* FrankWills *
Board Moderator
Premier Member
Registered on
Jul-06-2002
More User Info
|
Message #69779 posted by FrankWills (Info) August 06, 2005 21:59:35 ET
Trekking through the past.
Just thought I'd let others here know of a special thread that has been running for a while now at OG. It is a 'must read' for any and all Old-World cannabis lovers. For those that cherish forgotten and lost strains of yesteryear from the Asia and MicroAsia region of the world. The place where both cannabis indica and sativa thrives all year without any tending from man whatsoever. The place were mother nature kept her for all of mankind to enjoy and engineer today as we do. There are lots of pics of wild and cultivated strains in the thread and some breathtaking images of the landscapes where they grow. The thread starter, Mriko, is also currently offering seeds from this area that were contributed to him by locals in an effort to raise some money for building a new school. Keeping in mind that most of these landraces and IBL's are no very indoor friendly. Outdoors, fine, indoors, depends on the grower - though the indicas are far more indoor friendly than the thin bladed varieties. Whether you're after these strains or not it is well worth the read as it'll also show you the way that part of the world lives today.
Throughout the thread there are many other contributors who also offer good information about their own treks through those parts of the world . All in all it is one of the most warming and enlighting threads I've read in a long time. Like a trek through cannabis history.
So for all the oldSchool and OldWorld cannabis lovers, feast here:
www.overgrow.com/edge/showthread.php?s=23e99800df43370900fa24a8530dcec3&threadid=245261
*****************************************
“The man” has just written his latest article. I hope that you enjoy it.
My Cataloguing System
c. 2004 DJ Short
Perhaps one of the most useful devices used in a quality cannabis breeding project is that of catalogue techniques. This refers to the method used to categorize various traits for future reference, or how to best label traits from a given population. It is also a means to track who came from where (generational references).
First and foremost, I cannot begin to describe the level of complexity involved with a breeding project that extends from the f-2 to the f-5 range. It took me over a decade and a half of trial and much error to fully comprehend and develop a system that actually works to this level and beyond. It starts out simple enough, until the f-2's, then the complexity expands exponentially with each generation.
The P-1's are simple enough, they are the original breed-stock and labeled for what they are, i.e. Highland, Purple or Chocolate Thai, Oaxacan or Santa Marta Gold, Pure Afghan, etc. The f-1's were equally simple as they were of uniform expressions and I simply chose to label them “The Cross”. The f-2 generation was equally easy to identify with the label “Double Cross”, or the progeny of the f-1 cross. However, when the f-2's were grown out, extreme diversity ruled the making of the f-3's (or the descriptions of the f-2's selected to breed further with) a tougher call to make.
It is at this level (and beyond) that some form of labeling system becomes necessary to catalogue all of the different variations found. Beginning with the plants grown out from the f-2 seeds I chose to utilize an alphabetized system with each letter corresponding to a specific trait. For example, the letter “B” came to signify the “Berry” characteristic, “F” stands for “Fruity” (sometimes “Floral“), “G” is for Grape, “C” for Citrus, “O” for orange, “L” for lemon or lime, “K” equaled “Kush”, “S” for “Sativa” “P” for Purple, “X” for extreme glandular trichome production, etc.
I must confess that it took much trial and error to finally get it right. Therefore, if one were to look at my early notes many exceptions to what developed as “the rule” can be found. I left these early “mistakes” as they were so as not to over-complicate what came next. It is also very important to note that most of these observations were relatively subjective and that no more than two traits, or characteristics were ever assigned to any one plant. Therefore, the label “BK” came to stand for “Berry Kush”, or a Kush dominant plant with outstanding berry attributes. It is also important to note that only the most outstanding plant of any given attribute was selected for future work. So the plant that ended up with the “BK” label was the most Berry-Kush of the lot.
So, my f-3 stock became labeled with a two-letter code indicating what the most outstanding characteristics of it’s parent (primarily mother) were, and only those with the strongest expressions earned their label. When the f-3's were grown out and crossed to make the f-4 generation, these labels were coupled to indicate the parents of the f-4 progeny, i.e. BK/FS would be a cross between an f-3 Berry-Kush mother (I always list the female first, male second with a back-slash in between) and an f-3 Fruity Sativa father.
F-4's and Beyond
Consider the label number: 4/5 3 96-2. This is the type of numbering symbol I use to label F-4 and beyond plants. Before we dissect this number I need to point out a few rules that I follow in a breeding project beyond the F-4 generation.
First, I only grow out no more than six varieties at any single time. The reason is to avoid too much confusion. Six is about the maximum number of varieties an individual can realistically keep track of. These six (or five, or four etc.) varieties are then labeled as “1" through “6" (or the number of varieties used). Let’s say the 6 f-3's I use are: 1. “FK/FK”, 2. “BK/PK”, 3. “FK/FL”, 4. “GK/GK”, 5. “PK/FP” and 6. “XP/FK”. Notes are made to record this fact and the seeds are then sprouted and grown using these simple, single digit identification numbers (1 through 6 in this example).
Second, I select only one male from any single breeding project. Again, this simplifies things and avoids mistakes enormously. That male is generally selected at about the third week in the flowering cycle, unless it is a clone from another project. After the single male is selected the other males are removed and the remaining females are numbered according to their variety category (i.e. if there are seven #1. females, five #2 females, etc. they are labeled #1–1 through 7, #2–1 through 5, etc.) The male simply retains the number from its variety label, in our above example the number “5" (in the 4/5), or the “PK/FP” male.
