Schwaggy P's Random Stuff

[chiefer888]

I know that your question is directed towards @Schwaggy P, but my understanding: Genotype is the only constant with cuttings (clones). Environment plays a huge role in phenotypic expressions. My guess would be that unless someone is growing in a laboratory setting, they are failing to recreate the exact environment down to a T. Temperature, humidity, nutrient availability and uptake etc all make up the cuts environment, thus leading to different phenotypic expressions. Again, this is just my understanding of the science behind it. I am certain that @Schwaggy P will have a better grasp on it. Positive vibes...

~nugzz

Right, we’re talking nature (phenotype (expressed genetic presentation)) vs nurture (environmental variables). As you stated, in an environment that controls for extrinsic environmental variables, they should come out virtually identical.

 

[Frimpong]

Ya mmhmm hows that impact the lesson in genetics above? If what u see in yer grow is a crap shoot does any o that breeding selection make ne difference if genetic expression is largely based on environment not genetics?

U have to base your choices off something. Was just saying there are many dif variables when growing in different spots .

 

[Buck5050]

? ?

 

[chiefer888]

Ya mmhmm hows that impact the lesson in genetics above? If what u see in yer grow is a crap shoot does any o that breeding selection make ne difference if genetic expression is largely based on environment not genetics? Taken another step how does a breeder know what enviro traits trigger these expressions if they only test in their own or a very few different environs?

It appears to me that you want to establish either genetics or environment as a more important in how a cannabis plant will grow. I would urge you to look at it as genetics and environment. You need to consider both and how that will factor into your outcome. Just as clones will turn out differently in different environments and under different care, plants of different seeds will also provide varying results in the same environment.

 

[Schwaggy P]

just got my order the other day i am going to grow these outside next year unless i have time this winter
GLG came through again i got my schwaggy gear nice looking seeds and a awsome beer coozy
thanks GLG and Schwaggy P keep up the good work and always enjoy your posts brother

Thanks for the support, it will be pretty neat to see them grown outdoors.

 

[Schwaggy P]

One of the main reasons I asked the questions is I have 2 polyembryotic females. I dropped 9 beans from another chuckers BX and came up with 11 plants. I also had a twin with the f1 generation (less than 20 se seeds).

I feel like I have been handed an opportunity for a little experiment, unfortunately (I prefer regs) they are both female, I have never attempted reversing a plant. I feel like this added layer of copmplexity could skew the result.

The twins are not from the same seed, the weaker one of each did not make it.

From what I understand there are 2 process and 5 genetic markers (a brief review of data on the phenomenon in citrus. Characterization of genes associated with polyembryony and in vitro somatic embryogenesis in Citrus and Phenomenon of polyembryony. Genetic heterogeneity of seeds both abstracts quickly passed over my head)

Before the beans were popped I was planning a polyandric filial generation using the limited pool, in total 5 male 5 female, 9 from this seed pop and 1 from a previous run. This lead to the bottlenecking question as I am not sure if I am hunting a flaw or a feature.

Two of the clones are barely rooted and I am still going to have to take cuts of them (after clearing out a garden issue I am having) so it will be a minute before I attempt any of this.

WWSD? Should I attempt the reversal or hunt for male and female twins from my f1s?

Twins can result from sexual reproduction and asexual processes. Sexually produced twins (identical twins) are zygotic embryos that result from sexual reproduction whereby two gametes (1/2 of the total genetic info sex cells: sperm/egg) undergo fertilization to create a wholly new genotype/individual and split. Embryos resulting from apomixis are produced asexually when a non-egg cell produces an embryo which encompasses a clone of the mother’s complete genotype.

A common case of zygotic twin embryos would be cleavage polyembryony (identical twins). This is when a fertilized egg cell which carries a new complete genotype splits (cleaves) into multiple fully complete embryos. Since the multiple embryos split from the same sexually produced embryo, they have the identical genotype and yield identical twins. The twins are identical to each other but are different from the parents since the parents still only contributed half of the new genetic material that comprise the offspring.

The other type of polyembryony is the result of apomixis. This method of reproduction does not involve meiosis or fertilization. This phenomenon is common in citrus plants (and mangos) and is the focus of the paper you linked. There are a few ways Apomixis can take place and they each have a different term depending on the cell and pathway of development, but the general concept of apomixis is that you have embryos produced by non-egg cells.

An embryo that results from meiosis and fertilization is said to be the result of sexual reproduction yielding a new individual (genotype), while embryos produced by apomixis does not result from sexual reproduction (no meiosis/fertilization) and yields a clone of the mother’s genotype.

The paper you linked was describing the citrus plant that express apomixis in some genotypes. The experiment was able to pinpoint the citrus plants with this genetic expression through lab techniques because the coding for this trait involves an easy to find location of just a single nucleotide substitution. The results showed that there was a link between polyembryony and the presence of msg-2, suggesting that this compound is integral to the expression of the apomixis trait.

