Genetic Drift

[Highlander]

All I can say is my genetics are the same after decades of cloning. None of us have a DNA checker so you can't prove you are right, you are guessing.  So all we can do is look at our strains and see if they change. Mine didn't, so the way I clone doesn't change my strains. Anyone can F up, it takes determination to sustain a grow or a strain, with no excuses like cloning F ed up my grow.

 

Go ahead and report your cloning genetics failures for evidence.

 

What I do know is that you can clone like a wild dog for as long as you like and things can work out wonderfully for you and your strains. 

 

Back in 2009, I bought a bunch of seeds from Attitude - as a one-time deal, bought on a pre-paid visa and delivered to a neutral address.  Back then, I was concerned that we might see regulations get tightened and more seeds seized, so I wanted one good seed haul to sustain my gardening for years to come as we had no idea how easy or difficult it might be to keep new seed/strains coming.  In 2010, a patient of mine ordered some seeds too.  Of all of the seeds, I narrowed-down a couple of strains - super silver cheese and super lemon haze.  I've been running these two strains for 5 years or so now, and they are well-received by patients.  I have never kept a mother plant - just cloning from one generation to the next, and I have never seen any variations/mutations.  At one point, I had too many strains going and didn't do a good job of keeping clones coming.  I ended up with one super lemon haze plant in flower and none vegging.  I took a few cuttings about two weeks into flower.  They failed.  In desperation, I took a few more cuts 4 weeks into flower and they didn't root either.  Finally, I finished the last super lemon haze and then re-vegged it.  About 4 weeks into reveg, I was able to take new cuttings to root.  Now, a couple of years later, I still have the super lemon haze rocking, and I see no difference between today's clones and those cut five year ago.

[Restorium2]

Back in 2009, I bought a bunch of seeds from Attitude - as a one-time deal, bought on a pre-paid visa and delivered to a neutral address.  Back then, I was concerned that we might see regulations get tightened and more seeds seized, so I wanted one good seed haul to sustain my gardening for years to come as we had no idea how easy or difficult it might be to keep new seed/strains coming.  In 2010, a patient of mine ordered some seeds too.  Of all of the seeds, I narrowed-down a couple of strains - super silver cheese and super lemon haze.  I've been running these two strains for 5 years or so now, and they are well-received by patients.  I have never kept a mother plant - just cloning from one generation to the next, and I have never seen any variations/mutations.  At one point, I had too many strains going and didn't do a good job of keeping clones coming.  I ended up with one super lemon haze plant in flower and none vegging.  I took a few cuttings about two weeks into flower.  They failed.  In desperation, I took a few more cuts 4 weeks into flower and they didn't root either.  Finally, I finished the last super lemon haze and then re-vegged it.  About 4 weeks into reveg, I was able to take new cuttings to root.  Now, a couple of years later, I still have the super lemon haze rocking, and I see no difference between today's clones and those cut five year ago.

I did the same thing at the same time you did. It was the thing to do at the time. And then SFC gave me some elite genetics. I spent years trying to make the attitude seeds perform like the elites. There's no way to make them be as good. The elites are still as elite as ever, I don't run anything else. It's been a juggling act to stay in The Act and keep all the elites in house but I have done it. Makes me a little miffed when someone comes out and says definitively that strains weaken, or change over time. You can't argue with a real grower who pays attention. We are all on the same page after we have experience, real experience. There are a lot of excuses out there and genetic drift is one.

Edited February 27, 2015 by Restorium2

[Highlander]

I did the same thing at the same time you did. It was the thing to do at the time. And then SFC gave me some elite genetics. I spent years trying to make the attitude seeds perform like the elites. There's no way to make them be as good. The elites are still as elite as ever, I don't run anything else. It's been a juggling act to stay in The Act and keep all the elites in house but I have done it. Makes me a little miffed when someone comes out and says definitively that strains weaken, or change over time. You can't argue with a real grower who pays attention. We are all on the same page after we have experience, real experience. There are a lot of excuses out there and genetic drift is one.

 

I know SFC spent a lot of time, effort, and canna-credits acquiring elites.  It is one thing to order a bunch of seeds and sort through the results and quite another to get an elite cutting from an accomplished grower and rock it. 

 

I went out on a limb a few months ago and bought clones from a CL seller - Cali-O, Guerrilla Glue #4, and Ghost OG.  I'm just now seeing the harvests, so I'll see how it works out.  But if you can get a solid strain from a guy like SFC, you're already 90% of the way there - just grow it right. 

 

I'm glad to hear that SFC shared some strains.  A lot of the old growers won't do that.  They got a cutting in a toilet paper tube 10 years ago in the mail and don't want to share.