Now we may examine the above example: 4/5 3 96-2. The first two numbers, “4/5" are the variety number of the female first and male second. So in this case that would be: a “GK/GK” female crossed with the “PK/FP” male. The third number in our example, “3" means female #3 from the #4 (“GK/GK”) batch. The next number in the example, “96" is merely the year and the final number is the crop number for that year. So, translated, the number 4/5 3 96-2 is the third “GK/GK” (or #4) female crossed with the “PK/FP” (or #5) male grown from the second crop of 1996.
Please note that the “/5” male-used indicator will be /5 for all of the seeds labeled from this batch as the #5 (“PK/FP”) male is the only one used. If a male clone from a past crop is used it may be indicated by using the #7 in the initial notes (if six varieties are sprouted) and described as the male-clone-used in the #7 description. Likewise, if any of the six varieties tested are from a past clone (female), they may be selected as one of the #1 through #6 varieties, labeled and described accordingly.
It seems complex at first, but I assure you that it works great. The same system is used for the F-5 generation, and beyond. The system merely requires that dated notes be kept and catalogued. That way, any crosses may be backtracked and referenced via one’s notes and a simple, six or seven digit code is all that is needed to label and catalogue one’s plants.
Finally, this system works best for forward crosses mainly. Backcrosses will need another connotation to note their use . The “clone-used” labeling described prior works well for backcrosses involving clones.
This system is good for only one grow out at a time. If multiple grows, or facilities are used then they will need to be noted as well, perhaps with a lettered “A”, “B”, “C” etc. appended onto the catalogue number. Also, detailed notes of each individual plant are necessary to fully utilize any cataloguing system and are obviously required for success. Other than that, I have found this to be a relatively simple and foolproof system for cataloguing one’s breeding projects beyond the f-3 generation.
Background, Review and DJ’s Law
Remember; all of my seed-stock came from the cross of two distinctly different P1 parents with the mother being of pure, land-race sativa origin and the father being a pure indica. This cross produced a very uniform line I’ve referred to as “The Cross”, or f1 generation. When “The Cross” was bred with itself (dubbed “Double Cross” at the time) the resulting variance was phenomenal in the f2 generation expressions. Beginning with this f2 generation, intense scrutiny and application of the selection rules and laws come into play. The bulk of the variation from this f2 generation were primarily discovered in the 1980's.
I must comment here that the variation witnessed from this f2 cross, and subsequent crosses, was truly amazing in its complexity of variance. I also need to mention the fact that, as far as “the number’s game” is concerned (selecting from as large a population as possible), this f2, and to some degree the f3 generations are the most relevant. That is, the larger the number of f2's and f3's sprouted, the greater the degree of variance that is witnessed. It is from the f3 and beyond generations that specific traits are bred for and stabilized. Once a specific trait is recognized, the numbers necessary for success diminish with each generation successfully crossed toward the desired traits. In simple terms; the more f2's and f3's sprouted for examination the better. However, once a specific trait presents itself and is chosen for future work and appears to breed true through subsequent generation, the less f4's, f5's etc. that are needed to witness the desired results.
There is one very simple rule that I feel is primary when considering one’s involvement in a quality cannabis breeding project, or when applying Luther Burbank’s law (“Select the best and reject all others.”). It is an extension of Luther Burbank’s Law that I will refer to as:
DJ’s Law of Quality Cannabis Breeding.
“The progeny must equal or surpass its parent in overall quality and desirability to be considered for future breeding.”
That is, if the progeny is not as good as the bud it came from, it is rejected from further breeding. The finished product from the grown seed does not need to be exactly like the bud or parent from which it came. A good example is from the land-race Thai and the plants grown from its seed. The plants grown from the land-race Thai seed, especially produced indoors, were not much like the imported Thai from which it came (primarily due in this case to very different growing environments and curing techniques). It was, however, very equal, and in some instances superior to the buds from which it came and therefore worthy of consideration.
On the other hand, I have not had much luck in equaling the effects of certain tropical Island herbs such as Hawaiian or Jamaican indoors, and therefore these offerings never made the grade. For the record, the majority of land-race varieties grown out prove to fail DJ’s law, IMHO. Very few end up being of significant value or worthy of future consideration. But DJ’s law also applies to the selection of the f2's, f3's and beyond.
I realize that it is sometimes impossible in the current seed market to be able to sample a true example of the bud (parent) of the seed one purchases. Sometimes these varieties are commercially available in places such as a Dutch coffee shop, but one is never really certain if the bud one is purchasing (or the seed for that matter) is the real deal. This is perhaps one of the main flaws in the current seed market–reliability. Given this situation, the seed buyer and breeder will need to employ Luther Burbank’s Law first, and DJ’s Law after a parent is created for testing.
A Word About Mutagens
I am aware of concerns involving mutagens such as colchicine and their possible use on cannabis plants. Colchicine is a chemical that when applied to seeds or sprouts can cause extreme genetic mutations in future generations of the seeds that survive the treatment (often less that 1%). For the record let me state that I have never used colchicine, or any other mutagen, in my breeding work . All of my selections are from organically produced crops. I do have my suspicions, however, primarily concerning some of the Thai strains that I have used.
I am not certain, but I suspect that the Highland and Chocolate Thai may have been the results of a mutagenic regimen. The reasons I make the speculation is due to observations witnessed in the growing cycle of the Highland and Chocolate Thai and their progeny. Both were extremely “freakish” in some of their expressions, as were a number of subsequent generations. These freakish anomalies are similar to many of the abnormalities documented by mutagenic experiments published in journals such as High Times and Cannabis Culture. These abnormalities include asymmetric growth patterns, “albino” mutations that affect parts of the plant such as half of a leaf, various polyploid expressions and mild to extreme leaf mutations. I am very interested to learn about any first hand experience anyone may have had in this capacity. Having said that, one of the most important aspects to consider in regard to a breeding regimen is that of ratios.
