malignant
Well-Known Member
I disagree but dont care enough to argue with you. Ive read plenty of things that support generational degradation. have fun and good luck
Any Existing Evidence that Clones upon Clones Degrade Yield or Quality?
- Thread starter meowmix
- Start date
homebrewer
Well-Known Member
You clearly haven't been growing or cloning long enough to realize the errors in your statements so I also wish you fun and luck as you begin your hobby in horticulture.
malignant
Well-Known Member
i dont take clippings from anything other than a seed mother, i dont do the clipping of a clipping of a clipping nonsense. people do things differently for different reasons. and as for your dickish statment, its not a hobby, its a way of life, you dont need to be an ass and ive been doing it for nearly a decade.. was my only source of income for a couple years after i re-joined the shitty civilian world.
venacular
Well-Known Member
I have never noticed this to be true. Case in point: I added a breed to my garden to bring my total breeds in bloom to 2. Months later the plant I added had a growing infestation of black spotted mites. The original breed did not have any signs of mite infestation at all. I had been growing the original breed for years using cuttings. Never keeping a mother plant. I took cuttings from the infested plant while it was in bloom. Those cuttings were growing in the same cutting area as my other breed. At no time did my original breed gain a mite at all. I removed the cuttings from the infested plant after 2 weeks and discarded them. I also discontinued that particular breed because of this incident. Since then (years) my remaining breed has never had a mite breakout what so ever.
I have always found the opposite to be true. After continually growing a particular strain for many years, I find my yield to increase. The reason is not genetic. Knowing the nutritional requirements of a breed of cannabis is key to good yields for that breed. Something only time can tell us.
Wolverine97
Well-Known Member
I've generally had the opposite experience there. Not always, but most of the time I yield more with successive clone generations, though that's probably due to learning the wants/needs of each strain as I go.
Dankster4Life
Well-Known Member
I have a cut of ae77 cali-o.Had it for about 2 yrs.I believe it has been tossed around for around 20 yrs now.I myself have noticed no change nor has any one i have spoke with about the cut.20 yrs is quite a while i'd say.
malignant
Well-Known Member
Experience with the same strain over time and developing a fine tuned regime would improve things over time. I use the same formula of fish, guano, ewc, and kelp in a tea. My only variable is the type of guano.
Dank Raptor
Active Member
I have a strain that has been through 15 generations without a mother. Recloning clones for years and it is still some of the best smoke in town. No changes at all.
Hydrotech364
Well-Known Member
I have a Bloodline that dates back to the early 80s,clone only.Just keeps on keepin on.Stanky as fuck.
Jogro
Well-Known Member
Good thread. Here are my comments:
Empirically there are plenty of "mother" plants out there that have been maintained for 15+ years and are still going strong with no evidence of genetic change.
Empirically, there are any number of "clone only" strains that represent clones of clones of clones to the 10th or 15th generation or more, and the offspring appear to be indistinguishable from the parents.
So yes, it definitely is *possible* to maintain individual plants for many, many years without issues, and its also *possible* to take clones from clones from clones for many generations without "genetic drift". But just because this "can" be done, does NOT mean that it always works every single time, or that its impossible for lines to go "bad" over time!
The environment a plant is grown in, and good old fashioned dumb luck can play a role here.
Now to address a few concerns from this thread:
The issue is "mutation".
In essence even though DNA replication is 99.999999% faithful, its not 100%. When you are growing entirely new plants from clones, you're literally building tens of millions of new cells, each one copied from previous cells. Over many many cell replications, over many years or many generations, small errors in DNA sequence (called "mutations") can accumulate.
These can be simply copying errors, or they can occur from mutagens in the environment (like UV light), or for other reasons. When the happen to the DNA of a mature organism (in this case a plant) they could be called "somatic mutations".
In practice, many of these DNA copying errors will be harmless and undetectable. They're "there", but since they don't affect anything you can see, you don't know they're there. Some of these errors will kill the cell that has them, ending the mutant line, and again, for practical purposes being undetectable.
Some small number of them might even IMPROVE a plant. (Ultimately all variety of plants comes from random mutations).
But more likely that being helpful, some of the accumulated errors will hurt the plant in some way, by reducing yield, vigor, potency, infestation resistance, or by causing weird growth, etc.
In the "wild" these sorts of mutations wouldn't matter. Any mutation that actually hurt a plants survival or was otherwise negative would get weeded out by natural selection in a few generations. Constant natural selection for the "fittest" plants ensures that weaker genetics are perpetually being discarded. Even under artificial selection of human breeding this would be true too. Negative mutations leading to lower potency, vigor, disease resistance, etc, would be (hopefully) weeded out by breeders.
But in the context of a plant where there is NO ongoing selection, ie where someone is DELIBERATELY maintaining the same plant for decades as a mother plant, or maintaining the same genetics by taking clones from clones from clones, etc, accumulated mutations MIGHT eventually reduce the quality of the genetics. So THAT is the problem this thread is about.
