Schwaggy P's Random Stuff

Schwaggy P

🦨
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
'80s Black Afghani x Skunky Brewster
blaffy x skb.jpg
I'm only flowering him enough to get a few branches worth of pollen for the '80s Black Afghani ladies recently flipped. This should yield plenty of Black Afghani BX1 seeds to find a new male. He was starting to hit the top of the clear tote, so I bent the top and added some straw support.
 

Schwaggy P

🦨
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator

punnett logo.png
When breeding cannabis, your main focus is taking plants exhibiting exceptional traits and creating new plants that express some targeted bouquet of said traits in order to create new and “better” plants.

Each trait is decided by a pair of alleles (uh-leels). These alleles code for traits such as potency, height, flowering time, etc. For example, a female could have either red or brown pistils (stigma). Both of these gene variants can be present in the same plant and are coded by alleles. Which of these pistil colors express are dependent on which of the alleles is dominant. The dominant alleles will decide which traits are expressed.
punnett 1.png
The total sequencing and coding of all the alleles is known as the plant’s genotype. The observable expression of the dominant traits is known as the phenotype. When you are “pheno hunting”, you are essentially rolling the genetic dice to see which combination of alleles from a genotype lined up to give you a specific phenotype.

The variability you encounter when pheno hunting is limited to the genetic pool of the parent plants. This is why your different phenos will revolve around a related grab bag of traits. The gene pool is relatively limited (you aren’t going to find an oak tree pheno) but made more limited by long term targeted breeding, which seeks to shrink the possible phenos, you experience.

Punnett Squares are a way of illustrating/calculating the probability of genotypes/phenotypes produced by crossing plants of a certain genotype.

Let’s say we want to cross a short Skunk with a tall Haze. For this example let’s assume we know the alleles and genotype for both plants’ height.

Possible alleles: S=tall, s=short

The uppercase letter is the dominant allele and will dictate the trait’s expression. Anytime you see the uppercase dominant allele, the plant will express a tall phenotype. The lowercase letter represents the recessive allele and only when your plant has both alleles as lowercase ‘s’, will your plant express a recessive trait (in this case, short phenotype).

Skunk: ss – The pair of alleles are expressed as ‘ss’. The lowercase ‘s’ corresponds to “short” height. Since they are both recessive, this skunk is short.
Haze: Ss – The dominant ‘S’ allele coding for “tall” height is present and expresses a tall phenotype.

We can arrange this cross in a Punnett Square to see the possible combinations that can be made with these two plants to see what the progeny produces.
punnett skunk x haze.png
When we cross 2 plants, each plant will contribute one allele to the new plant. By arranging the genotypes in the Punnett Square, we can see each of the possible combinations of these alleles to calculate the frequency of phenotypes.

Keeping in mind that the presence of a dominant allele (S) means the resulting plant will express the tall trait, let’s list the possible combinations.

SS = tall
Ss = sS = tall
ss = short
By using the Punnett Square, we now see that our (Skunk x Haze) cross will result in 50% tall plants and 50% short plants. This 50:50 ratio describes the frequency at which the progeny will express. Whether you pop 4 seeds, or 4,000 seeds, the phenotypes will converge on this frequency (see: Law of Large Numbers).

Let’s see how things change if we alter the genotype of the Haze from (Ss) to (SS).
punnett true breeding.png
Now we see that all of the resulting plants are tall. This change of our Haze to (SS) is known as “true-breeding” since he will reliably pass on this tall trait.

Remember that this difference between Ss and SS is a difference of genotype, something we cannot observe. We can only “see” the phenotype of a plant. By making crosses and noting observations we could work backwards with the frequencies to better understand our plant’s genotype for breeding purposes. Breeding usually aims to create plants of a true breeding nature in order to have reliable tools that can influence projects in a way you see fit.

The Punnett Square can be used for multiple traits, but becomes cumbersome as you add more traits.

Punnett Square for 2 traits
Using (S) for height: S=tall , s=short
Using (P) for potency: P=potent , p=not potent
punnett new 2.png
Using our 2 trait Punnett Square, we have 3 different genotypes but only 2 phenotypes
SsPP = tall, potent (will breed true for potency because of PP)
SsPp = tall, potent
Sspp = tall, not potent

We can expect the population to be 75% tall+potent plants, and 25% to be tall+not potent plants. If you were focused in this round of breeding on finding the plants that are true-breeding for potency, the (SsPP) genotype would be your target.