[garyfisher]

All I can say is my genetics are the same after decades of cloning. None of us have a DNA checker so you can't prove you are right, you are guessing.  So all we can do is look at our strains and see if they change. Mine didn't, so the way I clone doesn't change my strains. Anyone can F up, it takes determination to sustain a grow or a strain, with no excuses like cloning F ed up my grow.

 

Go ahead and report your cloning genetics failures for evidence.

 

What I do know is that you can clone like a wild dog for as long as you like and things can work out wonderfully for you and your strains. 

So you are denying somoclonal variation exists.  Wow. You are quite dense.

 

I've never reported personal experience as proof.  I provide literature resources as proof.  These people do happen to have a "dna checker".

 

 

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0023541

http://jxb.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2011/05/26/jxb.err155.full

http://pcp.oxfordjournals.org/content/53/1/256.full

 

So go ahead and critique the article and explain how it doesn't exist please, almighty one.

I'm going to continue to bust these balls as long as you continue to provide false information.

[garyfisher]

About 9,100 results (0.66 seconds) 

Showing results for somaclonal variation google scholar

 

9100 scholarly papers on the subject seem to tell a different story that you fail to comprehend.

[garyfisher]

All I can say is my genetics are the same after decades of cloning. None of us have a DNA checker so you can't prove you are right, you are guessing. 

Arent these two sentences in contradiction of each other?  You are guessing.

[garyfisher]

How many growers are keeping track of how many passages they have attempted?  I doubt any.  I dont know many times a plant is good to subculture. 100?  1000?  I'm not arguing I've witnessed this in my own experiences growing. ( i never continue to clone a clone of a clone for 15 years.  do you guys??  ) 

I have witnessed this in the laboratory.  I do have access to a "dna checker" - is that a technical term?  I would call it a sequencer but you can also evaluate genetic change via RT-PCR.

 

Denying scientific fact is foolish. 

[Restorium2]

Doesn't effect the usefulness of my genetics if it actually is happening. So who cares?

 

Many describe it a a strain 'getting weak'. It's not happening with my strains. I'm not sure what I'm doing right or 'they' are doing wrong. I can only report on what I see. 

[Restorium2]

How many growers are keeping track of how many passages they have attempted?  I doubt any.  I dont know many times a plant is good to subculture. 100?  1000?  I'm not arguing I've witnessed this in my own experiences growing. ( i never continue to clone a clone of a clone for 15 years.  do you guys??  ) 

I have witnessed this in the laboratory.  I do have access to a "dna checker" - is that a technical term?  I would call it a sequencer but you can also evaluate genetic change via RT-PCR.

 

Denying scientific fact is foolish. 

I  have kept track for 21 individual cycles and no change. The genetics were handed off to me after AT LEAST 10 years of previous cycles.

Edited February 27, 2015 by Restorium2

[YesMichigan]

Let me take it another direction.

 

A plant is born it is a beautiful plant. Mrd got mad about the lack of support for its genetics (I'm kidding and totally agree with his logic on names) so it was renamed MonkeySpock#7 (RIP - Leonard Nimoy).

 

It goes through vegetation in what the original breeder said are its ideal conditions, say 75 degrees with a RH of 45%.

 

A clone is taken from that plant at the optimal moment. It goes through its vegetative state in ideal conditions.

 

A clone is taken from that plant but the grower got divorced, can't pay the AC or Dehumidifier bill anymore. It's okay, he has a bunch of fans and he is poaching off of the neighbor's porch sockets while she's at work during the day. That said, the room is now consistently 85 degrees and a RH of 65%. This goes on for four years. He has issues with the room because of the changes in conditions but he is still growing, it is only for himself as a medical user and he mostly cooks with it. He hasn't had it tested because he thinks all tests are crap and only useful to circle...well...he doesn't believe in testing and he thinks what he grows is as good as most of what is out there...

 

Five years later would the new clones have changed to accommodate the change in conditions from its optimal?

 

Follow-up question: If in year three a separate room was created with the new 85F/65RH conditions and seeding was forced and those seeds grown to account for the changed conditions (no other breeding) to make a seed designed for the different room would there be hope of adaptation in a reasonable period of time? Diminishing potency is not a concern. Proof or disproof of floral adaptation is all I'm pondering. If your answer is "Go get a degree in botany, bio-science and chemistry and tell us lazy guy." I agree and thanks for reading this far.