Ratios
The math for this selection process involves watching the ratios of desirable plants from f2 to f3 and beyond generations. The ratio of plants exhibiting a specifically desired trait from the f2 generation may be 1:20 or 1:50 or 1:100 or even as high as 1:1000 (approximate ratios). Once obtained and selected, however, and crossed to the correct pollen source, this ratio will equate more and more per each successful generational cross. This is another indicator of which individuals actually breed true for the specific desired trait(s). Therefore, if the ratio of plants with desired traits presents itself in an approximate 1:100 ratio in the f2 generation, and successful crosses are made, this ratio should diminish to between 1:50 to 1:20 for the same desired trait in the f3 generation. If the cross remains successful, the ratio will diminish to anywhere from 1:10 to an absolute IBL (In-Bred Line) beyond the f4 cross of 1:2 (or 1:1 barring male sexual exclusion, i.e. the ratio among the female plants only).
It is important to note that any 1:2 (1:1 female) IBL ratio is generally for a very specific, singular trait. When considering combinations of traits, the best obtainable ratio I have found is between 1:5 to approximately 1:10, depending on the number of desired traits sought. Please note that these ratio numbers are approximate and the true numbers may be closer to the powers of two such as 1:8, 1:16, 1:32 etc. It also needs to be noted that my ratios relate to total number of seeds sprouted and not just the number of female plants.
Therefore, if I sprout 100 f2 seeds and find one female plant with any number of desirable qualities, and I successfully find a male f2 pollen donor to cross with, and the ratio of these same desirable plants in the f3 generation becomes at least 1:50 (preferably 1:30 or better) then I consider myself on the right track and proceed from there. If a subsequent cross of the f3's provides a ratio of desirability in the f4's of 1:20 (or closer), I am definitely on the right track. In essence these are the (general) numbers I look for in the early breeding trials. Suffice it to say that my informal observations have proven true enough for me to be able to judge desirable results with adequate success, despite the approximations.
Suffice it also to say that I have a large collection of f3's and f4's and beyond that merit further investigation. These f4's (and some f3's and f5's) are the primary source for all future breeding work along the lines established by the ratios of plants with the desirable traits expressed therein.
A Word About Anomalies
Anomalies, individuals that are markedly different from the general phenotypic expression of a given variety, are rare, but occur with a near predictable ratio. Beyond the f-3 generation (and from my personal seed-stock) anomalies present themselves at the ratio of approximately 1:100. Because there are both positive (desirable) and negative (non-desirable) anomalies, the overall ratio of positive (desirable) anomalies is probably somewhere in the neighborhood of approx. 1:200. Desirable anomalies are very valuable to cannabis breeding providing that they are viable. So always keep an eye out for desirable anomalies and put sufficient energy into their reproduction. More often than not however, anomalies can be very finicky and therefore difficult to work with
Past Selection Processes Review
Originally, in the late 1970's, I was growing up to 100 plants at a time using over 1000 watts of light, and also outdoors in a backyard garden space. These were all land race sativa that fortunately cloned well. The ratio of highly desirable individuals from these plants was about 1:100. One of the most annoying traits of these varieties was hermaphroditism. Approximately 60% of all of these plants from seed were unmanageable hermis, and about 25% more were what I referred to as manageable hermaphrodites, meaning that with close observation and intense scrutiny the male pods could be seen and eliminated as they appeared. About 15% of these sativa plants were female enough to produce marketable sinsimilla bud, with a constant vigilance toward the occasional stray pollen sack. In other words the hermaphroditism expressed in these equatorial sativa was extreme and nearly total.
A quick word about the virtues of hermaphrodites: Ask any old-time herbalist, one who has been experiencing fine herb since at least the early 1970's, what their favorite all-time herbal variety was, and the answer will be something to the effect of; “Santa Marta or Acapulco Gold” or “Highland or Chocolate Thai” or “Punta Roya (red-tipped gold Highland Oaxacan)” or “Guerran Green” or “Panama Red” etc. et. al., all of which were equatorial, or sub-tropical, origin sativa and hermaphroditic. Even the great hashish of the era such as Lebanese Red and Blonde, all Moroccan and Nepalese were produced from seeded stock.
This is not so much in praise of the hermaphrodite as it is a suggestion in regard to the cannabinoid profile of seeded verses non-seeded herb. It has been my experience that the cannabinoid profile of seeded herb produces a wider range of effect than from non-seeded, or sinsimilla, herb. The equatorial environment also probably contributed to a wider range of cannabinoids. One of the aspects of the equatorial environment is its consistent day/night temperature range, there is little difference between day and night temps on the equator supposedly inspiring a wider cannabinoid profile. Couple this with the seeded cannabinoid profile and it becomes easy to understand the popularity of the equatorial produced sativa, despite its hermaphroditic problems. I am curios as to what future research in this capacity may provide.
Once the indica was introduced into the mix the hermaphrodite “problem” became controllable. It only takes a few zero-tolerance generations indoors to fully eliminate hermaphroditic tendencies. As a matter of fact, this, coupled with shortening the flowering cycle, became the first main concerns of the indoor or commercial horticulturist. This unbalanced focus may be the strongest contributing factor to the “blandness” of much of the herb to follow. The author “R” did a cover piece for High Times magazine in the mid-1980's calling for a “Ban the Bud” campaign, against the indica onslought, due to how bad and bland the quality of some herb was becoming then. I remember the times clearly.
During this period I was beginning to venture out into larger satellite grows (indoor and out) that kicked my selection numbers up to around 1000 plants at a time for awhile. It was from these trials that I was able to do the bulk of my f2 experimentation and selections. I worked with these numbers for enough trials to manipulate and witness the phenomenon of quality production to a high degree of certainty. Once I was certain how to produce the f3's, the f4's and beyond became much easier to produce.