The genotypes are the deciding factor for determining your phenotypes as you move through a breeding project. Notice, because we used a plant that was true breeding for tall plants (SS), none of the resulting progeny were short plants. If we had selected a plant that was tall but not true breeding (Ss), we would’ve had 50% short plants in the progeny as seen in the first (Skunk x Haze) example.

To highlight how Punnett Squares can become daunting as more traits are added, here is a 5-trait P-square
punnett 5.png
Now that we’re acquainted with Punnett Squares, let’s see how they can help answer a few questions.
1) How many seeds do I pop?
2) Are feminized seeds inherently bad breeding stock?
3) Why are F2 seeds considered “wilder” relative to F1 or F3?
 

Schwaggy P

🦨
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
How many seeds do I pop????

When starting a breeding project, you’ll come to this question at some point. In general, you’ll want to pop as many as your space can handle as this is ultimately a roll of the dice. But, we can approach this with a bit more intent using Punnett Squares and the illustrated frequencies.

Ideally, your breeding project is a well thought out plan that includes specific targeted traits that you’d like to have express in a new line. This is what can be considered the difference between a cross and a strain.

A cross is usually the mating of 2 plants with little intent as to the dynamics of inheritance. There is usually minimal forethought behind long-term expressions and nebulous guidelines for what exactly constitutes a “finished product”. Crosses usually do not go beyond an initial F1 hybrid and serve to be a large potential for which plants are considered for selection/keepers.

A strain on the other hand is more aware of end goals that entail a specific group of expressed traits that serves to either bolster an already great line or create a genuinely new line such that the original parent stock is not immediately obvious in the progeny. These aimed-for traits will help guide the breeding process by deciding how far one must go to achieve the finished product. If your finished product were spitting out predictable plants of a different arrangement of traits or variations that the breeders of the original parent stock wouldn’t immediately identify, then it could be considered a new line.

When you’re deciding how many seeds to pop to create a cross, it’s usually a blind search as no roadmap exists for you to know where to look for what. Since the deciding factor is “total dankness”, this implies an implicit understanding of what constitutes total dankness. In other words, “you’ll know it when to see it.” Some say it’s as good a compass as any, but among the downsides to this approach is employing a Punnett Square for predictive purpose. This is usually the approach of the grower for smoke as the genotypes are irrelevant. You’d only care about the expressed phenotype for final keeper plants.

When you make your target traits explicit: Tall and Sleepy effect for example; you can now use the Punnett Square to figure how many seeds to pop. This differs greatly from the cross-maker or grower for smoke, because you’ll want to be more aware of the genotypes as you move through your breeding project. Picking a plant with (SS) instead of (Ss) will affect the next generation and your ultimate goal, so this is an important point to consider.

For example:
S=Tall, s=short
Z=Sleepy effect, z=not sleepy effect

If you wanted to have a true breeding female that reliably passes tall height and sleepy effect, you’d ideally choose the plant with the genotype (SSZZ). If you have a cross you made (or acquired) using parents that expressed these traits (phenotype) like OG, then you could assume the parents were at least dominant for the traits.

This assumption would look like: (SsZz) since the parents expressed the traits, we can at least assume this much about the parent genotype. It could also be (SS) or (ZZ), but we’re being conservative with our assumption, as (SS) would actually make things easier.

how many seed square.png
Since we can only make selections based on phenotype (we cant see the genotype, but we now at least know the frequency at which they appear), you’ll be picking the plants with either (SsZz), (SsZZ), (SSZz), or (SSZZ) as these all have the same phenotype (tall with sleepy effect).

This means you can expect 56% of your popped seeds to at least express the phenotype you’d like. But for this example, our aim is for a true breeding genotype (SSZZ). Based on the Punnett, that appears 1 in 16 seeds. This ratio is for the total population and since females are only 50% of the total, we’ll need to double the amount of seeds (16 to 32 total seeds) to make sure we have the minimum number of seeds to statistically expect the appearance of our female target genotype.

While the Punnett Square can’t tell you which of the potential genotypes is the SSZZ, it gives you a baseline number to increase your chances of finding it. Given the traits and assumed genotype of the parents, we now know that we should pop at least 32 seeds to have the genotype we’d like for our project. You would need to do some more work to figure which plant has the (SSZZ) genotype, but the point is we have a baseline seed number to pop in order to expect it.

There are tons of avenues to travel toward reaching a breeding goal, you can focus on one trait at a time and slowly build on them with subsequent generations or try for multiple traits per breeding step. The purpose here is not to give every possible example, but to show how the Punnett Square can be a tool to help you figure how many seeds to pop in order to find desired plants.
 

