bluntmassa1
Well-Known Member
I ordered seeds at 15 they said I needed to be 18 but I lied. Does that mean I'm going to hell? lol
Ethics & Seeds
- Thread starter King Arthur
- Start date
bluntmassa1
Well-Known Member
Dinafem is a joke they do nothing but knock-offs money should go to the people actually breeding. Being cheap is fine Eskobar, Sannies, Jordan of the Islands, a few more lower end breeders that deserve money more so than an absolute pollen chucker who only cares about the money fuck breeding something a little different just crossing the same crosses just putting up a cool name and cool description. But kids will be kids.
don't even get me going on sneakers I won't even walk into a mall anymore shit is hideous but fucking kids. 
lol
King Arthur
Well-Known Member
see4
Well-Known Member
No such thing. Just means you're getting paid earlier. Ain't no harm in that.
greenghost420
Well-Known Member
hell is a state of mind....
OGEvilgenius
Well-Known Member
Last edited:
OGEvilgenius
Well-Known Member
Or, you know, some folks understand breeding extremely well... and breed the old heirlooms. See MikeJ at PeakseedsBC for example. He isn't line breeding anything. He's done open preservation and then taken big selections and bred using large populations the lines into what he feels they best represent - and he did a damn fucking good job too.To do what?
- Always buy from the original breeder (or the one who claims to be)
- Buy from a less expensive breeder who used original genetics.
Those two options posted by the emo actually show nicely what the problem is. The cheapskates in this forum pretending to be able to review seeds, strains, or breeders simply have no clue what they are talking about and only care about themselves... Not about other growers, not about any breeders, not about the future of cannabis... but growing epeen and pretending to have any credibility in the matter.
Complaining cannabis was better in the old days and certain strains aren't really those strains anymore, yet at the same time support the people responsible for unnecessary (well, to fill pockets) breeding in and selling someone else's strains, or don't do the breeding in required to make real hybrids but steal strains and think that F2 is more stable than F1 and F3 is IBL
Nice job making rollitup an even bigger farce.
Bodhi with his A11 open pollinated line and his NL.
Tom Hill with his open pollinated Haze and Deep Chunk lines.
Chimera - everything he does.
Sativied
Well-Known Member
That's almost cheating using Tom Hill and Chimera as examples. They aren't literally all pocket filling idiots.
You mentioned a few other words that are key... now take a look at what Ace seeds is doing with Old Timer's haze.
I replied to a post at another site about a week ago in reply to a quote from Tom Hill. Essentially sometimes it's better to mate 1-1, sometimes it's better to breed populations and that is often turned around / mixed up. That last thing is pre-mendelian pre-modern breeding. It's what farmers did a very long time ago. It's what the pioneers and breeders of some of those well known cannabis strains did too, and what is necessary to acclimatize and adapt landraces for indoor growing for example.
A hobby breeder at another forum called it "putting the best with the best" which sums it up nicely. The result (after many generations) is uniformity, but with a wide profile, without inbreeding depression (given large numbers). Traits are bred true when they are homozygous, which mean they received the same gene from both parents, while heterozygous genotypes have room for two different genes.
AA = bred true, all off spring will result in AA
Aa = not bred true, heterozygous, one gene dominates partly or entirely, but the other is still there.
Unstable means more different genes hence more different gene combinations hence more phenotypes. The same thing for stable, less genes, less possible combinations hence less phenotypes.
Inbred depression is the result of the loss of those genes you don't see, but would have passed on only to SOME of the offspring of 1 plant but can be passed on entirely given large enough plant counts.
That 'a' can be a gene for a new taste, resistance against a new virus it needs to protect itself again, one of the many genes that makes up the cannabinoid profile, etc etc.
Such a uniform yet diverse population is good for survival, Mexican farmers, I forgot the crop name, put landrace plants amongst their own every few years to keep that gene pool wide. Just in case they unknowingly bred out genes that took thousands of years to evolve and may yet have to show their purpose.
That only works out with a large amount of plants. I'm not talking 12 or 24....
And does not lead to homozygous lines best for creating hybrids. Well, on the very long run it does. Many tools and formulas have been developed to predict how long that takes. The saying it takes many years to breed a new strain... comes from putting the best with the best outdoors, once a year.
Anyway, heterozygous genotypes can carry more 'different' DNA info than homozygous. But crossing heterozygous with heterozygous leads to 3 different outcomes, not just 1, so leads to genotype and hence phenotype variation. While homozygous (true bred) x homozygous is all homozygous, aka a stable strain. What if you can have both, both heterozygous but uniform (no pheno type variation)... that's what IBLs and F1 hybrids based on selective breeding is about. AA x BB = all AB.