This is "genetic drift", and it explains why a plant that is a clone of a clone of a clone to the 100th generation or more *might* not be the same as the original parent. The further you get from the original parent, the more likely you are to have accumulated mutations. The same process explains why inbreeding the same line to itself for many generations without external selective pressure can also sap vigor.
The likelihood of this happening can be reduced in a number of ways: Keep plants away from mutagens, to the extent possible. Again, to the extent possible, try not to unnecessarily increase the number of generations. Don't perpetuate clones/lines that appear inferior to or deviant from the parent.
Every time a cell divides into two cells, its DNA gets copied from one copy to two.
So that's where the DNA replication occurs.
New growth is new growth. All the tissue is new.
The question is whether or not the DNA present in the new growth is the same as the DNA from older parts of the same plant.
Again, even though in theory the DNA from every single cell in a plant "should" be identical, in practice, mutations can occur and it isn't always true that every part of a plant is genetically identical to every other part.
Empirically there are plenty of "mother" plants out there that have been maintained for 15+ years and are still going strong with no evidence of genetic change.
Empirically, there are any number of "clone only" strains that represent clones of clones of clones to the 10th or 15th generation or more, and the offspring appear to be indistinguishable from the parents.
So yes, it definitely is *possible* to maintain individual plants for many, many years without issues, and its also *possible* to take clones from clones from clones for many generations without "genetic drift". But just because this "can" be done, does NOT mean that it always works every single time, or that its impossible for lines to go "bad" over time!
The environment a plant is grown in, and good old fashioned dumb luck can play a role here.
Now to address a few concerns from this thread:
Just taking cuttings does NOT change the DNA. The DNA in a piece obviously is the same whether its attached to the parent plant or not!
The issue is "mutation".
In essence even though DNA replication is 99.999999% faithful, its not 100%. When you are growing entirely new plants from clones, you're literally building tens of millions of new cells, each one copied from previous cells. Over many many cell replications, over many years or many generations, small errors in DNA sequence (called "mutations") can accumulate.
These can be simply copying errors, or they can occur from mutagens in the environment (like UV light), or for other reasons. When the happen to the DNA of a mature organism (in this case a plant) they could be called "somatic mutations".
In practice, many of these DNA copying errors will be harmless and undetectable. They're "there", but since they don't affect anything you can see, you don't know they're there. Some of these errors will kill the cell that has them, ending the mutant line, and again, for practical purposes being undetectable.
Some small number of them might even IMPROVE a plant. (Ultimately all variety of plants comes from random mutations).
But more likely that being helpful, some of the accumulated errors will hurt the plant in some way, by reducing yield, vigor, potency, infestation resistance, or by causing weird growth, etc.
In the "wild" these sorts of mutations wouldn't matter. Any mutation that actually hurt a plants survival or was otherwise negative would get weeded out by natural selection in a few generations. Constant natural selection for the "fittest" plants ensures that weaker genetics are perpetually being discarded. Even under artificial selection of human breeding this would be true too. Negative mutations leading to lower potency, vigor, disease resistance, etc, would be (hopefully) weeded out by breeders.
But in the context of a plant where there is NO ongoing selection, ie where someone is DELIBERATELY maintaining the same plant for decades as a mother plant, or maintaining the same genetics by taking clones from clones from clones, etc, accumulated mutations MIGHT eventually reduce the quality of the genetics. So THAT is the problem this thread is about.
This is "genetic drift", and it explains why a plant that is a clone of a clone of a clone to the 100th generation or more *might* not be the same as the original parent. The further you get from the original parent, the more likely you are to have accumulated mutations. The same process explains why inbreeding the same line to itself for many generations without external selective pressure can also sap vigor.
The likelihood of this happening can be reduced in a number of ways: Keep plants away from mutagens, to the extent possible. Again, to the extent possible, try not to unnecessarily increase the number of generations. Don't perpetuate clones/lines that appear inferior to or deviant from the parent.
In natural plant growth, cells divide. That's how the plant grows, obviously.
Every time a cell divides into two cells, its DNA gets copied from one copy to two.
So that's where the DNA replication occurs.
Of course not.
New growth is new growth. All the tissue is new.
The question is whether or not the DNA present in the new growth is the same as the DNA from older parts of the same plant.
Again, even though in theory the DNA from every single cell in a plant "should" be identical, in practice, mutations can occur and it isn't always true that every part of a plant is genetically identical to every other part.
FatAlaskanBudz
Member
This is an old thread/topic bud a goodie nonetheless.
It seems that there is a lot of confusion going on as to whether or not clones of clones of clones will result in any sort of DNA degradation.
The answer is both yes and no. My family has been growing weed for almost 40 years now and I have tested out just about every growing scenario you could imagine.