 

Interesting stuff to me (and it seems a few others) people sure can urinate far! Cooperation is the only way we will win. Jim Powers summed it up perfectly last night near the end of PGT. I'll do my own paraphrase: Enough people hate us and deride us already. Even if we disagree there should never be a time when we blatantly disrespect one another regardless the subject. "Be excellent to each other." Contrition is a sign of nobility and reserved only for the most secure. When was the last time you said "I'm sorry, I was mistaken"?

[Restorium2]

Let me take it another direction.

 

A plant is born it is a beautiful plant. Mrd got mad about the lack of support for its genetics (I'm kidding and totally agree with his logic on names) so it was renamed MonkeySpock#7 (RIP - Leonard Nimoy).

 

It goes through vegetation in what the original breeder said are its ideal conditions, say 75 degrees with a RH of 45%.

 

A clone is taken from that plant at the optimal moment. It goes through its vegetative state in ideal conditions.

 

A clone is taken from that plant but the grower got divorced, can't pay the AC or Dehumidifier bill anymore. It's okay, he has a bunch of fans and he is poaching off of the neighbor's porch sockets while she's at work during the day. That said, the room is now consistently 85 degrees and a RH of 65%. This goes on for four years. He has issues with the room because of the changes in conditions but he is still growing, it is only for himself as a medical user and he mostly cooks with it. He hasn't had it tested because he thinks all tests are crap and only useful to circle...well...he doesn't believe in testing and he thinks what he grows is as good as most of what is out there...

 

Five years later would the new clones have changed to accommodate the change in conditions from its optimal?

 

Follow-up question: If in year three a separate room was created with the new 85F/65RH conditions and seeding was forced and those seeds grown to account for the changed conditions (no other breeding) to make a seed designed for the different room would there be hope of adaptation in a reasonable period of time? Diminishing potency is not a concern. Proof or disproof of floral adaptation is all I'm pondering. If your answer is "Go get a degree in botany, bio-science and chemistry and tell us lazy guy." I agree and thanks for reading this far.

 

Interesting stuff to me (and it seems a few others) people sure can urinate far! Cooperation is the only way we will win. Jim Powers summed it up perfectly last night near the end of PGT. I'll do my own paraphrase: Enough people hate us and deride us already. Even if we disagree there should never be a time when we blatantly disrespect one another regardless the subject. "Be excellent to each other." Contrition is a sign of nobility and reserved only for the most secure. When was the last time you said "I'm sorry, I was mistaken"?

I'm as careful as possible, if that helps ...

[Restorium2]

How many growers are keeping track of how many passages they have attempted?  I doubt any.  I dont know many times a plant is good to subculture. 100?  1000?  I'm not arguing I've witnessed this in my own experiences growing. ( i never continue to clone a clone of a clone for 15 years.  do you guys??  ) 

I have witnessed this in the laboratory.  I do have access to a "dna checker" - is that a technical term?  I would call it a sequencer but you can also evaluate genetic change via RT-PCR.

 

Denying scientific fact is foolish. 

So what exactly did you do to mess up your genetics?

[YesMichigan]

How many growers are keeping track of how many passages they have attempted?  I doubt any.  I dont know many times a plant is good to subculture. 100?  1000?  I'm not arguing I've witnessed this in my own experiences growing. ( i never continue to clone a clone of a clone for 15 years.  do you guys??  ) 

 

I have witnessed this in the laboratory.  I do have access to a "dna checker" - is that a technical term?  I would call it a sequencer but you can also evaluate genetic change via RT-PCR.

 

What is the observational indicator of change? Was it found through chemical analysis or visual inspection? How would a regular person look for it?

 

I think more people than you think clone clones for 15 years. You guys are in a pretty elite group of genetic options. I think some forget that at times. 1%ers wondering why everyone doesn't just grow a fresh batch of LC from seed. Let them eat 'Lemon Caketm' should be the theme for you guys.

 

Awesome group, so much knowledge and I don't mean to harsh the mellow if body-slamming each other now and again is kind of what it is all about too because I would hate to lose out on a gem like the italicized in the name of "playing nice".

[Restorium2]

Certainly I know some people growing clones of seeds popped 15+ years ago with excellent results. I am not denying this phenomenon exists, just wondering why it doesn't effect more people in a more noticeable way?

Probably strain specific.

[garyfisher]

I  have kept track for 21 individual cycles and no change. The genetics were handed off to me after AT LEAST 10 years of previous cycles.

The length of time doesn't matter.  It is the number of passages as I indicated earlier.  You think 21 passages is a lot?  Maybe in prokaryotes.  As i mentioned earlier, it could take 1000 or 10000 passages.  You have no understanding of how DNA replicates itself and it is clearly shown through your statements.