During the late 1980's, and due to the harsh political realities of the times, the high numbers game became too dangerous. The war on some drugs and spooky ops such as Operation Green Merchant forced my experimentation deep underground. Fortunately, the lessons learned prior proved fruitful and progress was possible despite the political weather. I had already learned to produce f3 and f4 Blueberry (et. al.). However, doing so with diminished numbers actually helped boost my learning curve. Between 1987 to 1990 I was able to do so using less than 100 plants from seed at a time. And by 1991 I was able to do adequate selection work from past produced stock using less than 50 plants (seeds) at a time.
Europe
Holland
By the early 1990's I was extremely interested in the burgeoning seed market developing in Holland. I had known about the seed banks since 1983 and was always only interested in obtaining more pure, land-race varieties. Unfortunately, there were only hybrid crosses ever available at the time and I had more than enough of my own to work with. By 1993 I finally made the pilgrimage to Amsterdam where I made new connections. In 1994 I connected with the first company that I worked with in Europe. By 1995 I was supplying this company with seed-stock both for sale and for breed work. I had contracted with this company to produce Blueberry, Flo and Blue Velvet.
The first company I worked with in Europe sprouted only 25 seeds of each of these varieties to make selections from. Other than supplying seed-stock, I was only minimally involved in the selection process. I did get to see the mother and father plants alive, however, the selection process had already been done prior by others. Unfortunately, my relationship with this company was short-lived as all the owner really wanted was my seed-stock. Once he had it I became a very low priority in his scheme. In all honesty I was never paid one red cent for any of the Blueberry (or “Flow” or Blue Velvet) that company number one in Europe produced (plus having over 3,000 seeds that I produced completely ripped off).
Needless to say this lack of concern prompted me to seek other possibilities that culminated in my relationship with the second company I worked with in Europe. At this company about 50 seeds of each variety were sprouted, but I was once again mainly left out of the selection process except for sampling a number of finished products and making selections based on those (which is enough, actually). I never got to see any of the live plants from this selection process at company number two in Europe. I also contributed seed-stock for three more varieties there; Blue Moonshine, Blue Heaven and Purple Passion. The owner of this company was satisfied with paying me the minimum amount I would consider adequate. Fortunately, part of the deal was my ability to remain independent and work with whomever else I pleased.
Switzerland
The third company I worked with in Europe was in Switzerland. The owner of this company was able to dramatically push the envelope there and some interesting results blossomed. I visited Switzerland three times between 1999 and 2001 and was truly amazed at what I witnessed on each visit. Out of all of the companies that I worked with in Europe, I felt the most involved and productive in Switzerland. I was involved with selections of finished products and with live mother and father plants as well. I even got to help plant, transplant and harvest a few of the gems produced there.
The varieties produced by the third company that I worked with in Europe included Moonshine Rocket Fuel, Rosebud and Blue Satellite. I must admit that the bubble hash from the Blue Satellite is among the finest and most desirable product I have sampled (outside of my own) since the 1980's! Unfortunately, the owner of this company was unable to successfully work with the local authorities and was forced to leave Switzerland. Some truly intrepid tales were spun during the brief stay there and I will remember many of them with delight.
Canada, The True North Strong and Free
With glimmers of hope on the horizon, Canada is fast becoming the Cannabis Breeding capital of the world. With the much-appreciated activism of entrepreneurs such as Marc Emery (et. al.), a new haven for a seriously dedicated cannabis community is developing. One such entrepreneurial dedicate is Red of Legends Seeds. I met Red in Switzerland where he was very busy and involved working for the happening community there. Red is a high-flying, free spirit with a savvy sense of taste.
Red was able to orchestrate the necessary requirements to produce a very large selection process. This grow consisted of about 400 plants (over 200 Blueberry phenos and over 100 Flo). Out of these there ended up being over 160 Blueberry and over 70 Flo females and about 60 males that made the initial cut. Copies of each of these were cloned and meticulously maintained by the crew. This actually turned out to be a slight overkill, but a testimony to the absolute dedication of the crew.
The Crew
Mighty-G is a green-thumbed master gardener whose success with cannabis is phenomenal. Mr. G was able to provide and maintain a near-perfect growing environment for a lengthy period of time as the plants were kept in an extended vegetive state to insure 100% clone success. The plants were absolutely beautiful. Kermit was in charge of clone reproduction and maintenance. Kermit has been a respected part of the local cannabis community for many years. Chimera appeared online a few years ago and has proven himself to be an intelligent and dedicated soul, along with being a focused horticulturist with excellent credentials in the field of genetics. I first learned of Chimera online where he posted to a few message boards that I occasionally lurk and I appreciated the information he shared. The Cannabis Cowboy also added his expertise, especially considering the collection, purification and pressing of the dry-sieved resin.
I just want to give a big “shout out” and a huge thank you to all of the crew for their very successful efforts on this project. You cats rock! Thank you.
The Process
The main room was divided in two with the Blueberry on the left and the Flo on the right. The plants were relatively huge considering how long they’d been in veg. Lush growth dominated as three distinct Blueberry phenotypes and two distinct Flo presented their development, along with a small number of unique anomalies. Of course, all individuals were numbered and labeled and notes were made over the course of several inspections during the flowering cycle.
During this period all of the males were isolated in a separate room and watched closely to enable the best selection from them. From this particular gene-pool, I find it relatively easy to select the best males as they tend to express their traits regardless of environment or light cycle. There were so many to choose from during this process that the difficulty became who to cull out. Most of the males were at least to some degree resinous with glandular stalked trichome, some more than others. This usually makes it easy to test certain profiles such as overall flavors.
