Is cannabis wank?

[Cambium]

22 hours ago, Amarillo slim said:

don't disagree with anything they are saying in it, although of course its something they could have done a chapter on, and condensed into a paragraph there are some things they haven't touched on or gone into details about.

What they are referring to happening in Spain is more the practice of commercial seed production as apposed to real breeding. Of course while many people find donors that are easy to work with, good breeders seek out plants that are often very tricky to obtain large amounts of viable pollen from. Requiring experimentation with reversal procedures, using large numbers / Sqmtr of space for donor plants as well as labour intensive manual harvesting of the pollen from stubborn male parts

 

Yes. I would have liked further explanation. It's hard to find anything to read specifically that all the traits avaliable via m/f are avaliable via f/f, that would be suitable for my level of understanding. One point they make and one that I'm aware of and as you point out, is that many plants cant be, or struggle to be selfed. Surely this highlights that with out the male component, much can be lost to the breeder who only deals in females?  

 

22 hours ago, Amarillo slim said:

And ofcourse the fact that these seed producers often use one pollen donor for many crossings due to it reversing readily, is something that to a large extent is also mirrored in traditional M/F seed production due to the inability to easily select good male plants.  For example there are many companies ive seen who near all their crossings are with one special male plant they’ve found which produces great offspring

 

Yup. Certainly not trying to isolate out selfing as the main problem. The industry and everything that comes from the market (society)  that justifies that industry is the problem, and it isnt isolated to the Cannabis industry. Gene pools are shrinking everywhere, genes that are in our hands and those that arent (wild). Poor custodianship of the natural world is worse than it's ever been. I'm not comfortable nor optimistic about technological solutions to this problem, but I accept they are coming and that field scale, open pollination will become (already has become) a niche breeding tool, and the foundation of the species will be lost to a petri dish and hyper tuned convenience.  

 

I accept that it's very much a conservation (for want of a better word) thing for me. And trends give a strong indication of the present direction. I can accept the explanation, I think  but cant shake the sense of impending doom the industry in general gives me, but I certainly cant deny that I would hold that opinion even if fems were excluded from the equation. 

 

For the last 20yrs of my life, I have been driven by a overwhelming sense of loss. The loss of ecology unmolested by humans. I have no problem accepting the reality of how/why we find ourselves here at this point in time, and that unmolested Cannabis in particular is a thing of the distant past . But I have no doubt that we should think about our actions within the context of custodianship and how we can cause this loss to accelerate over a period of time that's a blink of an eye in an ecological sense and just long enough for humans not to notice.

 

22 hours ago, Amarillo slim said:

but you can’t blame the genetics for being available, or the people in these places for wanting to grow them.  

 

Absolutely. I'm not one for claiming to know what's best for local farmers. That doesn't change the reality of the actual ecological impact, and ultimately, we are the source of that impact. 

 

22 hours ago, Amarillo slim said:

The main thing that I wanted to get across, is that all of these issues with fems are indirect.  There is nothing fundamentally wrong with female x female matings, the genetic combinations created are the same, again with the offspring produced and so on.  Thats the part I take issue with, when people perpetuate the myth that there is something necessarily inherently different about plants obtained through all female breeding other than the lack of males present.  

 

 

Indirect issues are still issues. 

 

Without a deeper understanding, some reading or something, I will have to take you at your word regarding the fact that the gene pool is accessible in its entirety via f/f. 

 

Yes, good discussion.

Edited June 21, 2020 by Cambium

[Kev.k]

No. It’s great. End of story. 

[Amarillo slim]

23 hours ago, Aladdin.khalifa said:

Have you seen a lot of south African plants displaying the intersex trait even outdoors?

 

Not outdoors no. I could probably count on my hands the number of truly intersex plants I've seen outdoors. Under light dep and indoors, different story, not to mention the introduction of deliberate stress.  I do the same testing for outdoor plants as for in, just with a slight more tolerance for outdoor only cultivars.  

23 hours ago, Aladdin.khalifa said:

I love what you do mister Slim, keep up the good work!!

 

Cheers 

 

6 hours ago, Cambium said:

Yes. I would have liked further explanation. It's hard to find anything to read specifically that all the traits avaliable via m/f are avaliable via f/f, that would be suitable for my level of understanding.

