Accidentally crossed autoflowering with non-auto. whats gonna happen??

mayrequiempass said:

I just got done with my first harvest a few weeks ago and have planted seeds from a NL female that was pollinated by a Pakistan Ryder hermie. Im about 4 weeks into veg and one of the NLxPR has already shown its pistils and its only about 6 inches tall. So the First generation from a Photo x Auto can be an Auto, I believe the ratio will be roughly 50/50, but im not sure.

Click to expand...

I'm not saying you're wrong, but any plant can show "pre-flowers" at 3-4 weeks.
By itself, that doesn't mean its flowering, just that its sexually mature and READY to flower.
If your plant starts to develop actual flower clusters under greater than 16 hours per day lighting then its a true autoflower.

Incidentally on DJ Short, he's said all kinds of bad things about ruderalis-based genetics, and its fair to say he's not a "fan".
Then again, breeding of plants with autoflowering genetics has come a LONG way since he did it 25+ years ago.

OGEvilgenius said:

Having a dominant gene would make breeding a bit easier though in selection, especially in terms of potency.

Click to expand...

Well, having a dominant autoflower gene would make retention of the autoflowering trait during selection a lot easier, that's for sure.

Seems a lot of autos suffer from lower potency as a result of all the other traits inherited from the original ruderalis varieties, would be a lot easier to breed those traits out of a line if the gene was dominant.

Click to expand...

It could take fewer generations, I think.

At this point, though, many if not most of the commercial autoflowers are already 8-10-15 or even more generations bred away from the original hemp-like ruderalis plants. Apart from the autoflowering trait itself, these don't retain much, if any other ruderalis genetics at all.

Remember, with appropriate selective breeding, you can reduce the percentage of autoflowering genes by 50% in every other generation, just by backcrossing to a photoperiod plant. After ten generatons of crosses and back-crosses (ie just under three years of work), you can turn a line from 50% ruderalis genetics to less than 2%, and that's without any selection at all. This also assumes you're starting with a pure ruderalis plant. If, instead, you're starting with an already worked line, you're probably starting with something that has less than 10% ruderalis genes to begin with.

As a related issue, I think its an open question whether or not just having an autoflowering gene in a plant affects its potential potency.

Emprically, there are any number of fairly potent auto-flowering strains out there now (eg 60 day Wonder is supposed to be pretty potent, as is Paki Kush ryder). So its certainly possible to have strong auto plants.

But if this is true, you're just never going to have autoflowering plants as good as the best regular photoperiod ones, even if you were to exclude 99.999% of all Ruderalis genes from your line.

very insightfull jogro

im still partial with that topic. With Sinsemilla crops its no challenge to the eye and touch the buds to be thicker and more saturated with trichomes than seeded buds. Still, the effects (unless your a complexed smoker) the potency difference isnt something you'll notice as much, especially when your high ... One brightside point of view to see it is that you'll have classified seeds for your next grow and save yourself some bucks... still, sinsemilla i'd say is something of a different fragrance, touch, smoke, a more detailed aspect of a cannabis grower who's fascinated and proud of their plants and all the work involved to get the best out of 'em. I don't go around letting my girls be pollinated, but if there's a male on an occasion i didn't spot and literally empreagnated the girls, i won't jump of a bridge about it.
im not sure if ill go all the way on crossbeeding the seeds from the AF buds, but one thing's for sure, and that is that those suckers are going to the soil!

ps. thanks for the likes

Jogro said:

I'm not saying you're wrong, but any plant can show "pre-flowers" at 3-4 weeks.
By itself, that doesn't mean its flowering, just that its sexually mature and READY to flower.
If your plant starts to develop actual flower clusters under greater than 16 hours per day lighting then its a true autoflower.

Incidentally on DJ Short, he's said all kinds of bad things about ruderalis-based genetics, and its fair to say he's not a "fan".
Then again, breeding of plants with autoflowering genetics has come a LONG way since he did it 25+ years ago.

