What's The Best Way to Make Autoflowering Seeds?

Hi,

I'm really fascinated with auto-flowering plants and want to
make my own seed collection... the only seeds I can seem to
find online are all feminized... does anyone know where to buy
quality normal auto flowering seeds?

And if that isn't available whats the better strategy...


#1. use colloidal silver during the flowering stage to force my
females to create pollen (and thus turn into hermies?)...

#2. try to cross them with say ... BIG BUD... strain... and if i do
that, is it right that only 1 out of 4 of the new seeds would then
be auto flowering + big bud?

Thanks for your advice!

Autos are duff, get photoperiods.

Flash has some cheap regular autoflowers. They can be found anywhere, attitude, seedsman, ngr etc.

budman111 said:

Autos are duff, get photoperiods.

Click to expand...

Ignore this guy. Anyone who thinks auto's suck just can't grow them well.

The best way to get autoflowering seeds is to buy either a strain that is regular (male and female seeds), or a fem strain and use CS or some other reversing agent to make fem seeds.

If you cross an auto with a regular photoperiod plant like big bud, NONE of the offspring in the first generation will be autoflowers. If you take two siblings from the first generation and breed them together, one fourth of THOSE offspring (f2 second generation) will be autoflowering.

EverythingsHazy said:

Anyone who thinks auto's suck just can't grow them well.

Click to expand...

My new Signature...thanks Hazy LOL

Damn it I wanted that signature ....

EverythingsHazy said:

If you cross an auto with a regular photoperiod plant like big bud, NONE of the offspring in the first generation will be autoflowers.

Click to expand...

That is absolutely wrong. Please don't spread false info.

Bad Karma said:

That is absolutely wrong. Please don't spread false info.

Click to expand...

The autoflower gene is recessive. When you cross a dominant gene with a recessive one, the recessive one gets hidden in the f1 generation.

AA (photo) x aa (auto) = Aa (photo het. for auto)

Cross those offspring, and you'll get some autoflowers.

EverythingsHazy said:

Ignore this guy. Anyone who thinks auto's suck just can't grow them well.

The best way to get autoflowering seeds is to buy either a strain that is regular (male and female seeds), or a fem strain and use CS or some other reversing agent to make fem seeds.

If you cross an auto with a regular photoperiod plant like big bud, NONE of the offspring in the first generation will be autoflowers. If you take two siblings from the first generation and breed them together, one fourth of THOSE offspring (f2 second generation) will be autoflowering.

Click to expand...

EverythingsHazy said:

The autoflower gene is recessive. When you cross a dominant gene with a recessive one, the recessive one gets hidden in the f1 generation.

AA (photo) x aa (auto) = Aa (photo het. for auto)

Cross those offspring, and you'll get some autoflowers.

Click to expand...

Regardless of autoflowering being a recessive trait, if you crossed a photoperiod plant, with an autoflower, some of their seeds (F1 hybrids) will be of the autoflowering variety.
Also, to lock down the autoflower trait, one would be better served to backcross the offspring to the autoflowering parent, rather than mating two siblings together.

Someone better look at a punnet square!

Bad Karma said:

Regardless of autoflowering being a recessive trait, if you crossed a photoperiod plant, with an autoflower, some of their seeds (F1 hybrids) will be of the autoflowering variety.
Also, to lock down the autoflower trait, one would be better served to backcross the offspring to the autoflowering parent, rather than mating two siblings together.

Click to expand...

No. It DOES matter that the autoflowering trait is recessive, and none of the f1's will be autoflowering, as a result. That's what recessive means. That when paired up with a dominant trait (photoperiod) it will not show. A plant can be a carrier of the auto trait, without autoflowering, and that's exactly what all of the f1's will be.

Also, you don't get a variety of different plants in an f1 generation. They are all uniform, with only the dominant traits from each parent showing. That's what gives them hybrid vigor. Once you move on to f2+, recessive genes start pairing up again, and the hybrid vigor is lost. However, in order to create plants that produce stable, predictable offspring, you need to inbreed several generations.

AA=photoperiod
aa=autoflowering

Photoperiod x Autoflower


F1 x F1 (from the above cross)

brimck325 said:

Someone better look at a punnet square!

Click to expand...

EverythingsHazy said:

No. It DOES matter that the autoflowering trait is recessive, and none of the f1's will be autoflowering, as a result. That's what recessive means. That when paired up with a dominant trait (photoperiod) it will not show. A plant can be a carrier of the auto trait, without autoflowering, and that's exactly what all of the f1's will be.

Also, you don't get a variety of different plants in an f1 generation. They are all uniform, with only the dominant traits from each parent showing. That's what gives them hybrid vigor. Once you move on to f2+, recessive genes start pairing up again, and the hybrid vigor is lost. However, in order to create plants that produce stable, predictable offspring, you need to inbreed several generations.

AA=photoperiod
aa=autoflowering

Photoperiod x Autoflower

F1 x F1 (from the above cross)

Click to expand...

So why does DJ Short's Blueberry seeds have issues with autoflowering? By your rationale, he would have had to used a true autoflowering plant, or one with predominately autoflowering traits, as one of the original parents, before he started stabilizing the strain. Correct? But we all know that's not the case, as he only used Photoperiod Thai genetics, in that strain. Recessive genetics sometimes show up in the weirdest places, at the weirdest times. The punnet square, although a good indicator, is not 100% accurate. To quote Jurassic Park...

Yes it's a good indicator and backs up what u are saying. My comment was not directed at you bk, I agree totally with you.

On this subject...lol

Edit...a real pun net square, not that half assed thing he posted.

brimck325 said:

Yes it's a good indicator and backs up what u are saying. My comment was not directed at you bk, I agree totally with you.

On this subject...lol

Edit...a real pun net square, not that half assed thing he posted.

Click to expand...

Can either of you guys post some links or pictures or something to back what you're saying? If you are right, I'd like to read more about it, since it is the opposite of almost everything I've read about auto breeding.

EverythingsHazy said:

Can either of you guys post some links or pictures or something to back what you're saying? If you are right, I'd like to read more about it, since it is the opposite of almost everything I've read about auto breeding.

Click to expand...

F1s of a cross between a stable autoflowerer and a regular cannabis strain are likely to be wild and unstable, demonstrating a wide range of characteristics with only a small percentage carrying the autoflowering properties. The trick behind it is to successively back cross for several generations, selecting each time for autoflowering traits as well as vigor, potency and taste. With each successive generation you should realize more and more stability with an increasing percentage of autoflowering offspring. However, it will take many generations of this before you can truly say that you have created an autoflowering strain.

http://howtogrowmarijuana.com/breed-autoflowering-marijuana-seeds/

brimck325 said:

My comment was not directed at you bk, I agree totally with you.

Click to expand...

Cool, thanks for clarifying.

So far, I've spoken with two breeders who have made photo x auto crosses, and stabilized them as auto strains, and both say they haven't had any auto in f1. Does anyone here have documented proof of this, based on your own experimentation?

*If it doesn't fully flower and mature under 24hrs of light, it isn't an auto.

EverythingsHazy said:

So far, I've spoken with two breeders who have made photo x auto crosses, and stabilized them as auto strains, and both say they haven't had any auto in f1. Does anyone here have documented proof of this, based on your own experimentation?

*If it doesn't fully flower and mature under 24hrs of light, it isn't an auto.

Click to expand...

Wow, LOL. Just looking at old auto breeding folklore, and you were the only one that was right, being beat up by everyone else. Typical. Hope you're doing well 8 years later