed away from the auto is a P1 (parent generation 1) breeding. F1 auto/photo needs to be crossed to the original photo parent P1. P1 Bx. This step will need repeating to remove the auto mutated gene because you have to breed double ressesive genes which are only available in the photo and P1 BX1 and P1 BX2.

 

Auto flowering is not a gene trait but a mutation within the gene pool. Further to add to this not all auto's carry a single dammage gene. Many genes are responsible for auto's and not all auto breed the same for this reason.

 

I THINK WE ARE GETTING A BIT ADVANCED FOR THIS THREAD. 

 

I will gladly take this further in a auto flowering thread. :yep:

 

Edited by brock1
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

Posted (edited)

@brock1 it was me thinking that auto can’t be dominant because it doesn’t show in f1 gen.. but if there is another explanation to this ie auto trait is ‘damaged’ and not recessive I’d love to know more about it but as you say.. probably not the place, will have a read up on the net.. thanks for the info... found only this.. could you point me in the direction of your info on auto being a ‘damaged dominant trait’?

Autoflowering seeds are available from seed retailers. Although some traits are complicated and require more than one gene to express, autoflowering is one of the most basic types of genetic traits and follows the laws of simple recessiveness and dominance. Specifically, it is a recessive trait.

also that ‘you can’t breed the auto out’ but as you later point out, this is possible but would require bx from the f1 to the original photo parent. 

Your last point I find intriguing as I think the quote above from max yeild crontradicts it ‘many genes are responsible for autos and not all auto breed for the same reason’ does this mean that there is potential for an auto x auto to produce a photoperiodic plant? as in the op?

Edited by Era
Add quote
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Era said:

@brock1 it was me thinking that auto can’t be dominant because it doesn’t show in f1 gen.. but if there is another explanation to this ie auto trait is ‘damaged’ and not recessive I’d love to know more about it but as you say.. probably not the place, will have a read up on the net.. thanks for the info... found only this.. could you point me in the direction of your info on auto being a ‘damaged dominant trait’?

Autoflowering seeds are available from seed retailers. Although some traits are complicated and require more than one gene to express, autoflowering is one of the most basic types of genetic traits and follows the laws of simple recessiveness and dominance. Specifically, it is a recessive trait.

also that ‘you can’t breed the auto out’ but as you later point out, this is possible but would require bx from the f1 to the original photo parent. 

Your last point I find intriguing as I think the quote above from max yeild crontradicts it ‘many genes are responsible for autos and not all auto breed for the same reason’ does this mean that there is potential for an auto x auto to produce a photoperiodic plant? as in the op?

I will find some link ect out for you later. If I forget please drop me a pm as it's a busy time for me right now. As for the last question can a auto x auto breed a none auto? Yes ofcaurse it can but that plant can't because it is a gene repair. A auto can use a normal gene to repair a damaged or missing gene. 

Share this post


Link to post

Posted (edited)

16 hours ago, brock1 said:

Yes they are select any random seeds from the f1 and breed random to. All will revert to auto in future generations. You can't breed away from it because 100% of the f1 though don't express auto are carrying a dominant auto gene. 100% of any cross are auto weather they auto flower or not. Fact.

I am not having an f4 auto - f4 auto could produce a photoperiod, unless something is totally wrong in the breeding practice (selected unstable plant) 99.99999% auto f4 - auto f4 will be produce all autoflowers, Your talking about that needle in an haystack. An f4 autoflower just cant decide to become photoperiod unless its bad breeding practice or a cock up in packaging. Just dont make sense to me. An f1s fast photoperiod is not classed as an autoflower but its photo - f3 auto because it flowers under 12/12/ Honestly this is reading too much into imo. Mephisto have started bx back to photoperiods recently then they have go forward to the second f4 gen to get full auto again that just takes the plant back to f1 by bx but with more traits of photoperiod used.

Edited by nudger36
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, nudger36 said:

I am not having an f4 auto - f4 auto could produce a photoperiod, unless something is totally wrong in the breeding practice (selected unstable plant) 99.99999% auto f4 - auto f4 will be produce all autoflowers, Your talking about that needle in an haystack. An f4 autoflower just cant decide to become photoperiod unless its bad breeding practice or a cock up in packaging. Just dont make sense to me.

Your right but also wrong. You miss the point that most selective breeding is bottlenecking the gene pool. That is the main reason for mutation and gene repair is a plant's way to combat this as seen with the f1 auto/photo cross.

Edited by brock1
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

Posted (edited)

I do agree on that mate :) not just cannabis. Look at some of these poor pedigree dogs! selective breeding at its greatest. How is the  plant looking now @stoner any change?

Edited by nudger36
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

Well it has been an interesting thread so far, and i think ive learnt something. Never thought genetics would be simple but it gets confusing real quick. 

Got much more respect for the good breeders. 

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, nudger36 said:

How is the  plant looking now @stoner any change?

 

still no sign of flowering, they're getting till sunday then getting ripped out if there are no signs of change

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now