Click to expand...

Thank you for the insight on that, i spoke without realizing they could be preflowers, i'll keep a close eye on them to tell if it is a true autoflower, although the light cycle is currently 18/6 and my 100% known autoflowers showed pistils a few days after the possible non-auto.

Is the autoflower pheno dominant or recessive?

I think it's a gene and not phenotype, but it's recessive anyway. If it was dominant you could cross it with most plants and have the autoflowering trait show in the F1 instead of having to wait at least 3 generations.

Cloudz2600 said:

I think it's a gene and not phenotype, but it's recessive anyway. If it was dominant you could cross it with most plants and have the autoflowering trait show in the F1 instead of having to wait at least 3 generations.

Click to expand...

Sorry, was high when i wrote that post. Yes it would be a phenotype as it isn't visible like color. I was planning on crossing Some Fem White widow autos with critical mass regs....heres what i came up with.

Uh...color=phenotype. Non-visable=gene. Think eye color. Phenotypes are expressions of the genes. You've got the words backward, but you understand it.

"A phenotype (from Greek phainein, 'to show' + typos, 'type') is the composite of an organism's observable characteristics or traits: such as its morphology, development, biochemical or physiological properties, phenology, behavior, and products of behavior (such as a bird's nest)."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenotype

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_color

"Eye color is a polygenic phenotypic character"

Cloudz2600 said:

Uh...color=phenotype. Non-visable=gene. Think eye color. Phenotypes are expressions of the genes. You've got the words backward, but you understand it.

"A phenotype (from Greek phainein, 'to show' + typos, 'type') is the composite of an organism's observable characteristics or traits: such as its morphology, development, biochemical or physiological properties, phenology, behavior, and products of behavior (such as a bird's nest)."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenotype

Click to expand...

Fuck wasn't thinking again i meant to say genotype in the second post. But check out those charts.

Only thing those is in the F1, the WW can't be Au, it has to be aa to show the autoflower geno. So focus on F2 and F3.

The non-auto doesn't have the chance to be auto. It isn't in the genes. It would be AA every time. Assuming capital A is dominant and little a is recessive. I totally failed the punnet chart portion of bio in college though. I think bubblegum that's an old chart just used for an example. Frankie crossed an AK auto with some non auto.

Cloudz2600 said:

The non-auto doesn't have the chance to be auto. It isn't in the genes. It would be AA every time. Assuming capital A is dominant and little a is recessive. I totally failed the punnet chart portion of bio in college though.

Click to expand...

So i can't make a auto and non auto version of the cross between the two?

You could bubblegum, but it would take multiple generations to get a for sure auto. The F1 would only be 50% chance for having the auto. Just realized charts 2 and 3 and for F2 and F3. so F1=50%, F2=75%, F3=100%

Cloudz2600 said:

You could bubblegum, but it would take multiple generations to get a for sure auto. The F1 would only be 50% chance for having the auto.

Click to expand...

Once i finish my current grow, it will be go time on the project.

What are you planning on crossing?

Cloudz2600 said:

What are you planning on crossing?

Click to expand...

White Widow Auto Feminized with Male Critical Mass. At first I'm just going to identify the autos and non autos in generations two. After a few generations I'll hope to stabilized the auto geno. And then I'll worry about the high yields/potency.

strain reviews of Critical Mass say it's pretty awesome. With the THC of WW it should be a nice strain to have. I wish I had the patience/space for breeding. Would be nice to breed an auto that I like and that produces a good bit.

Cloudz2600 said:

strain reviews of Critical Mass say it's pretty awesome. With the THC of WW it should be a nice strain to have. I wish I had the patience/space for breeding. Would be nice to breed an auto that I like and that produces a good bit.

Click to expand...

Yeah I'll have the non auto version growing indoors year round, and the autos, I can do 15-40 of them outdoors and get 2-3 harvest per season. Not sure how much they would yield each though.

did you grow the seeds