For your specific case of twins, I would be curious to find out if the twins are sexually derived or apomictic. I would try to separate the different seedlings and grow them out to see if they are identical twins to their siblings, or clones of the mother. The fact that apomixis results from asexual processes implies that any attempt to breed for it would necessitate the female which initially expresses this trait. If it can only spawn from a carrier female and only produce genetic copies, thus only females, then I wouldn’t expect it to be a trait that a male could influence.

There seems to be a correlation between higher levels of vitamin C and the incidence of twins, so you might be able to tinker with this concept and see if anything comes from it.
Link between vitamin C and twin seedlings can increase seed production in crops.

 

[Schwaggy P]

Got a question for ya. Take a cut of wedding cake. Same cut shared a thousand times but the results are much different based on how/where its grown. Even using same lights/nutes/media in four grows turns into four different looks, g/w, lab test scores. Hows this explain that? Mendel says it shouldt be the case. Are dom traits not important for cannabis?

Hey Nu-Be,
Your characterization of “much different” is too ambiguous. Do you mean one version slightly foxtails vs. another? Or, do you mean one grew into a short afghan forearm cola smelling like rotten garbage? Environment plays a key role in phenotypic expression. Mendel never tried to explain environmental influence on phenotypic expression. Mendel used observation to deduce the patterns of inheritance. His work, which is just the articulation of observable natural processes, suggest the heritability of dominant vs recessive traits, and their expected frequencies. It wasn’t the case that Mendel pulled some opinion together and his thousands of pea plants obliged his unfounded ramblings. Mendel would say that the genotype is the genetic potential blueprint for the phenotypic expressions. They are called Mendel’s BASIC Principles of Heredity, not Mendel’s COMPREHENSIVE FINAL WORD on all things heredity. Would you attack the architect for his use of blueprints for buildings because a shoddy contractor wasn’t too skilled at installing the crown molding in the kitchen? Even the terrible carpenter’s product wouldn’t stray wildly from what the blueprint calls for. His molding might be askew but it wouldn’t be a bench. This slight deviation from the theoretical potential wouldn’t “disprove” the concept of blueprints.

Your attempt at criticism is misplaced as what you question is an issue of varying environments. Mendel’s pea experiments controlled for the majority of environmental factors as it took place in his garden. With these environmental variables mostly controlled, he studied the patterns of inheritance ceteris paribus. That you could say phenotype is further influenced by environmental pressures is not proof that Mendel’s work and the multiple corroborating experiments since are pointless or “wrong” any more than you could say your 4th grade geometry teacher is wrong because their lessons didn’t include multivariate integration as a means of calculating area.

I find it interesting that you have chosen to attack a well-established and highly controlled/corroborated concept of genetics with a handwaving “all my bros totally kept everything exactly the same cuz we used promix” example to try to minimize basic principles of heredity. Did your multiple grows exhaust serious rigor? Did you account for atmospheric pressure at differing elevations of respective gardens? If not, the reduced pressure of your relatively lower lying gardens enjoyed a higher rate of transpiration, resulting in the need for more water and feedings. These more frequent waterings would mean opportunities for soil biota fluctuations from larger hydration swings, more feeding opportunity, humidity microclimate fluctuations within the same garden all exerting pressure on phenotypic expression.

Just because you and a couple buddies used the same medium and light doesn’t mean the environment was exactly the same. Above, I gave the example of atmospheric pressure. Did you and your buddies only grow the Wedding Cake isolated in its own space or were there other plants around? Did one of you take cuts or trim in the same room? Plants release jasmonate (a hormone) in response to tissue damage, thought to reroute growth into defensive compound production which neighboring plants sense and mount chemical responses. This jasmonate has been shown to affect terpenoid compound ratios in cannabis which would result in your group throwing disparate lab results. Why in this case would your assumption be to toss out inheritance theory and not assume there is just some uncontrolled environmental variable?

The heredity illustrated in Mendel’s principles represent how dominant and recessive traits are inherited, that’s it. The difference in how environment impacts the expression is a separate issue. It doesn’t account for environment or epigenetic issues that can further nuance (not transform altogether) trait expression. Your Wedding cake wouldn’t become Landrace Thai because your friend in Canada grew out a cut. It might have a little more purple because the genes coded in such a way that the blurple light he used included the UV diodes which triggered the production of anthocyanin in the Wedding Cake, but it doesn’t transform so wildly that you should just toss out genetic theory.

 

[Schwaggy P]

If what u see in yer grow is a crap shoot does any o that breeding selection make ne difference if genetic expression is largely based on environment not genetics?