Deebs

The Sentient Naturewalker
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
Thanks for this Schwaggy! That has to be one of the best explanations of expressions I have read in a very long time. I think I just had a flashback of karnaugh mapping for logical circuitry, and the linear/boolean algebra used.. lol

This is great information specifically in regards to excellent reference material for the future project!
 

Schwaggy P

🦨
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
Thanks for this Schwaggy! That has to be one of the best explanation of expressions I have read in a very long time. I think I just had a flashback of karnaugh mapping for logical circuitry, and the linear algebra used.. lol

This is great information specifically in regards to excellent reference material for the future project!
My pleasure. Now you made me miss math. ?

Thanks, I have rough info written for open pollination but I'm still trying to organize the background theory and the applications for the preservations.
 

Schwaggy P

🦨
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
Is it a bad idea to use feminized plants for breeding?
At some point in forum perusal, you will likely encounter some form of this question: “Can you use a feminized plant for breeding?” Answers will generally fall along yes or no, but lack a more full-throated explanation as to why the poster feels this is a good/bad practice.

Answers in the affirmative are usually guided by experience and take the form, “I have a feminized plant that is more stable than most reg plants. She doesn’t put out any hermie progeny.” While others take an opposite stance (can be guided by experience, but many times just repeating an assumption read from someone else), “No way! Feminized plants are inherently bad stock and will lead to hermie prone progeny.”

I will balance my stance by playing each side of this question and say that both of these sides are correct. While it seems counterintuitive to say both apparently contradictory answers are the case, I’ll illustrate using Punnett Squares.

Many times, traits that are considered bad can be recessive (think small letter allele), but can be “hidden” when paired with a dominant allele (think uppercase allele). Much like disease in humans, both partners must be carriers of specific genes in order for the disease to express in progeny. Statistically speaking, the chance of any two random partners both carrying this trait ensures the appearance of these genetic disorders is relatively low.

By selfing, or breeding a plant to itself, you are guaranteeing that whatever undesirable recessive traits lurk in the gene pool will necessarily double down and increase the chance of its expression in the progeny. What was before a possibility, has now been made a certainty.

Let’s see an example:

We have an OG Kush female we kept from a pack of fems. This OG did not express any intersex traits while growing, but some of her sisters did. We feel good about this plant because the phenotype did not show any hermie trait, but let’s remember we cannot see the genotype.

We’ll use H(no hermie) and h(hermie) to describe the alleles that code for stability. Since this pheno does not express the hermie trait, but the sisters did, we can assume our chosen OG Kush has the genotype (Hh).

Let’s see what happens to the progeny when we self this OG Kush

herm.png
We see that 25% of the resulting S1 plants are hermie prone (hh). Now we can appreciate the importance of genotype and its role in subsequent generations. Even though the chosen OG Kush phenotype was as stable as could be, the presence of the recessive hermie trait allele (h) means you’ll be dealing with some presence of hermie prone plants down the line.

Now does this mean feminized seeds are inherently bad stock? Let’s keep in mind that the phenomenon just described would also be true of masculinized seeds as the true culprit here is simply the fact that by breeding the exact same genotype to itself, we are guaranteeing a doubling down of the recessive traits that are present. If only 10% of a population is a carrier for a disease, this means that only couples that happen to both be carriers will produce affected children. By selfing, we now went from 10% to 100% and the rate of recessive expression has just increased.

So my answer to the question would be Yes and No.

Yes, selfing can produce a higher rate of issues in progeny, but only because of the logical conclusion that you’ve ensured recessive alleles are present for both contributing parents.

No, if you notice from the Punnett Square, we’ve also produced true-breeding stable (HH) plants. So it’s not that all progeny are forever cursed with the hermie trait, you can also create very stable plants.

You could use this OG Kush for a regular seed-breeding program and “cleanout” the hermie trait phenotype assuming your male is true-breeding.

Let’s see our OG Kush fem plant (Hh) crossed to a true-breeding Skunk male (HH):

herm2.png
Now we can see that all of the progeny have a stable no hermie phenotype. It would be understandable how you could then come to the conclusion that breeding regular seeds is superior to selfing.

An interesting point to consider: While all of the phenos are hermie-free, some genotypes here (Hh) still include the ingredients for hermie-prone plants appearing again in later generations. Navigating proper selection is the hallmark of a solid breeding program. This should also hint toward why F2 populations can be so variable coming from otherwise "stable" F1.

