That's a great help.
Also, I've been reading a fair bit of literature about the loss of potency to the mother plant and it's ongoing clones. There seems to be quite a lot claiming a loss to potency of 50th generation clones etc.
Personally, I don't believe it. When they cloned dolly the sheep, was she any less of a sheep? Plus cloning a sheep is a lot more complicated than cloning a plant. A clone has exactly the same dna as the donor, it's inherant and can not change. If a plants genetic make-up is to produce a certain quality of bud I really can't see how this can be altered.
The plant is kept in a kind of stasis, never allowed to grow up, it ages only in it's youthfulness. Why can't it be the other way round, I mean after 8 years the clones should be super clones.
The plant's dna is all over it, no matter which cuttings you take the dna will match the mother's. Has anyone ever flowered a mother after a couple of years? I'd be interested to know if the smoke seemed any better, or for that matter, any worse. What about the yield from a finally-flowered-mother?
I'm a believer in evolution, and with this I understand that dna can and does change to match the host's environment. All life has this ability, and plants are no exception. But it takes a climactic change to alter the dna used for the host to survive.
If the plant is kept at a constant, I really can't see there being any change. The dna make-up would have to alter for the plant to produce weaker buds.
I'm not saying that I'm right, just saying the way I see it
.....
)