Your criticism would only make sense if by “crap shoot” you were pulling Hibiscus, Apple Trees, and Skunks, out of a pack of Sunshine Daydream. The reality is not at all like this and is in fact just variations on the theme of the parent plants. Genetic expressions are tempered by environmental factors but are ultimately limited by the genetics. Your environmental factors wouldn’t do anything the genetics didn’t allow.

You seem to have an issue with a simple model because it doesn’t include every possible detail that could ever exist. Why would you ever expect it to include this? Do you run through kindergarten classes slapping primary color wheels from kids’ hands yelling, “These are incomplete! Throw them out, they’re useless!” Then interrogate the teacher about why they didn’t incorporate every possible shade/combination?

Taken another step how does a breeder know what enviro traits trigger these expressions if they only test in their own or a very few different environs?

There are generally accepted environmental factors that growers have found to allow for best growth. Temp, humidity, light levels, watering/feeding etc. are pretty standard so the peripheral environmental factors most can’t make regular (elevation/pressure, quality of water source, hormone interactions from neighboring plants, etc) exert slight expression differences. As stated before, your Wedding Cake doesn’t turn into landrace Thai in another garden.

At no point did I claim that Mendel’s Basic Principles of Inheritance are the be all, end all and that no other information would ever be needed for breeding plants. (If I did, please quote it). In fact, I didn’t even give any reason to believe I wasn’t beginning a longer term application of genetics theory to cannabis. Feel free to crack open most genetics textbooks and let me know what the first section covers (hint: it involves peas).

 

[Schwaggy P]

100% ya my question is hows that change the black & white rules outlined above? Appears u can throw most them rules out the door for weed breedin.

The “black and white rules” cover the topic of inheritance and genetic potential. Environmental influence would change things by expressing phenotypes within the range of their potential. No one claims that the genetics guarantee an outcome, they only introduce a possibility range. A plant that is genetically tall will only reach this potential with the minimum inputs required by the genetic needs. You couldn’t deprive the plant of water and light and then shake your fist to the heavens, "Damn You Mendel!" when your plants are stunted losers. It isn’t a failing on the part of genetic theory.

Feel free to breed however you’d like. The logical conclusion of your “genetics don’t matter” theory would result in only needing a single plant that could transform into what ever biological organism you want by turning up the temperature. Hey, if the only arbiter of what you end up with is a couple environmental factors, then you should be able to turn your cat into Chemdog with a few tweaks.

 

[Frimpong]

Ahhhh glad u are here Schwaggy.

 

[Buck5050]

Knowing the differences between phenotype and genotype is still hard for even myself to separate when drawing conclusions about my own plants. I can see the hang up. I have taken multiple cuts of the same plant and grown them both indoors and outdoors, and I would be the only one that would know it was actually the same. There is no physical way to tell it came from the same place even though they were grown and finished 50 feet from each other.

 

[OldG]

I am glad for the education. The question stirred answers to things i have pondered. Now it makes sense.

Its all part of the human phenome project...

 

[GCG]

No one else finds 4th grade geometry teacher fucked up. 4th grade wtf! Lol

 

[Schwaggy P]

'80s Black Afghani x Skunky Brewster - day 40


GC x Skunky D - day 40

Here's the balanced stinky pheno

A pheno that leans hard to the GC, buds look very similar with what seems to be the same quicker finish
​

 

[Frimpong]

'80s Black Afghani x Skunky Brewster - day 40
View attachment 28535

GC x Skunky D - day 40
View attachment 28536
Here's the balanced stinky pheno
View attachment 28537
A pheno that leans hard to the GC, buds look very similar with what seems to be the same quicker finish
View attachment 28538​

Looks awesome man

 

[HOGBACKMAGIC14]

'80s Black Afghani x Skunky Brewster - day 40
View attachment 28535

GC x Skunky D - day 40
View attachment 28536
Here's the balanced stinky pheno
View attachment 28537
A pheno that leans hard to the GC, buds look very similar with what seems to be the same quicker finish
View attachment 28538​

LOOKING JUICY

 

[DopeDaniel]

Perhaps this is a case of uncommon zygotic twins? a case of 2 ova in one one shell? I will attempt to explain, I do not think both sets are the result of apomaxis but perhaps this first one I will show is. Atlest one of the zygotes appeared "incomplete" a chimera of sorts? This one I called T2.



I was able to seperate them but the 2nd up was malformed and stunted. I can only base a comparison to the mother on photographs as I never personally saw the plant. It looks very similar but it also looks similar to its sister from another father...

This one I saw doubble tap roots and what germinated looked to be 2 more equal plants. This one I called T1


I neglected to cut the membrane at this point, just a spritz of water which resulted in this later thst day.

Perhaps I have one of each. Each plants are very similar and to my uneducated eye I'd call them the same pheno.

