E
Epic Genetics
Guest
it was a fast auto 70 days start to finish crossed to a kush photo , the cross made photo plants that took longer to flower then the original photo kush , wasnt something i expected to see at all
peace
New Grower Actual Results from F1 Auto/photo crosses
- Thread starter mr.mcgregor
- Start date
it was a fast auto 70 days start to finish crossed to a kush photo , the cross made photo plants that took longer to flower then the original photo kush , wasnt something i expected to see at all
peace
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2013
- Messages
- 976
- Reputation
- 0
- Reaction score
- 475
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 73
- Website
- www.cannabisforcolorado.com
E
Epic Genetics
Guest
no none of the f1s auto'd
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2013
- Messages
- 976
- Reputation
- 0
- Reaction score
- 475
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 73
- Website
- www.cannabisforcolorado.com
Have you seen any reduction in flower time with any F1's? I have my first F1 Flo autos that I will plant soon. I may only do 2-3 weeks if veg from the time they break ground to flower only to look for traits.
Male flowers will be a new one to me too look for traits.
Male flowers will be a new one to me too look for traits.
Okay, I'm a chemistry major and it's been awhile since my last bio class, I'm certainly no genetics expert, but let me take a crack at it.
I think we may be looking at this all wrong, we presume that there are only two traits; the photosensitive trait and a photosensitive inhibiting gene that suppresses aforementioned trait. The photosensitive trait being dominant and the photosensitive inhibiter gene being recessive (or whatever the fk it is, lol), but I believe the reason we are seeing such unexpected results in F1 is because we are looking so deeply into the 'auto' trait, when I believe the answer lies in the dominant trait... Or should I say 'traits'?
I believe that it is possible that these are several photosensitive traits; early flowering, late flowering, etc. and that they are independent of one another. I believe that some of these traits are dominant while others are 'partially dominant' and that is why sometimes we see the ratio that we expect in the F1 and sometimes we see a ratio that we do not expect and get mixed results. The same could go for the 'auto' trait, is it not possible for there to be multiple genes that display the 'auto flowering' trait?
In the end, I have no idea wtf I am talking about and am not qualified to speak on matters of genetics as I have never breed a damn thing in my life, lol.
It seems logical, from an evolutionary standpoint, to have this 'auto' trait present as it makes the plant adaptive, although it may not be necessary at times, at other times it may help the species survive and reestablish photosensitive varieties in the future, after some strange global phenomena. In my mind it just increases the species survivability as a whole. I know that sometimes we have longer or shorter seasons, based of the earth's orbital pattern around the sun, could the 'auto' trait be a built in protection from extremes in seasonal changes?
... Please be a gentleman when smashing my makeshift hypothesis to pieces, lol.
I think we may be looking at this all wrong, we presume that there are only two traits; the photosensitive trait and a photosensitive inhibiting gene that suppresses aforementioned trait. The photosensitive trait being dominant and the photosensitive inhibiter gene being recessive (or whatever the fk it is, lol), but I believe the reason we are seeing such unexpected results in F1 is because we are looking so deeply into the 'auto' trait, when I believe the answer lies in the dominant trait... Or should I say 'traits'?
I believe that it is possible that these are several photosensitive traits; early flowering, late flowering, etc. and that they are independent of one another. I believe that some of these traits are dominant while others are 'partially dominant' and that is why sometimes we see the ratio that we expect in the F1 and sometimes we see a ratio that we do not expect and get mixed results. The same could go for the 'auto' trait, is it not possible for there to be multiple genes that display the 'auto flowering' trait?
In the end, I have no idea wtf I am talking about and am not qualified to speak on matters of genetics as I have never breed a damn thing in my life, lol.
It seems logical, from an evolutionary standpoint, to have this 'auto' trait present as it makes the plant adaptive, although it may not be necessary at times, at other times it may help the species survive and reestablish photosensitive varieties in the future, after some strange global phenomena. In my mind it just increases the species survivability as a whole. I know that sometimes we have longer or shorter seasons, based of the earth's orbital pattern around the sun, could the 'auto' trait be a built in protection from extremes in seasonal changes?
... Please be a gentleman when smashing my makeshift hypothesis to pieces, lol.
E
Epic Genetics
Guest
i think it depends on the non auto strains that are actually used in the auto , they determine the faster or slower photo flowering in the f1's , my 8 week photo when crossed to a 70 day auto (seed to harvest) made for a 10 week photo when the 2 were crossed to f1
blew my mind but makes sense to me now
peace
E
Epic Genetics
Guest
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2013
- Messages
- 976
- Reputation
- 0
- Reaction score
- 475
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 73
- Website
- www.cannabisforcolorado.com
I understand what your saying. If that is the case why not take a long flower sativa and cross it with an auto.
If the flower time is increased in f1 then you should be able to back cross a f5 with f1 running the breading cycle and increase flower times in autos. Making them more of a super auto or fast finish plant.
Big heavy plants that finish in time.
If the flower time is increased in f1 then you should be able to back cross a f5 with f1 running the breading cycle and increase flower times in autos. Making them more of a super auto or fast finish plant.
Big heavy plants that finish in time.
soccerdad
High Functioning Stoner
- Joined
- May 8, 2013
- Messages
- 56
- Reputation
- 20
- Reaction score
- 99
- Points
- 0
- Currently Smoking
- 3BOG x CDLC.
I have recently been wanting to cross something like a big ol sativa like malowi gold with a auto white widow.all i can think of is how tasty that would be.
if I have male malowi pollen...and make seeds from the female auto WW...if i grow out those seeds the resulting..males and females would be an F1?
would i then have to grow male and female from the F1 group to get F2..and so on? or do I pollinate the F1 female with the original malowi pollen...sorry if this post should be in another thread..but i got to reading and just had to ask. this is such good stuff...
peace SD
if I have male malowi pollen...and make seeds from the female auto WW...if i grow out those seeds the resulting..males and females would be an F1?
would i then have to grow male and female from the F1 group to get F2..and so on? or do I pollinate the F1 female with the original malowi pollen...sorry if this post should be in another thread..but i got to reading and just had to ask. this is such good stuff...
peace SD
Similar threads