Only after the most desirable males are selected (i.e. all the others rejected) are issues of structure and growth pattern considered. Sweet, fruity and floral expressions are most desirable, but attention is paid to other possibilities as well. Top quality candidates of indica, sativa and mutant anomaly are picked by process of elimination. Then those with the best structure; hollow stems, good color and flower density, become the final candidates.
The females also pose the same problem in regard to who is eliminated. Notes are made as to any outstanding qualifications that present themselves during the bud cycle. But it is not until the sixth week in flower, and sometimes not until the eighth week (or longer if the variety is strongly sativa), that the real differences in individuals becomes apparent and the truly amazing qualities shine. And even then, it only amounts to field-notes until well after harvest and the cut-and-dried product is totally cured. It is then that the final selection process begins.
During our selection-crop numerous individuals could have passed the requirements to be a great mother plant. By and large, the overall ratio of desirable plants that qualified for final selection from this crop was approximately 1:10 (employing DJ’s Law). As it turns out the elite ratio of final candidates turned out to be approximately 1:30–the best of the best as it were. By the eighth week in bud approximately two dozen individuals stood out as primary candidates. After these samples were individually labeled and jar cured for about two months, a total of eleven were of supreme quality. Believe it or not, the final elimination process among these eleven was perhaps the most difficult to complete. Part of the sprocess involved selecting one of each of the three Blueberry phenotypes, one of the Flo, one Blue Moonshine and deciding on the possibility of something new.
The Varieties
After the fourth week in bud, generally speaking, certain characteristics become apparent. On the Blueberry side of the room three distinct phenotypes presented themselves, while on the flo side two less distinct phenos appeared. The three Blueberry phenotypes could be referred to as indica, sativa and variegated or mutated. The indica were shorter, denser and had larger calyx and bract leafs making the buds look plump. The sativa were taller, more slender leafed with more elongated buds of dense, smaller calyx. The indica tended to be of a stronger, more musky odor where the sativa were more delicate and floral. The variegated or mutated individuals varied more in their aromatic palate with some seeming more potent than others. On the flo side the difference was less pronounced between phenotypes but two distinct types developed. The primary difference was in bud structure and formation with one type growing with its bract leaves pointing more up and the other with its bract leaves pointing down. Both were more sativa looking with dense buds of small calyx. There was also a difference in potency of aroma between these individuals.
The seed stock “True Blueberry” currently under scrutiny derived from f2’s that were very “BK” or Berry Kush-like. These f2 “BK”’s were crossed with very “TF”, or “True Floral”, sometimes referred to as “Temple Flo”, mates in the f3 and/or f4 generation to brighten the head considerably. Once the right mix was discovered these f4’s (and beyond) crosses were inline bred (filial crossed) to stabilize the proper traits. The “flo” pheno’s are closer to the “TF” (“True Floral”, “Temple Flo”), headier side of the mix, most reminiscent of the Highland Oaxaca Gold.
“Grape Krush” (or “Blue Krush”)–a productive, deep-colored hybrid of very high quality. This plants exhibits partial to full leaf-deformities of the “krinkle” type, but with good structure and heavy bud production of large calyxes. The buds express a strong sharp/fruity odor with a distinct sweet/grape flavor brought out in the cure. A strong, long-lasting head/body mix is evident in the finished product with an exciting, but not “racy”, head and a mild narcotic body. Very euphoric and desirable effects that most seasoned connoisseurs prefer. 50-60 day flowering time.
“Flodica” – a mostly indica phenotype from the flo line. A rare, near-total recessive indica found by chance in the “TF” line (“TF”= “Temple Flo” or “True Floral”). Generally, the flo line sports very sativa like structures of taller plants with slender leaves and spear-shaped buds. The “Flodica”, however, is a near-pure indica phenotype of short, stout, yet productive, structure with very large, dense, dark indica buds. Very resinous with heavy gland production of an earthen palate to the buds that produce a very strong, narcotic-type experience. 50-55 day flowering time. Unfortunately, the “Flodica” (and the “True Blue Moonshine”) were nearly sterile--i.e. no (or very few) seeds developed, and were therefore culled.
“True Blueberry”–the ultimate hybrid of Blueberry expression. Selected for its superior quality from a large pool, this hybrid contains the best from both worlds (indica and sativa). Medium height with long, fruity and productive buds of medium sized calyxes. Beautiful lavender hues become apparent soon into the flowering cycle. The finished product is of the highest quality with sweet, elongated Blueberry buds destined to please the most finicky palate. High resin production as expected from the “Blue” family. 50-60 days flowering time.
“True Blue Moonshine”–a true “hash-plant”. Selected for its outstanding production of large, clear gland heads, this mostly-indica hybrid really packs a musky/fruity punch. Medium height producing parge, dense buds glistening with trichomes. More musky than fruity with a burgundy/earthen flavor at cure. Top-notch Moonshine. 50-60 days flowering time.
“F-13"–a Holy Grail plant of four-star excellence. Previously unreleased, a very desirable product and potential breeder. A more-sativa hybrid of medium height with long, spear-shaped, dense and resinous buds and an earlier finish time than most sativa. The superfluous quality of the finished product is remarkable: a clear, clean, crisp head of the kindest order with a sweet/floral flavor. This girl really rings the bell every time! Not for the couch-lock crowd, this heady sativa is for those who truly enjoy its stimulating yet comfortable appeal. A real day (or night) brightener. My personal favorite from this batch. 50-65 days flowering time.
Stay tuned for future re-releases of Velvet Luna (formerly Blue Satellite and Blueberry Sativa), Moonshine Rocket Fuel and Rosebud in the not-too-distant future. Have fun and best regards toward your horticultural ventures. Enjoy!
*****************************************
By UncleBug
Variation in Cannabis
Here are some recent publications on patterns of variation in Cannabis. The bottom line is that so-called "indica" and "sativa" drug strains are both C. indica ... sativa is the stuff they make rope out of.