The point of an IBL is to mate it with another. "A" plant of the resulting F1 is not suitable for breeding (clone only from someone's hybrid...). An F1 population could be stabilized in many generations but F2 is not more stable than F1, for example.
IBLs and hybrids is what non-cannabis breeders have been doing since around WWII, based on the rediscover of Mendel's work and the phenotype vs genotype distinction from some Johansen guy over a hundred year ago. Thanks to that, we can all eat. See green revolution:
http://www.fao.org/english/newsroom/focus/2003/gmo2.htm (that mexican crop was apparently wheat...)
There's a place for both old skool open population breeding and more selective breeding. Modern plant breeding is gene mapping. Which simply means trying to figure out the genotypes behind phenotypes by tracking how they inherit. The goal there is to do as little inbreed generations as necessary. Merely crossing the best phenotypes (which what small/medium scale putting the best with the best comes down to) narrows breeds out more genes than necessary.
Those early pioneers and breeders put all that work in it so breeders since have been able to create hundreds of strains, well, phenos, with all those great tastes and smells, through selective breeding.
Saying breeders who use open pollination know breeding extremely well is when it comes to cannabis in general contrary to reality.
I'm sure the examples you mentioned had good reasons to do what they did... which should be obvious by now. Think long term. Think evolution...
Plant breeding is not mimicking evolution (too slow). To create modern hybrids and breed and lock in new tastes there's this thing called crossbreeding and intense selection. Biodiverse populations make good breeding stock for IBLs and in turn hybrids. To create a hybrid (with no pheno variety) one would still have to create a homozygous line first (two actually...).
Some people get rare land races or old seeds and then pop them to see if they can find a keeper.... that the most ironic scenario in this context.
You mentioned a few other words that are key... now take a look at what Ace seeds is doing with Old Timer's haze.
I replied to a post at another site about a week ago in reply to a quote from Tom Hill. Essentially sometimes it's better to mate 1-1, sometimes it's better to breed populations and that is often turned around / mixed up. That last thing is pre-mendelian pre-modern breeding. It's what farmers did a very long time ago. It's what the pioneers and breeders of some of those well known cannabis strains did too, and what is necessary to acclimatize and adapt landraces for indoor growing for example.
A hobby breeder at another forum called it "putting the best with the best" which sums it up nicely. The result (after many generations) is uniformity, but with a wide profile, without inbreeding depression (given large numbers). Traits are bred true when they are homozygous, which mean they received the same gene from both parents, while heterozygous genotypes have room for two different genes.
AA = bred true, all off spring will result in AA
Aa = not bred true, heterozygous, one gene dominates partly or entirely, but the other is still there.
Unstable means more different genes hence more different gene combinations hence more phenotypes. The same thing for stable, less genes, less possible combinations hence less phenotypes.
Inbred depression is the result of the loss of those genes you don't see, but would have passed on only to SOME of the offspring of 1 plant but can be passed on entirely given large enough plant counts.
That 'a' can be a gene for a new taste, resistance against a new virus it needs to protect itself again, one of the many genes that makes up the cannabinoid profile, etc etc.
Such a uniform yet diverse population is good for survival, Mexican farmers, I forgot the crop name, put landrace plants amongst their own every few years to keep that gene pool wide. Just in case they unknowingly bred out genes that took thousands of years to evolve and may yet have to show their purpose.
That only works out with a large amount of plants. I'm not talking 12 or 24....
And does not lead to homozygous lines best for creating hybrids. Well, on the very long run it does. Many tools and formulas have been developed to predict how long that takes. The saying it takes many years to breed a new strain... comes from putting the best with the best outdoors, once a year.
Anyway, heterozygous genotypes can carry more 'different' DNA info than homozygous. But crossing heterozygous with heterozygous leads to 3 different outcomes, not just 1, so leads to genotype and hence phenotype variation. While homozygous (true bred) x homozygous is all homozygous, aka a stable strain. What if you can have both, both heterozygous but uniform (no pheno type variation)... that's what IBLs and F1 hybrids based on selective breeding is about. AA x BB = all AB.
The point of an IBL is to mate it with another. "A" plant of the resulting F1 is not suitable for breeding (clone only from someone's hybrid...). An F1 population could be stabilized in many generations but F2 is not more stable than F1, for example.