 

I think the main reason people expect there to be some difference is because we are mammals with a focus on gender, male and female being integral parts of reproduction etc.  It makes it slightly counter intuitive to think that it 'doesn't matter' on a genetic level. But perhaps not that long away similar things to creating feminised seeds could even be used in humans. IVG, where they can produce a type of stem cell from a skin or blood cell for instance, then form eggs or sperm from this.  Its still obviously a work in progress but the idea is that you could create a sperm cell from a woman and vice versa, allowing two woman or two men to actually produce an offspring (albeit with the males needing a surrogate).

 

Ofcourse gender can even be fluid in humans, and in other non mammalian animals that have different sex determining chromosomes such as birds and fish, there are many cases of both sperm and egg being able to be produced by one individual to enable sexual reproduction. Hens can under go a partial transfer of gender to produce sperm for example.  In cannabis its quite a natural process, we just bring it about artificially so the plants with the right genetics can be used.  Theres nothing sinister or inherently unnatural about it.  

 

6 hours ago, Cambium said:

many plants cant be, or struggle to be selfed. Surely this highlights that with out the male component, much can be lost to the breeder who only deals in females?  

 

There is a strong correlation between a plants tendency to express intersex traits through stress, and its ease to reverse to produce large amounts of viable pollen.  As I seek out the plants that show low-no intersex tendencies under environmental stress, then yes, often it is difficult to produce pollen from these individuals.  But, its an obstacle worth overcoming for the outcomes imo. There are very few cases of plants that can't be reversed at all.  The real problems start when you start to hit issues with sterility, something that I've just spent a whole winters work dealing with, only to produce a very small number of offspring from what would normally be 1000s of seeds. A whole other thing.  Even just doing things the way I do - growing out full season plants to finish, re-veg, stress test / find best STS ratios, produce donors and targets to produce next gen - is a lot of work and ball ache compared to simply seeding a few branches with the 'best male(s)', perhaps coupled with running another two similar gens indoors over winter.  This is one reasons why 'Fs' shouldn't be taken as any guide to the quality of the seeds, as there can be such variance in the actual breeding work thats gone on, not to mention things like population sizes and a whole host of intricacies.  In any case, for actual results, all female breeding is superior. The extra labour that is required for things like pollen production/collection is a small price to pay for the greater accuracy in selection of favourable genotypes etc...

 

6 hours ago, Cambium said:

Yup. Certainly not trying to isolate out selfing as the main problem. The industry and everything that comes from the market (society)  that justifies that industry is the problem, and it isnt isolated to the Cannabis industry. Gene pools are shrinking everywhere, genes that are in our hands and those that arent (wild). Poor custodianship of the natural world is worse than it's ever been. I'm not comfortable nor optimistic about technological solutions to this problem, but I accept they are coming and that field scale, open pollination will become (already has become) a niche breeding tool, and the foundation of the species will be lost to a petri dish and hyper tuned convenience.  

 

I accept that it's very much a conservation (for want of a better word) thing for me. And trends give a strong indication of the present direction. I can accept the explanation, I think  but cant shake the sense of impending doom the industry in general gives me, but I certainly cant deny that I would hold that opinion even if fems were excluded from the equation. 

 

For the last 20yrs of my life, I have been driven by a overwhelming sense of loss. The loss of ecology unmolested by humans. I have no problem accepting the reality of how/why we find ourselves here at this point in time, and that unmolested Cannabis in particular is a thing of the distant past . But I have no doubt that we should think about our actions within the context of custodianship and how we can cause this loss to accelerate over a period of time that's a blink of an eye in an ecological sense and just long enough for humans not to notice.

 

I know exactly what your saying here, there is a lot of doom and gloom, but I personally think focusing on it is not the answer.  Im a realist, I like to worry about things that I can change and not feel disempowered by those I cannot.  A lot of my friends are heavy into conservation, and while I have massive respect for the work they do, I sometimes feel that they are not always being realistic or putting their focus in the right places.  For example they might care about deforestation, care about feeding people, then also not like monocrop farming or breeding methods they deem unnatural.  You can't have your cake and eat it, something has to give.  For me, knowing that a lot of the developing world where these issues are most prevalent have got very inefficient agriculture, largely down to the genetics they use. I can't help but think one of the most effective things for conservation of wild spaces etc would be employing the cutting edge of plant breeding to develop new cultivars for these environment through the use methods like double haploid breeding etc...  Yes there should also be conservation in the gene pools of crop plants (or any plant for that matter). But in terms of practical solutions to problems, I believe the 'conservation mindset' is not always the most helpful. 

 

6 hours ago, Cambium said:

Indirect issues are still issues. 