--------------------
Genetic evidence for speciation in Cannabis (Cannabaceae). Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution. 2005. 52(2): 161-180.
Karl_W._Hillig
Department of Biology, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA
ABSTRACT
__Sample populations of 157 Cannabis accessions of diverse geographic origin were surveyed for allozyme variation at 17 gene loci. The frequencies of 52 alleles were subjected to principal components analysis. A scatter plot revealed two major groups of accessions. The sativa gene pool includes fiber/seed landraces from Europe, Asia Minor, and Central Asia, and ruderal populations from Eastern Europe. The indica gene pool includes fiber/seed landraces from eastern Asia, narrow-leafleted drug strains from southern Asia, Africa, and Latin America, wide-leafleted drug strains from Afghanistan and Pakistan, and feral populations from India and Nepal. A third putative gene pool includes ruderal populations from Central Asia. None of the previous taxonomic concepts that were tested adequately circumscribe the sativa and indica gene pools. A polytypic concept of Cannabis is proposed, which recognizes three species, C. sativa, C. indica and C. ruderalis, and seven putative taxa.
-------------------------
A chemotaxonomic analysis of terpenoid variation in Cannabis. Biochemical Systematics and Ecology 2004. 32: 875-891.
Karl W. Hillig
Department of Biology, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, 47405 USA
ABSTRACT
To determine whether the terpenoid composition of the essential oil of Cannabis is useful for chemotaxonomic discrimination, extracts of pistillate inflorescences of 162 greenhouse-grown plants of diverse origin were analyzed by gas chromatography. Peak area ratios of 48 compounds were subjected to multivariate analysis and the results interpreted with respect to geographic origin and taxonomic affiliation. A canonical analysis in which the plants were pre-assigned to C. sativa or C. indica based on previous genetic, morphological, and chemotaxonomic studies resulted in 91% correct assignment of the plants to their pre-assigned species. A scatterplot on the first two principal component axes shows that plants of accessions from Afghanistan assigned to the wide-leaflet drug biotype (an infraspecific taxon of unspecified rank) of C. indica group apart from the other putative taxa. The essential oil of these plants usually had relatively high ratios of guaiol, isomers of eudesmol, and other unidentified compounds. Plants assigned to the narrow-leaflet drug biotype of C. indica tended to have relatively high ratios of trans-beta-farnesene. Cultivars of the two drug biotypes may exhibit distinctive medicinal properties due to significant differences in terpenoid composition.
--------------------------------
A chemotaxonomic analysis of cannabinoid variation in Cannabis (Cannabaceae).
American Journal of Botany 91(6): 966-975.
Karl W. Hillig and Paul G. Mahlberg
Department of Biology, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana
ABSTRACT
Cannabinoids are important chemotaxonomic markers unique to Cannabis. Previous studies show that a plant's dry-weight ratio of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) to cannabidiol (CBD) can be assigned to one of three chemotypes and that alleles BD and BT encode alloenzymes that catalyze the conversion of cannabigerol to CBD and THC, respectively. In the present study, the frequencies of BD and BT in sample populations of 157 Cannabis accessions were determined from CBD and THC banding patterns, visualized by starch gel electrophoresis. Gas chromatography was used to quantify cannabinoid levels in 96 of the same accessions. The data were interpreted with respect to previous analyses of genetic and morphological variation in the same germplasm collection. Two biotypes (infraspecific taxa of unassigned rank) of C. sativa and four biotypes of C. indica were recognized. Mean THC levels and the frequency of BT were significantly higher in C. indica than C. sativa. The proportion of high THC/CBD chemotype plants in most accessions assigned to C. sativa was <25% and in most accessions assigned to C. indica was >25%. Plants with relatively high levels of tetrahydrocannabivarin (THCV) and/or cannabidivarin (CBDV) were common only in C. indica. This study supports a two-species concept of Cannabis.
------------------
A Systematic Investigation of Cannabis
Karl W. Hillig
Doctoral Dissertation
Department of Biology, Indiana University
March, 2005.
ABSTRACT
Botanists disagree whether Cannabis (Cannabaceae) is a monotypic or polytypic genus. A systematic investigation was undertaken to elucidate underlying evolutionary and taxonomic relationships within the genus. Genetic, morphological, and chemotaxonomic analyses were conducted on 157 Cannabis accessions of known geographic origin. Sample populations of each accession were surveyed for allozyme variation at 17 gene loci. Principal component (PC) analysis of the allozyme allele frequencies revealed that most accessions were derived from two major gene pools corresponding to C. sativa L., and C. indica Lam. A third putative gene pool corresponds to C. ruderalis Janisch. Previous taxonomic treatments were tested for goodness of fit to the pattern of genetic variation. Based on these results, a working hypothesis for a taxonomic circumscription of Cannabis was proposed that is a synthesis of previous polytypic concepts. Putative infraspecific taxa were assigned to “biotypes” pending formal taxonomic revision. Genetic variation was highest in the hemp and feral biotypes and least in the drug biotypes. Morphometric traits were analyzed by PC and canonical variates (CV) analysis. PC analysis failed to differentiate the putative species, but provided objective support for recognition of infraspecific taxa of C. sativa and C. indica. CV analysis resulted in a high degree of discrimination of the putative species and infraspecific taxa. Variation in qualitative and quantitative levels of cannabidiol (CBD), tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), and other cannabinoids was determined, as were frequencies of alleles that control CBD and THC biosynthesis. The patterns of variation support a two-species concept, but not recognition of C. ruderalis as a separate species from C. sativa. PC analysis of terpenoid variation showed that the wide-leaflet drug (WLD) biotype of C. indica produced enhanced mean levels of guaiol and isomers of eudesmol, and is distinct from the other putative taxa. In summary, the results of this investigation show that a taxonomic revision of Cannabis is warranted. However, additional studies of putative wild populations are needed to further substantiate the proposed taxonomic treatment.