IBLs and hybrids is what non-cannabis breeders have been doing since around WWII, based on the rediscover of Mendel's work and the phenotype vs genotype distinction from some Johansen guy over a hundred year ago. Thanks to that, we can all eat. See green revolution:
http://www.fao.org/english/newsroom/focus/2003/gmo2.htm (that mexican crop was apparently wheat...)
There's a place for both old skool open population breeding and more selective breeding. Modern plant breeding is gene mapping. Which simply means trying to figure out the genotypes behind phenotypes by tracking how they inherit. The goal there is to do as little inbreed generations as necessary. Merely crossing the best phenotypes (which what small/medium scale putting the best with the best comes down to) narrows breeds out more genes than necessary.
Those early pioneers and breeders put all that work in it so breeders since have been able to create hundreds of strains, well, phenos, with all those great tastes and smells, through selective breeding.
Saying breeders who use open pollination know breeding extremely well is when it comes to cannabis in general contrary to reality.
I'm sure the examples you mentioned had good reasons to do what they did... which should be obvious by now. Think long term. Think evolution...
Plant breeding is not mimicking evolution (too slow). To create modern hybrids and breed and lock in new tastes there's this thing called crossbreeding and intense selection. Biodiverse populations make good breeding stock for IBLs and in turn hybrids. To create a hybrid (with no pheno variety) one would still have to create a homozygous line first (two actually...).
Some people get rare land races or old seeds and then pop them to see if they can find a keeper.... that the most ironic scenario in this context.
greenghost420
Well-Known Member
whats your thoughts on breeders that have stolen their gear from another person or breeder and then sells seeds from these "hot" genetics? dont care as long as the genetics are good?
hydroMD
Well-Known Member
If they put their product on the market, its open game.
Ya dont see JD short fallow all of his notching about people stealing blueberry with who's genetics his dad used to GET blueberry...
Hypocritical.
If your trying to keep your genetics private property, you'll need to wait for the federal government to change its stance on cannabis so royalties can be collected.
But since most original strains dont exist anymore, ppl will have hard times attaining patents. Old school barley and wheat strains pay royalties because they are the building block to all strains... cannabis no longer fits this model
King Arthur
Well-Known Member
Depends on the situation, everything isn't black and white. Especially if only one side of the story comes out and the other doesn't get a chance to speak before being thrown under the bus. I have worked for some fucked up people and for all the shit I went through if I would have taken a cut I wouldn't feel guilty at all.
But I didn't... Ya know what I mean? We never really know the whole story.
greenghost420
Well-Known Member
i def understand. just curious of peoples thoughts on stolen genetics. like if i broke into dnas spot where they held mothers, then had seeds for sale from that B n E, or even bred with em, say tangie x my mendodawg male. what would you think bout those actions? would you buy the tangiedawgs or flame me? lol
I am not sure if it is just a hyperbole question or if you really dont see the difference.
Once someone has broken in and taken something without permission it changes things.
I also feel like when someone is gifted seeds and or clone and asked not to use them for breeding or breeding purposes they should not do it.
Never saw any notations on any seed site where a breeder asks his customers not to use his strains in breeding projects.
greenghost420
Well-Known Member
asking a totally different question reguarding ethics. now whats your opinion ?
Well of course in that circumstance it would be as wrong as possible. I think I see what point you are making, if so, its not applicable to a situation where someone actually goes and steals. If you buy their mothers, then you can do whatever you want with them. If you steal them, its not yours.
Just another note...
I have a Rottweiler from a very good and reputable bloodline.
Part of the contract for purchase included a breeding section. I am not legally allowed to breed her unless they approve the male. They want to make sure their bloodline name is not screwed with a bunch of backyard breeding.
In a lot of cases, that is not part of the contract. If you buy a pure-bred dog, you can breed it as often as you like.
If Mr.Nice or DJ Short etc. didnt want their lines used for breeding, well they should have made sure everyone knew that.
Of course, if you went to check out a new breeder and the headline was something like "IF YOU PURCHASE THESE SEEDS YOU CANNOT USE THEM IN ANY BREEDING PROJECTS" you probably would keep right on going.
King Arthur
Well-Known Member
I wouldn't buy them if I knew those were the circumstances, I don't buy from thieves. But I don't consider someone popping blueberry and crossing it a thief (in your scenario they are clearly thieves). I wouldn't talk down upon you though if you bought a cross from them though either because not every company does the cross that I specifically want so I can't expect you to not want something that you may be interested in. Does that make any sense?