 

 None of us have a DNA checker so you can't prove you are right, you are guessing. 

Yes that is a RT-PCR if you cannot read the words on the machine.

So what exactly did you do to mess up your genetics?

I never said I messed up my genetics.  I actually said the opposite.  I have not observed this in cannabis specifically.  I am not paid to research cannabis(schedule 1) but I cannot fathom how cannabis DNA replication would behave differently from any other propagating organism. 

Edited February 27, 2015 by garyfisher

[garyfisher]

How are so many growers failing to produce this genetic drift in their normal non-sterile cloning practices? Is it common to introduce this drift over time by simple cloning of clones?

Lets be honest here.  Cloning is a form of tissue culture.  The articles I referenced specifically addresses this which I doubt any of you even read the abstract. 

 

Certainly I know some people growing clones of seeds popped 15+ years ago with excellent results. I am not denying this phenomenon exists, just wondering why it doesn't effect more people in a more noticeable way?

Glad you're not denying fact.  Resto seems lost.

Just because mutations happen doesn't mean they are observable phenotypically- they may- they may not.  It really depends on the type of mutation and where it occurs in the mechanism.  You guys are acting like mutations don't occur because you don't see mutants.  Here is a link to different types of DNA mutations that occur naturally through the machinery within the cell. http://www.uvm.edu/~cgep/Education/Mutations.html

 

If you have a DNA point mutation, probablly wont affect much but it could if it was a conserved residue.

If you have a frameshift mutation, you will see some wicked crazy observable changes.

[garyfisher]

What is the observational indicator of change? Was it found through chemical analysis or visual inspection? How would a regular person look for it?

Under a microscope, the cells show morphological changes.  It's a visual inspection.  It would be a waste of my time and resources to actually test this.  I usually just throw them out at that point and start a new generation from cryo-frozen cells which are part of the first couple original passages.

 

I apologize for being so blunt but I really despise the spread of bad information.  It's so easy to do on the interw3bz.

[garyfisher]

Let me take it another direction.

 

A plant is born it is a beautiful plant. Mrd got mad about the lack of support for its genetics (I'm kidding and totally agree with his logic on names) so it was renamed MonkeySpock#7 (RIP - Leonard Nimoy).

 

It goes through vegetation in what the original breeder said are its ideal conditions, say 75 degrees with a RH of 45%.

 

A clone is taken from that plant at the optimal moment. It goes through its vegetative state in ideal conditions.

 

A clone is taken from that plant but the grower got divorced, can't pay the AC or Dehumidifier bill anymore. It's okay, he has a bunch of fans and he is poaching off of the neighbor's porch sockets while she's at work during the day. That said, the room is now consistently 85 degrees and a RH of 65%. This goes on for four years. He has issues with the room because of the changes in conditions but he is still growing, it is only for himself as a medical user and he mostly cooks with it. He hasn't had it tested because he thinks all tests are crap and only useful to circle...well...he doesn't believe in testing and he thinks what he grows is as good as most of what is out there...

 

Five years later would the new clones have changed to accommodate the change in conditions from its optimal?

 

Follow-up question: If in year three a separate room was created with the new 85F/65RH conditions and seeding was forced and those seeds grown to account for the changed conditions (no other breeding) to make a seed designed for the different room would there be hope of adaptation in a reasonable period of time? Diminishing potency is not a concern. Proof or disproof of floral adaptation is all I'm pondering. If your answer is "Go get a degree in botany, bio-science and chemistry and tell us lazy guy." I agree and thanks for reading this far.

I really like this response.  It is well thought out and presented clearly.  Glad you are open to the idea that mutations occur.

 

1) It's possible but I don't think they will adapt positively.  The mutations are more of a random type of thing.  If the mutation happens to have a positive effect for the conditions of the room and you continue to clone THAT specific plant-yes.  However, adaption in the general sense is more of a feature we see through lineage.

 

2)  'Reasonable' amount of time is subjective.  Through one breeding?  It's possible but it depends how many seeds you start.  It could be 10 out of 10,000 seeds display the adaption you are hoping for.  The more times it is bred, the greater the chance an observable adaption may occur.  It may not. 

 

I would love to go more in depth on the topic but I have a ton of work I have to do.  I'll check back here tomorrow.

Edited February 27, 2015 by garyfisher

[YesMichigan]

Under a microscope, the cells show morphological changes.  It's a visual inspection.  It would be a waste of my time and resources to actually test this.  I usually just throw them out at that point and start a new generation from cryo-frozen cells which are part of the first couple original passages.