Only limiting ourselves to phenotype (can’t see genotypes), it now makes sense why there are so many seemingly contradictory opinions on this subject. Another point to consider is the amount of “elite” cuts that get selfed are themselves the product of hermie accidents. This tendency suggests a higher presence of the hermie trait in the population of plants many decide to reverse. This pre-existence of the trait coupled with doubling down on the genotype means feminized plants will necessarily have a higher rate of herm incidence.

Ultimately, the answer to this question is, “It depends.” This may not be totally satisfactory, but using the Punnett Squares, we can gain a better appreciation for the nuances involved with this concept.
 

Schwaggy P

🦨
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
@Schwaggy P have you been cataloging which traits are dominant and recessive across all of your breeding stock? If so, do you find that expression is pretty similar across the genome? Also, what about incomplete dominance, do you see that factoring into the equation?
I have been for the Skunky Brewster male and Green Crack S1 most closely. The most annoying so far is my GC sharp astringent vinegar smell seems to be recessive (makes sense b/c GC is more mango). The BX-ing has been an attempt to make that desirable trait true-breeding. These are the two that I've used in many pairings so I can see what tracks throughout. There are other notes for certain plants that seem to be appearing (Chem D variegation) along like heterozygous traits (Vv), but not as fully noted as with the two mentioned. I've noticed linked traits (two traits that seem to correlate together); Green Crack S1 crosses that have the heavy early frosting on secondary leaves has come with her tacky trichome texture.

As far as incomplete dominance, it's difficult in a limited setting to know whether a scenario is incomplete dominance or the just a weird recessive trait popping out. Where in the inc.dom example of a red flower mother and white flower male producing pink flowered offspring, it can be hard to pinpoint such a phenomenon in very similar looking traits in cannabis. I've noticed the nose on some offspring can be thought of as expressing incomplete dominance but even here, how can I know that what I'm smelling is just the logical combination of completely dominant terpenes creating a new but similar bouquet vs. an aroma that is an incomplete dominance creating a new pheno bouquet? I have not seen an obvious case of incomplete dominance like dark rust stigma and bright pink stigma creating a moderately colored rusty pink stigma yet.

Trying to make genetic theory work for the small-scale breeder is about taking things in small digestible bites and building a bigger picture "full stomach" made from the successes of these individual targeted bites. Looking at the 5-trait P-square and thinking about what it would take to try to do all of that in one shot is too much. But focusing on 1-2 traits at a time and slowly building makes the process possible. Even if one never tries to apply these things, it can help gain a better understanding for what is going on.
 

MacGydro

Gum Wrapper Grows
Hey Schwaggy, good to see you around again! I'm gonna drop some questions here that I asked in your RIU thread back in April, since you're hanging here now, if ya don't mind.
Since then, I've got some Skunky VA, and Skunky VA x Skunky D in flower, but haven't finished anything quite yet.
Here's the previous posts:
Schwaggy, where ya been? What's new and good?

Just read the thread in the last couple days, and wanted to add to the respect others have expressed.

Love your commitment to the Plant, the time you've taken to spread knowledge, and your choices of genetics to play with... So much so, in fact, that I just had to check a couple out for myself, along with the latest Bodhi order from GLG.

Skunky VA and Skunky VA x Skunky D should be en route shortly, so I figured I'd shoot a couple anticipatory questions your way...

10 or so years ago, I had a "Chemdog" cut I loved, but never knew which specific cut it might be. Having since had experiences with a few Chem D derivatives, I can say that wasn't it. I get moth balls (camphor?), Garlic, and onions predominately in the Chem D crosses I've done.

The "Chem" I had in an overheated little 400hps closet was lanky, spear shaped buds, and all lemons and gasoline vapors in the smell/taste department, according to my decade-old memory. She had a Sativa heavy effect, to the point of paranoia, and peeking through the blinds.

Does this sound like the SKVA to you, or maybe the JB or maybe something else?

Been missing whatever it was since I lost it, and since I haven't run across the SKVA again yet, I'm looking forward to checking out your beans, as the rks and Iraqi sound like great potential too!

So, next question goes in the opposite direction. The reason for the latest Bodhi order is a good night time indica. Heavenly Hashplant (Katsu Bubba x 88G13HP) and Pillow Book (Master Kush x Purple Unicorn F something) should provide something good there, but, what do you think the chances of finding a good knock out in either Skunky VA or the Skunky VA x Skunky D crosses?

Something from the dad or grandad maybe?
I'll be looking for each end of the Sativa / indica spectrum either way, and of course, plenty of stink!