Southern African strains appear to be derived from wild Himalayan populations (e.g., they both tend to have high levels of THCV). Early flowering is a beneficial trait in wild populations so this trait may be a carryover from earlier times. Incidently, some of the the elite southern African strains like "Swazi" may be recent introductions. Their genetics are different than the feral African strains.
The above-mentioned articles can be purchased for about $30 each at the following web sites. Otherwise, Hillig's dissertation should be available in a few weeks from: http://wwwlib.umi.com/dissertations/
http://www.amjbot.org/content/vol91/issue6/#SYSTEMATICS
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03051978
http://www.springerlink.com/app/hom...ults,1:102893,1
"Cultivars of the two drug biotypes may exhibit distinctive medicinal properties due to significant differences in terpenoid composition...any links to learn more on this?"
http://www.omma1998.org/McPartland-...1(3-4)-2001.pdf
John M. McPartland and Ethan B. Russo. 2001. Cannabis and Cannabis Extracts: Greater Than the Sum of Their Parts? Journal of Cannabis Therapeutics 1(3/4): 103-132.
SUMMARY. A central tenet underlying the use of botanical remedies is that herbs contain many active ingredients. Primary active ingredients may be enhanced by secondary compounds, which act in beneficial synergy. Other herbal constituents may mitigate the side effects of dominant active ingredients. We reviewed the literature concerning medical cannabis and its primary active ingredient, delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). Good evidence shows that secondary compounds in cannabis may enhance the beneficial effects of THC. Other cannabinoid and non-cannabinoid compounds in herbal cannabis or its extracts may reduce THC-induced anxiety, cholinergic deficits, and immunosuppression. Cannabis terpenoids and flavonoids may also increase cerebral blood flow, enhance cortical activity, kill respiratory pathogens, and provide anti-inflammatory activity.
******************************************************
YIELD OF DREAMS
Using half the normal light, you can reduce growroom temps and electrical bills and achieve a healthy and heavy harvest.
by Jorge Cervantes
"You can use half the light and achieve the same harvest," says James, an astute man with a cat-that-ate-the-canary look, as he puffs on a spLiff the size of a big Cuban cigar.
"You're joking," I wince, "but I'll hear you out if you pass me that spliff."
After a short conversation, during which he makes a few simple growroom drawings on the back of a brochure, I'm convinced he's on to something very, very interesting. "This looks good on paper and sounds too good to be true," I say. "I must see proof before sharing this with High Times'Grow America readers. They are a very demanding Lot."
James whips out his cell phone and quickLy makes four appointments for the following two days with growers in southern Holland.
We meet the next morning, have coffee, a few tokes of Snowball, and jump into a panel delivery truck packed with electrical and hydroponics supplies. We pull into a typical Dutch driveway and disappear behind an automatic garage door. The home looks no different than any other in the neighborhood, until we climb the stairs to Mr. Clean's attic growroom.
"Heat is a big problem here, because the growroorn is just below the roof," James explains. "We had to do something to keep the room cool but not use any more electricity. What we found costs less and works better." With a twinkle in his eye, he continues: "When the temperatures rise outdoors, it's more difficult to control the microclimate in the room.
Air circulation changes. Convection becomes more intense. Humidity, water absorption, and evaporation speed up as well."
High-intensity-discharge lights generate heat that can cause many problems in a growroom. For the best results, the average temperature should stay around 75*F during the day and no less than 55*F at night. Daytime growroom temperatures as high as 90*F can cause irregular nutrient uptake and slow growth.
"On average, a hot system will produce between 35% and 60% less than a system running at nominal temperatures," says James. "The other problem is that the buds don't close. They stay fluffy. THC levels are also lower when plants are grown hot. And you have the extra work of trimming these fluffy bastards."
The fluffy buds are less-than-prime smoke and fetch a lower market price. High temperatures also cause buds to exude more pungent odors, which could alert neighbors to the grow operation.
To avoid these problems, James started experimenting with schedules in the flowering rooms, where the light regimen was set at 12 hours on and 12 hours off. He tried turning half the lights on for the first hour of the day before switching on the other half. Then he tried turning half the lights off for the last hour of the day.
"We noticed no real difference in growth or production, and we were saving a few kilowatt hours of electricity," James says. "But we still didn't solve our heat and odor problems. That's when I got radical and put my engineering background to use."
James spent 14 years as an engineer for Grodan, a Danish soil company. Most of those years, he visited greenhouses in the Netherlands solving problems. They still call "Witty Wortel," Dutch for "problem solver."
"You know about the two Dutch guys who invented copper wire, right?" inquires James. I answer with a blank stare. "Yes, they were fighting over a penny! We've found a new invention that makes the same penny twice as valuable as it was before."
James evaluated the data he'd amassed over the years spent troubleshooting in the greenhouse industry and found that plants need bright light, but react slowly to it. Greenhouses are dependent upon natural sunlight. Artificial Light is used when natural light intensity levels drop below a specific point. Different plants require different light levels. When plants are given less artificial they react as though growing in shade; they mature more slowly and lack vigor. James wondered what would happen if he simulated the greenhouse environment indoors.
In the Netherlands, direct sunshine is intensity drops whenever clouds block sunlight. Plant growth slows somewhat, but it does not stop. Plants culti-
vated under intermittent bright light coupled with less intense light stilt grow big and strong, but they take longer to mature. James used this simple principle as the foundation for more growroom experiments. The results were extraordinary.