Like if I want a gorilla glue 4 crossed with stardawg and yoohoo seeds stole the gorilla glue 4... I might just still buy it because they specifically crossed what two strains I wanted. Regardless of ethics or anything I might not even look that far into the company because of the whole "zomg gg4 x stardawg, I been waiting ages for that cross...." or whatever.
I need to medicate
GrowUrOwnDank
Well-Known Member
Dudei think most of us just want a little weed and all of the breeders I've tried including Dinafem and Sweet Seeds sell good genes.
I appreciate your history of weed breeding hobby, but they got 30%+ THC strains. And it's only going to get better as the breeders continue to experiment and develop faster, more hardy, easier, bigger yields and etc.
You are really over obsessing. Relax. But WHATEVA you believe in and so will everyone else.
thenotsoesoteric
Well-Known Member
If people give someone a clone and ask them not to breed it or give it to anyone, imo, they're a greedy asshole!
I had an asshole friend like this before and they suck as people in my experience. Dude would sit and smoke every bowl I packed no problem, but then he would pack up a bowl and instead of matching me, dude would smoke it to the head. He and his click were the types of assholes the would sit on a cut like it was some prized gem. I never asked the stingy toad for shit, but my other friend did and the a-hole's answer was, and I quote: "If you want the strain you can buy the seeds like I did, I don't give no one shit." Sociopaths, man.
That is the epitome of scumbagness in my opinion. Why would you want to hoard a strain that people enjoy or medicine that people could benefit from? Greed. So yes, I would tell somebody that I wouldn't give "their" clone out, and then as soon as I got it I would go out and give it to every last person that wanted it. Otherwise, I would never, and I don't care how good a strain is, I would never accept a clone that had any stipulations on it. There is no lineage that is so superior to another that I would ever fill discouraged about not having that particular clone.
I understand people wanting to get credit for a lineage, bragging rights or a sense of accomplishment, but beyond that I think patenting any plant or animal is scumbag stuff and we as humans are pieces of crap for treating living organisms as profit makers. God complex at it's fullest.
Fuck monsanto and sam the skunk man's mutli-million dollar plans to fuck off marijuana's genetics in a way that benefits seed makers. You want a patent, invent the next coca cola or the next new iphone or legalize marijuana so corporations can fuck weed off too.
I had an asshole friend like this before and they suck as people in my experience. Dude would sit and smoke every bowl I packed no problem, but then he would pack up a bowl and instead of matching me, dude would smoke it to the head. He and his click were the types of assholes the would sit on a cut like it was some prized gem. I never asked the stingy toad for shit, but my other friend did and the a-hole's answer was, and I quote: "If you want the strain you can buy the seeds like I did, I don't give no one shit." Sociopaths, man.
That is the epitome of scumbagness in my opinion. Why would you want to hoard a strain that people enjoy or medicine that people could benefit from? Greed. So yes, I would tell somebody that I wouldn't give "their" clone out, and then as soon as I got it I would go out and give it to every last person that wanted it. Otherwise, I would never, and I don't care how good a strain is, I would never accept a clone that had any stipulations on it. There is no lineage that is so superior to another that I would ever fill discouraged about not having that particular clone.
I understand people wanting to get credit for a lineage, bragging rights or a sense of accomplishment, but beyond that I think patenting any plant or animal is scumbag stuff and we as humans are pieces of crap for treating living organisms as profit makers. God complex at it's fullest.
Fuck monsanto and sam the skunk man's mutli-million dollar plans to fuck off marijuana's genetics in a way that benefits seed makers. You want a patent, invent the next coca cola or the next new iphone or legalize marijuana so corporations can fuck weed off too.
Bud Tipps
Well-Known Member
Anyone ever considered that using someone else strains helps promote the original?
Take DJ Shorts Blueberry for example, almost every seed company has a cross with that in it.
And when was the last time the Attitude had DJ Shorts Blueberry in stock? It's always out of stock, he can't seem to keep up with demand.
Now take an example of an original strain that never gets crossed with anything or copied by another seed company. Spoetnik from Paradise seeds. Not a well known strain, always in stock, virtually no hype or demand.
There will always be growers who want the original breeders seeds, around 25 percent according to this poll.
Take DJ Shorts Blueberry for example, almost every seed company has a cross with that in it.
And when was the last time the Attitude had DJ Shorts Blueberry in stock? It's always out of stock, he can't seem to keep up with demand.
Now take an example of an original strain that never gets crossed with anything or copied by another seed company. Spoetnik from Paradise seeds. Not a well known strain, always in stock, virtually no hype or demand.
There will always be growers who want the original breeders seeds, around 25 percent according to this poll.