 

Ofcourse.  perhaps indirect issues wasn't the best phrase to explain what I meant here, but you are right that just because there are good sides to something, doesn't mean the negatives aren't still a very real thing.  I guess my point is that a lot of these negatives are circumstantial. To do with bad practice etc.  And not to let these things tarnish the view of something that is other cases can be a very positive thing.  

 

 

Could rabbit on,  I feel this has been productive though and worth while. We've all learnt something.  What the forums are all about.  cheers 

Edited June 21, 2020 by Amarillo slim

[Funk P]

4 hours ago, Amarillo slim said:

 

Not outdoors no. I could probably count on my hands the number of truly intersex plants I've seen outdoors. Under light dep and indoors, different story, not to mention the introduction of deliberate stress.  I do the same testing for outdoor plants as for in, just with a slight more tolerance for outdoor only cultivars.  

 

Cheers 

 

 

I think the main reason people expect there to be some difference is because we are mammals with a focus on gender, male and female being integral parts of reproduction etc.  It makes it slightly counter intuitive to think that it 'doesn't matter' on a genetic level. But perhaps not that long away similar things to creating feminised seeds could even be used in humans. IVG, where they can produce a type of stem cell from a skin or blood cell for instance, then form eggs or sperm from this.  Its still obviously a work in progress but the idea is that you could create a sperm cell from a woman and vice versa, allowing two woman or two men to actually produce an offspring (albeit with the males needing a surrogate).

 

Ofcourse gender can even be fluid in humans, and in other non mammalian animals that have different sex determining chromosomes such as birds and fish, there are many cases of both sperm and egg being able to be produced by one individual to enable sexual reproduction. Hens can under go a partial transfer of gender to produce sperm for example.  In cannabis its quite a natural process, we just bring it about artificially so the plants with the right genetics can be used.  Theres nothing sinister or inherently unnatural about it.  

 

 

There is a strong correlation between a plants tendency to express intersex traits through stress, and its ease to reverse to produce large amounts of viable pollen.  As I seek out the plants that show low-no intersex tendencies under environmental stress, then yes, often it is difficult to produce pollen from these individuals.  But, its an obstacle worth overcoming for the outcomes imo. There are very few cases of plants that can't be reversed at all.  The real problems start when you start to hit issues with sterility, something that I've just spent a whole winters work dealing with, only to produce a very small number of offspring from what would normally be 1000s of seeds. A whole other thing.  Even just doing things the way I do - growing out full season plants to finish, re-veg, stress test / find best STS ratios, produce donors and targets to produce next gen - is a lot of work and ball ache compared to simply seeding a few branches with the 'best male(s)', perhaps coupled with running another two similar gens indoors over winter.  This is one reasons why 'Fs' shouldn't be taken as any guide to the quality of the seeds, as there can be such variance in the actual breeding work thats gone on, not to mention things like population sizes and a whole host of intricacies.  In any case, for actual results, all female breeding is superior. The extra labour that is required for things like pollen production/collection is a small price to pay for the greater accuracy in selection of favourable genotypes etc...

 

 

I know exactly what your saying here, there is a lot of doom and gloom, but I personally think focusing on it is not the answer.  Im a realist, I like to worry about things that I can change and not feel disempowered by those I cannot.  A lot of my friends are heavy into conservation, and while I have massive respect for the work they do, I sometimes feel that they are not always being realistic or putting their focus in the right places.  For example they might care about deforestation, care about feeding people, then also not like monocrop farming or breeding methods they deem unnatural.  You can't have your cake and eat it, something has to give.  For me, knowing that a lot of the developing world where these issues are most prevalent have got very inefficient agriculture, largely down to the genetics they use. I can't help but think one of the most effective things for conservation of wild spaces etc would be employing the cutting edge of plant breeding to develop new cultivars for these environment through the use methods like double haploid breeding etc...  Yes there should also be conservation in the gene pools of crop plants (or any plant for that matter). But in terms of practical solutions to problems, I believe the 'conservation mindset' is not always the most helpful. 

 

 

Ofcourse.  perhaps indirect issues wasn't the best phrase to explain what I meant here, but you are right that just because there are good sides to something, doesn't mean the negatives aren't still a very real thing.  I guess my point is that a lot of these negatives are circumstantial. To do with bad practice etc.  And not to let these things tarnish the view of something that is other cases can be a very positive thing.  