 

I apologize for being so blunt but I really despise the spread of bad information.  It's so easy to do on the interw3bz.

 

Blunt is fine. Do you baseline before you start a new generation to be able to identify cell change or more of a "feel" thing that something looks different under the microscope?

[trichcycler]

these genetic change occurring don't mysteriously affect "potency" for starters. if a strain is getting weaker, then so are the grow habits.

Like humans, each exposure to bacteria, pathogens, virus' does and will affect dna. The common cold changes our dna everytime we get it. We don't see these changes much, or do we?
Unless sterile technique is used each and every cloning introduces a dna changer, not once in a while, but every time. Does that make plants weak? no necessarily. does it make them better? not necessarily. will we see the changes, not without proper equipment sometimes. I've used cultures to refresh my garden as I observe my records, not my glance or toke. There are so many varibles to be checking for , if one was desiring to check, like internode spacing, growth patterns. leaf formation, root formation, carb burning capabilities so on. Does any of it matter to the grower or patient? of course not silly.

I see the pattern clearly now.....

Nobody is trying to sell anything to replace traditional cloning or imply that anyone genetics are going to pot because of cloning. Its cheap, effective, and has been performed forever. My grandparents cloned house plants and trees. humans are cloned now. most foods are results from cloning. cows are cloned. I can tell you that cow farmers are most definitely NOT cloning from a clone(like I do). They don't perform cloning in the farm yard either. I'd have to copy paste an article to explain why though, kinda dumb that way.

something to do with gary fishers explanations above, disease, etc.

[trichcycler]

GF,

 

you screwing off at work again????

[Highlander]

these genetic change occurring don't mysteriously affect "potency" for starters. if a strain is getting weaker, then so are the grow habits.

 

Like humans, each exposure to bacteria, pathogens, virus' does and will affect dna. The common cold changes our dna everytime we get it. We don't see these changes much, or do we?

Unless sterile technique is used each and every cloning introduces a dna changer, not once in a while, but every time. Does that make plants weak? no necessarily. does it make them better? not necessarily. will we see the changes, not without proper equipment sometimes. I've used cultures to refresh my garden as I observe my records, not my glance or toke. There are so many varibles to be checking for , if one was desiring to check, like internode spacing, growth patterns. leaf formation, root formation, carb burning capabilities so on. Does any of it matter to the grower or patient? of course not silly.

 

I see the pattern clearly now.....

 

Nobody is trying to sell anything to replace traditional cloning or imply that anyone genetics are going to pot because of cloning. Its cheap, effective, and has been performed forever. My grandparents cloned house plants and trees. humans are cloned now. most foods are results from cloning. cows are cloned. I can tell you that cow farmers are most definitely NOT cloning from a clone(like I do). They don't perform cloning in the farm yard either. I'd have to copy paste an article to explain why though, kinda dumb that way.

something to do with gary fishers explanations above, disease, etc.

 

A good example of cloning is bananas.  Just about every banana sold in a grocery store in the US today is a clone of a clone of a clone of a clone. 

[+Malamute]

Apples?

[trichcycler]

"a clone of a clone" ?

 

proof?

 

or are you including the fact that they originate in sterile conditions as cultured tissues?

[trichcycler]

certainly, but not purposely achieved at home, at least not with target accuracy, if one wishes to cause these changes.

 

 

keep scalpels alcohol/flame clean, same with the surface we work with, clone in a aero/rockwool/sponge/rooter, etc, rather than dirt.

and if possible clone outside of the garden. recall that I do not practice this, perhaps only to justify my ridiculous expense of managing cultures to

refresh the stock at will?  

I doubt much that any legal grower would ever see any evidence of dna changes in their garden lifetime, but they do exist for sure. who cares really?

 

I do, but really only because of the expense of managing my library. I need really clean genetics when breeding so I like to start with a fresh culture before I gather pollen, just in case we score a gem form the union. This gem would be cultured forever so starting with clean dna sounds best to me. only my opinions though, I never went to culture school, or grow school, and only practice what I've learned from books.

 

if a grower wanted to see an exaggerated expression of genetic manipulation it could be as easy as a scalpel dip into the local Crown Gall local infection in a nearby tree.  the exciting part about this is you never know what kind of mutant may result. some may be really out of this world, and some might show no difference.

 

example, if the  agrobacterium is cultured, fed ecoli, then say, a GFP(green floro protein), with some luck this expression could be transferred into the dna downlink forever, the way it is with many commercial plants today.

 

I attempted to upload two pics, one of a crown gall diseased cannabis plant and another of the GFP expression, but "error was returned"  might try again tomorrow