Last question for now is, do you have any thoughts on a name for the Skunky VA x Skunky D cross yet? Skunky VD, Funky VD? VD Funk? I dunno... Anyway, looking forward to running them and finding some gems!

Oh, and if anyone else can answer any of those questions, from experience, feel free...

Hope you and yours are doing well, And avoiding cabin fever. Keep up the good garden!

And the second one:

Hey @Schwaggy P , I've got another question that's been eating at me a while, but I guess I haven't figured out how to ask the Google, but I figure maybe your scientifically trained self could answer:

I run a recirculating hydro system, 1/2" top fed, through hydroton, then 2" PVC, water falling to rez, timer set to 1 min on, per hour.

From experience, oxygen levels seem to be fine; No root rot or any noticeable detrimental effects to growth, but for peace of mind, would you happen to know a formula for how fast oxygen levels deplete per gallon of water, per hour, at what temp, etc?
I've tried searching here and the web in general, but I'm not sure if I'm asking the algorithms the right questions, so I figured I'd ask a smart human lol

Happy gardening!
 

stanknugzz77

CHOOSE YOUR TITLE
How many seeds do I pop????

When starting a breeding project, you’ll come to this question at some point. In general, you’ll want to pop as many as your space can handle as this is ultimately a roll of the dice. But, we can approach this with a bit more intent using Punnett Squares and the illustrated frequencies.

Ideally, your breeding project is a well thought out plan that includes specific targeted traits that you’d like to have express in a new line. This is what can be considered the difference between a cross and a strain.

A cross is usually the mating of 2 plants with little intent as to the dynamics of inheritance. There is usually minimal forethought behind long-term expressions and nebulous guidelines for what exactly constitutes a “finished product”. Crosses usually do not go beyond an initial F1 hybrid and serve to be a large potential for which plants are considered for selection/keepers.

A strain on the other hand is more aware of end goals that entail a specific group of expressed traits that serves to either bolster an already great line or create a genuinely new line such that the original parent stock is not immediately obvious in the progeny. These aimed-for traits will help guide the breeding process by deciding how far one must go to achieve the finished product. If your finished product were spitting out predictable plants of a different arrangement of traits or variations that the breeders of the original parent stock wouldn’t immediately identify, then it could be considered a new line.

When you’re deciding how many seeds to pop to create a cross, it’s usually a blind search as no roadmap exists for you to know where to look for what. Since the deciding factor is “total dankness”, this implies an implicit understanding of what constitutes total dankness. In other words, “you’ll know it when to see it.” Some say it’s as good a compass as any, but among the downsides to this approach is employing a Punnett Square for predictive purpose. This is usually the approach of the grower for smoke as the genotypes are irrelevant. You’d only care about the expressed phenotype for final keeper plants.

When you make your target traits explicit: Tall and Sleepy effect for example; you can now use the Punnett Square to figure how many seeds to pop. This differs greatly from the cross-maker or grower for smoke, because you’ll want to be more aware of the genotypes as you move through your breeding project. Picking a plant with (SS) instead of (Ss) will affect the next generation and your ultimate goal, so this is an important point to consider.

For example:
S=Tall, s=short
Z=Sleepy effect, z=not sleepy effect

If you wanted to have a true breeding female that reliably passes tall height and sleepy effect, you’d ideally choose the plant with the genotype (SSZZ). If you have a cross you made (or acquired) using parents that expressed these traits (phenotype) like OG, then you could assume the parents were at least dominant for the traits.

This assumption would look like: (SsZz) since the parents expressed the traits, we can at least assume this much about the parent genotype. It could also be (SS) or (ZZ), but we’re being conservative with our assumption, as (SS) would actually make things easier.
Since we can only make selections based on phenotype (we cant see the genotype, but we now at least know the frequency at which they appear), you’ll be picking the plants with either (SsZz), (SsZZ), (SSZz), or (SSZZ) as these all have the same phenotype (tall with sleepy effect).

This means you can expect 56% of your popped seeds to at least express the phenotype you’d like. But for this example, our aim is for a true breeding genotype (SSZZ). Based on the Punnett, that appears 1 in 16 seeds. This ratio is for the total population and since females are only 50% of the total, we’ll need to double the amount of seeds (16 to 32 total seeds) to make sure we have the minimum number of seeds to statistically expect the appearance of our female target genotype.