 

 

Could rabbit on,  I feel this has been productive though and worth while. We've all learnt something.  What the forums are all about.  cheers 

 

Thank you for the knowledge bomb I'm reading it and reading it again trust me and that goes to everyones opinions! Good shit! Much love 

[buddy13]

is this what it was like in the "old days"?

can see why people miss it so much. great information without too much ego flexing

[JockBudman]

On 19/06/2020 at 9:09 AM, Sgt Smash said:

Great advice there. I've strated micro dosing

 

Do you have any recommendations for strains that put a spring in your step? That's the sort of thing i could do with when having to do the weekly shopping

 

 

Panama from Ace and Grapefruit from Female Seeds did that for me. I'd say that, broadly speaking, most sativa heavy or pure sativa strains are good for truckin on down the line 

[Funk P]

8 minutes ago, JockBudman said:

 

 

Panama from Ace and Grapefruit from Female Seeds did that for me. I'd say that, broadly speaking, most sativa heavy or pure sativa strains are good for truckin on down the line 

 

I'll check these out as I'm in need of a sativa leaning hybrid. Any other recommendations anyone? Thanks for that one jock 

[JockBudman]

It's a pleasure  I'll never miss a chance to bang the sativa drum.

 

I'm sure others will have plenty suggestions too, I know there's a few sativa fans around here.

[Funk P]

Just now, JockBudman said:

It's a pleasure  I'll never miss a chance to bang the sativa drum.

 

I'm sure others will have plenty suggestions too, I know there's a few sativa fans around here.

 

Yeah I think that's a main problem of mine, I've always smoked indica dominant cause the market is flooded with them and well I'm just a spacker and grew them too... What I've started to not be a fan of are the characteristics of the "indica high", I need that spring in my step shit... 

[JockBudman]

34 minutes ago, Funk P said:

 

Yeah I think that's a main problem of mine, I've always smoked indica dominant cause the market is flooded with them and well I'm just a spacker and grew them too... What I've started to not be a fan of are the characteristics of the "indica high", I need that spring in my step shit... 

 

I've been through the same cycle tbh. Especially in the beginning all I grew was indica dom stuff because I wanted quick flower time and short plants.

 

It's taken years to learn what I need is sativa or sativa doms and it was grapefruit with it's fast flowering time that drew me in. Now of course, I don't think anything of running a 16 week strain - the tents are in play most of the year so why not?

[silvester growdrobe]

On 6/18/2020 at 8:17 PM, Slippy One said:

BReal smokes pure Insane OG J’s all day long and is known to say he doesn’t get high anymore. He smokes for flavour. its the same for most psychoactive things, I get bored of booze myself, bloody second rate medieval buzz.    

 Are you saying medieval is bad because it's outdated?

You might find cannabis has been around slightly longer...

 

e2a: the cynic in me would also suggest that B-Real might just be saying that to sell Insane OG in his dispensaries...

Edited July 2, 2020 by silvester growdrobe

[Slippy One]

2 hours ago, silvester growdrobe said:

 Are you saying medieval is bad because it's outdated?

You might find cannabis has been around slightly longer...

 

e2a: the cynic in me would also suggest that B-Real might just be saying that to sell Insane OG in his dispensaries...

I was just bad mouthing booze is an old buzz, but I think we’ve been doing booze longer, cultivation of cannabis dates back to 3000 years BC, Meade was used when nomadism stopped, pre Mesopotamian, Sumatran times, so 2000 years older than recorded cannabis cultivation. 

[silvester growdrobe]

Well that's schooled me. If I wasn't so drunk I'd try to remember that...

[Hashcity]

What I've noticed buying weed is most of it is just shit.. Shit taste, shit stone or wet, no curing whatsoever. Its all a world away from the late 90's early 2000's when weed was very tasty and dry with a few weeks cure, really enjoyable smoke.. It's like the good growers don't grow anymore and gangsters have took over with blues, blues and more blues which i may had is very cheap by the oz but still 1g per 10 nickers. 

I've discovered that i like the haze buzz, it tastes nice and makes me feel happy and alive and is nothing at all like shit blues.. But not many cash croppers grow hazes just dull indicas.. Weed is shit usually if bought from dealers but grown yourself is a damn sight better coz you've chose the strain and you've grown it, dried it and most of all cured it to perfection!  If i was just starting experimenting with weed buying it i probably wouldn't bother with it tbh... Fuck the modern cash croppers and their snidey dealers! Taking our hard earned money and giving us a sub standard product, fuck them off! 

 

[LA LUNA]

On 21/06/2020 at 1:10 PM, Cambium said:

For the last 20yrs of my life, I have been driven by a overwhelming sense of loss. The loss of ecology unmolested by humans

I know this in an old post cambium, im an optomist at heart and remain as positive as i can but that paragraph above really resonates with me !