Mr. Clean's attic growroom has two banks of lights overhead, each containing five 600-watt high-pressure sodium lamps. He's conducted many different experiments with light levels. The most productive method was to turn every other lamp on, creating a zigzag light pattern in the room. He switches half of the tights on for two hours. At the end of two hours, he turns off the first bank of five lights and turns on the second bank to reverse the zigzag Light pattern. He maintains this schedule for 12 hours, alternating every two hours. By having only five Lights on at any one time, he cuts his electricity consumption in half. In order for this system to work properly. a minimum of four lamps is necessary.
The first crop employing the new zigzag scheme with only five lamps on at any one time produced about 9.3 pounds (4.2 kilosl, roughly 70% the yield of the previous crop. James continued to refine the schedule with many more experiments. Yields continued to climb.
Our second stop is a growroom run by two beautiful young Dutch women, affectionatety known as "The Babes." Their first crop with James' custom-made Quick Switch Master controller looked good at first but caught a virus during flowering, and some plants died. The Babes were forced to harvest the remaining 110 healthy plants two weeks early, only seven weeks into flowering. When dry, the harvest weighed in at 4.8 pounds (2.2 kilos). Given the total amount of wattage (600-watt HPS), they harvested roughly 0.7 grams per watt for every 30 days of flowering. (The benchmark is 0.5 grams per watt for every 30 days.) This was a major improvement.
Their next crop yielded approximately 3.1 kilograms of top-quality bud from 150 plants - that's about 20.8 grams per plant, or 0.7 grams per watt per 30 days of flowering (1.4 grams per actual watt used during the entire flowering period). Yield was low because the clones were not grown long enough. (A group of Polish growers has recorded the highest yield thus far using this system: 1.6 grams per watt during eight weeks of flowering.)
"Clones are 'pregrowing' in this room," says James as we enter the third growroom on our tour. He advises giving clones 120 hours of pregrow time - either five days of round-the-clock light or seven days of 18-hour light. "If they're small or weak, let them pregrow until they're strong," James explains. A plant that hasn't been pregrown and set into flowering while still small will produce 35-50% fewer buds than a pregrown plant. Plants should be at least 10 inches (about 20 to 25 centimeters) high, with lots of side branches, before they get turned over to 12-hour light.
Light is only half the equation. For a heavy harvest, everything in the growroom must be integrated into a precise system. Lamps should be fixed 55 inches (1.4 meters) overhead and exactly 39 inches (1 meter) apart and set up in a matrix, so that illumination is even below. The plants will instinctively grow toward the static lamps.
Fresh, well-circulated, temperate air is the next most important element. James says that half of the evacuated air should be replenished immediately, creating a constant vacuum in the growroom. With proper air pressure, the door should have a tiny bit of negative pressure when opened. The next trick is to replenish the air so that it's evenly dispersed throughout the garden. Extracting air also creates a vacuum in the room that can be used to draw air in from a passive source. Direct the air along the length of the growing bed with flexible ducting. Cut 1-inch holes every 4 inches along the length of the duct. Cover some holes with duct tape and experiment with airflow volume. Use the tape to partially cover holes to balance incoming airflow along the length of the duct.
Air temperature should stay at or close to 75* to 80*F when the lights are on. Add a fan to bring more fresh air into the room. The intake fan can also be attached to a thermostat to further help regulate airflow.
The Quick Switch Master (QSM) turns the lights on and off in relation to the temperature. When the exhaust system can't keep the temperature below a given value, the QSM turns off progressively more lights until the temperature
drops to the appropriate level. Once the room is cool, the lights go progressively back on. If you get a couple of really warm days in a cold winter, the system automatically compensates. With the QSM, James' electricity costs decreased 25-30%.
He leaves the extraction fan on 24 hours a day. Circulation fans go on and off with the lights. This wet/dry irrigation schedule also helps regulate humidity, which runs between 55% and 65% when lights are on, and 40% to 45% when they're off. From the fifth to seventh weeks, humidity can drop another 10%. About a week before harvest, when the buds are large and compact, humidity sometimes jumps to 70-80%, due to the buds sweating at the tops.
The fourth room on the tour is a sea of big, fat buds. Olaf uses B'Cuzz with Atami A & B fertilizer and soil booster, starting with flowering complex from the second week until one week before harvest. He prefers an inexpensive potting soil with high peat content and 20% perlite. The advantage of using this soil and watering from below is that the plants don't need all the food at first; it's stored in the potting soil. When the plants' nutrient needs increase, they have reserves in the soil.
Adjust the pH to between 5.6 and 5.9. Adding Cannazym (an enzyme-rich soil improver from Canna) weekly from the onset through harvest helps to break down any residual fertilizer salts and old root systems from previous harvests.
Getting the feel for irrigation takes some practice. because the frequency varies. "In the beginning, I water the 3-gallon [11 -liter] pots about once a week," observes Olaf. "The closer it is to harvest time, the more often I water - usually three times a week." Irrigation solution fills the growing bed with about an inch of nutrient solution; it should take two to three days to be used. In two to five days, the solution will disappear. When the tray under the pot is dry for one full day, it's time to irrigate again.
The Quick Switch Master is quite economical. A double-switch box for 10 lamps costs less than $500 (E400); a smaller version, for six lamps, costs $250 (E200). No matter how you figure the investment out, it's less expensive to buy a switch box than the extra ballasts to run the lamps. The actual net decrease in electrical consumption works out to be 35%, because the crop takes 10 to 14 days longer to mature properly before harvest.
Increasing yield and lowering expenses is both a science and an art. When all factors - light, heat, air, water, nutrients, soil - are functioning at their highest capacities, you should have a heavy harvest.
James' technique integrates low- and high-tech solutions to maximize every facet of the growing equation. Apply some of these principles to your own grow, and watch expenses fall and yields soar.
Take care.
|