If T2 is the result of apomaxis then I would have a clone of the mother? This just seems to unlikely to me as wouldn't there have to have been an influx of genetic material to polinate the seed? T1 I could see as a zygote that split early on. Then maybe @groerr foliar fed ascorbic acid, hell might prevent pm too.

Thanks for taking the time.

 

[Schwaggy P]

Perhaps I have one of each.

Possible, but difficult to say for sure without comparing the twins to siblings and mother.

If T2 is the result of apomaxis then I would have a clone of the mother?

Yes. Just as a rooted cutting originally taken from the mother's tissue results in a clone, so too does the mother's cells generating an embryo result in a clone as there is never any deconstruction of her original DNA (meiosis) or introduction of outside genetic material (fertilization) in the development from apomixis.

This just seems to unlikely to me as wouldn't there have to have been an influx of genetic material to polinate the seed?

One of the defining characteristics of apomictic polyembryony is that there is no fertilization (influx of genetic material to pollinate) in the production of additional asexual embryos. Here is an illustration of the normal sexual development of monoembryonic seeds vs. the development of polyembryonic seeds.

​

In the top line, we have an embryo sac with 7 cells (3 antipodals, 1 central cell, 2 synergids, 1 egg cell in orange). The egg cell (orange) will be the recipient of the pollen and go on to form the usual single embryo embodying a mix of the mother/fathers' genes.

In the bottom line, everything proceeds as before with the exception of new embryos produced from the nucellus (maternal tissue encasing the embryo). You can see these 2 new embryos (nucellar embryos) developing in red. The result is 3 total embryos in the seed. One of these being the result of sexual reproduction and having a new genotype thanks to mixing of mother/father genes. The other two are copies of the mother's genotype (like new clones produced from cuttings) since they generated from her cells without undergoing meiosis (a deconstruction of mother's DNA) or fertilization (introduction of new genetic material).

Here is a good video describing types of apomixis:

 

[Schwaggy P]

GC x Skunky D




Table of my favorite Schwaggy's Afghan Skunk F3


Table with '80s Black Afghani and Chocolate Covered Strawberries F2 (Fire Alien Black x Starfighter F2). Half the table has a blurple and the other half has a QB.

Chocolate Covered Strawberries F2 (left) - 80sBA (right)


'80s Black Afghani - These will be getting a few branches pollinated with the ('80sB.A. x Skunky Brewster) pollen to make BX1 seeds.
​

 

[Schwaggy P]

GC x Skunky D - Day 58​

Here is my favorite pheno ready to come down. She started with a nice mix of Skunky D funk and GC astringent but at around day 40, was mostly really sharp sour (think Sour D's lime smell) and I was bummed out. She then started funking up again around day 50 and has resettled with a mix of the skunk funk (burnt rubber/hot asphalt/rot) and sharp sour spray. Chem D does this same type of smell progression: starts generically funky, mid bloom starts to smell like dirty diapers, then finishes out with a more garlicky chem funk. I just hope this skunk bouquet sticks around after the dry/cure.

The other observables are solid "skunk" traits I wanted (narrower leaves, high calyx:leaf ratio, quick finishing, better humidity tolerance, double leaf serration, taller apical cola and mid height side branch structure). If the smell stays true, she'll be a great Skunk #1 that actually smells like the stinky skunks you expect when you pop skunk seeds. There's no "sweet" to her and I'd like it to stay that way.

The Skunky D line is great for straight offensive garbage/rot skunks, but this line adds that sharp sour punch that smells like a skunk's spray. I'm hesitant to declare this a Roadkill Skunk because of the almost too good to be true legends that are associated with that name, but this has been the closest population of plants I've grown to actually resemble the descriptions of an RKS. Almost every other skunk I've grown from other sources ends sweet. I'm immediately popping her F2 seeds to find a male and most likely going the BX route to work this line.

​

The phenos which leaned to the GC all "look" done (browned stigma) while the Skunky D leaners keep pushing fresh stigma. The Skunky D leaners have amber trichomes under the scope but look like they could flower for as long you want to take her (just like Chem D). The Skunky D father performed similarly in the (Giesel x Skunky D) cross that @CoB_nUt grew out.

Nailing the Skunk #1(really the Skunk #2 line that was deemed too smelly and dropped for the Skunk #1) has been my main goal thus far. All of the different things you've seen from me so far were R&D for skunk inputs to get to this point. There was such a differential between the description and memories you'll read concerning what RKS-type skunks "should" be and the skunks you get when you run through all of the old-school skunks (SSSC Skunk #1, Sensi Skunk#1, Mr Nice Shit, The Pure, etc.) that I had to work on making ingredients to get a skunk that consistently stinks like a skunk's spray without losing the traits of a Skunk #1.