While the Punnett Square can’t tell you which of the potential genotypes is the SSZZ, it gives you a baseline number to increase your chances of finding it. Given the traits and assumed genotype of the parents, we now know that we should pop at least 32 seeds to have the genotype we’d like for our project. You would need to do some more work to figure which plant has the (SSZZ) genotype, but the point is we have a baseline seed number to pop in order to expect it.

There are tons of avenues to travel toward reaching a breeding goal, you can focus on one trait at a time and slowly build on them with subsequent generations or try for multiple traits per breeding step. The purpose here is not to give every possible example, but to show how the Punnett Square can be a tool to help you figure how many seeds to pop in order to find desired plants.
Is it a bad idea to use feminized plants for breeding?
At some point in forum perusal, you will likely encounter some form of this question: “Can you use a feminized plant for breeding?” Answers will generally fall along yes or no, but lack a more full-throated explanation as to why the poster feels this is a good/bad practice.

Answers in the affirmative are usually guided by experience and take the form, “I have a feminized plant that is more stable than most reg plants. She doesn’t put out any hermie progeny.” While others take an opposite stance (can be guided by experience, but many times just repeating an assumption read from someone else), “No way! Feminized plants are inherently bad stock and will lead to hermie prone progeny.”

I will balance my stance by playing each side of this question and say that both of these sides are correct. While it seems counterintuitive to say both apparently contradictory answers are the case, I’ll illustrate using Punnett Squares.

Many times, traits that are considered bad can be recessive (think small letter allele), but can be “hidden” when paired with a dominant allele (think uppercase allele). Much like disease in humans, both partners must be carriers of specific genes in order for the disease to express in progeny. Statistically speaking, the chance of any two random partners both carrying this trait ensures the appearance of these genetic disorders is relatively low.

By selfing, or breeding a plant to itself, you are guaranteeing that whatever undesirable recessive traits lurk in the gene pool will necessarily double down and increase the chance of its expression in the progeny. What was before a possibility, has now been made a certainty.


Ultimately, the answer to this question is, “It depends.” This may not be totally satisfactory, but using the Punnett Squares, we can gain a better appreciation for the nuances involved with this concept.
I came here looking for information and pictures relating to your Hell's Angel OG Bx1 and left feeling like I learned something. I appreciate that. Positive vibes...

~nugzz
 

Gentlemancorpse

Cannabis Chaotician
Staff member
Moderator
So first off, appreciate you dropping all this knowledge Schwaggy! It's making all those lessons I vaguely remember from school start to make sense lol... maybe if they used cannabis as an example back then I would've paid more attention...

As someone who aspires to do more chucking in the future its reall awesome to have this thread as a reference.

Second off... what in all that is good in this world is Hippy Slayer and where do I find some...

unnamed (1).jpg
 

Schwaggy P

🦨
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
Love your commitment to the Plant
Thanks for the kind words and support.

Does this sound like the SKVA to you, or maybe the JB or maybe something else?
Of the Chem cuts, it sounds most like the SKVA. The lemons comment isn't something I get from her nose, but everything else you described sounds similar to her. Some speculate that OG Kush is a SKVA S1, so if that holds, there could be some lemon in there you might be able to tease out or you may have had an S1.

what do you think the chances of finding a good knock out in either Skunky VA or the Skunky VA x Skunky D crosses?
The Skunky VA x Skunky D would be the more likely of the two to spit out a knockout hit. The Skunky D leans more to the body blow from the Chem D. The Skunky VA will have phenos like the Chem you described with an almost overwhelming potency with more balance head/body from the Skunky Brewster.


do you have any thoughts on a name for the Skunky VA x Skunky D cross yet? Skunky VD, Funky VD? VD Funk? I dunno... Anyway, looking forward to running them and finding some gems!
No name for that pairing. It should be a nice array of Chem Skunks to choose from.

would you happen to know a formula for how fast oxygen levels deplete per gallon of water, per hour, at what temp, etc?
You'll be getting into some physics/chemistry abstractions (taking a few known formulae and tweaking/substituting a sequence of calculations to fit the exact situation you're looking to study). The biggest issue you'll be running into is the chemistry of your nutrient solution. Formulas are generally for pure water and standard pressures, so correcting for your nutrient levels and their possible oxygen affinities will be difficult to do a priori in abstract theoretical calculating. You may be better served by taking measurements of your dissolved oxygen in the reservoir for given variables and finding the relationships from experiment.
DO.png Understanding Dissolved Oxygen
Screen Shot 2020-09-16 at 9.11.29 AM.png https://dep.wv.gov/WWE/getinvolved/sos/Documents/SOSKit/DOSaturation.pdf
 
Top Bottom