I have personally grown strains that have been propagated by cutting from a mother, clone from clone and even micropropagation. The longest ride I've taken my girls (clone from clone) for was 42 generations with absolutely no noticeable genetic deviation. Now that doesn't mean that the deviation wasn't present, it just means that we didn't see any.
We did however have some environmental issues with the grow which affected the last 6 generations so had to pop new seeds because our genetics had taken a drastic turn and our potency for all 4,000 plants was plumeting. That is why we were only able to get to the 42nd generation. I won't go into the details, but we really fucked the plants up. We tried to clone from only the strongest of those but alas, no dice. The damage had begun.
I am currently in Washington state because I was contacted by an investor that happens to grow one of my favorites.....MTF, or ATF for those that cant remember Matanuska. This investors problem is that when he bought his original clones, the flower tested at 27% THC. That was 2 years ago. Since that time he has watched as his beloved strain has lost it's potency. The buds look fantastic, they smell great, have a 6% terpene profile. The issue is that he can't seem to get his THC count over 15% let alone back up to 27%.
From my own personal experience, I am 99.9 % sure that this is being caused by phenotypic variation, genetic mutation or by the fact that his growers aren't doing their job correctly.
Unless you are growing your weed in a very dialed in controlled environment, you are going to experience some sort of genetic variation (whether mutation or phenotipic) at some point. In my experience, stress is the leading cause of mutation and phenotipic variation which can only be avoided in a regulated, controlled environment. Cell mutation occurs when the cells are dividing and if the plant is under a good amount of stress then it's possible that these cells will begin to mutate. More than likely though, you can simply take away the stress and the plant will bounce back to its former glory.
(clone from clone genetic variation) Case in point; we sent out a couple hundred clones to a local grower. A couple years later I visited him to see how things were doing. When he showed me the 9th generation clones of mine, I though that he was mistaken because these plants definitely did not look like my strain. The leaves were more broad, the flowers had taken on a more rounded shape, the smell was a lot more piney, the color was off and if anyone compared mine and his they would 100% say that they were different strains. After further investigation we found that his, temperatures, humidity ranges, ph, airflow, etc.... were all completely different than what the original plants were brought up on. He had effectively changed a number of phenotypical expressions of the plant strain simply by changing the plants environmental stress factors. Being the scientists I like to think myself as, I took a couple of clones from him to see what would happen once I put them back into the environment whence they came. I vegged them and then forced them into flower. Even though I had reintroduced them back into their original environment, they held on to their new traits. I cloned from them aand second time and again they held strong to their new phenotype. Not only did these plants look different, but they also tested different with fluctuations in their entire cannabinoid profile.
The point I am hopefully making is that if you have a great grow setup that provides an atmosphere with the least amount of stress where the variables are kept at the same constant with each crop, then you would be hard pressed to see any sort of degradation. On the flip side, if you are growing your plants in a high stress environment then I guarantee at some point you will begin to see the loss of not only potency, but of the vitality in the plant itself because you are taking a clone, an exact duplicate of that plant at THAT moment in time, you are not taking a duplicate of the original after it sprouted. So if you are taking clones of plants that are being stressed then you will most likely end up with a plant that is very far from the original. This doesn't mean that the genetics have changed, it's the same genotype, it just means that the genes are being expressed in a different pattern than it was expressing before.
Just to clarify, in case someone points out that the grower we had sent the clones to may have mislabeled the plants, at that moment in time he was only growing our strain.
It seems that there is a lot of confusion going on as to whether or not clones of clones of clones will result in any sort of DNA degradation.
The answer is both yes and no. My family has been growing weed for almost 40 years now and I have tested out just about every growing scenario you could imagine.
I have personally grown strains that have been propagated by cutting from a mother, clone from clone and even micropropagation. The longest ride I've taken my girls (clone from clone) for was 42 generations with absolutely no noticeable genetic deviation. Now that doesn't mean that the deviation wasn't present, it just means that we didn't see any.
We did however have some environmental issues with the grow which affected the last 6 generations so had to pop new seeds because our genetics had taken a drastic turn and our potency for all 4,000 plants was plumeting. That is why we were only able to get to the 42nd generation. I won't go into the details, but we really fucked the plants up. We tried to clone from only the strongest of those but alas, no dice. The damage had begun.
I am currently in Washington state because I was contacted by an investor that happens to grow one of my favorites.....MTF, or ATF for those that cant remember Matanuska. This investors problem is that when he bought his original clones, the flower tested at 27% THC. That was 2 years ago. Since that time he has watched as his beloved strain has lost it's potency. The buds look fantastic, they smell great, have a 6% terpene profile. The issue is that he can't seem to get his THC count over 15% let alone back up to 27%.
From my own personal experience, I am 99.9 % sure that this is being caused by phenotypic variation, genetic mutation or by the fact that his growers aren't doing their job correctly.
Unless you are growing your weed in a very dialed in controlled environment, you are going to experience some sort of genetic variation (whether mutation or phenotipic) at some point. In my experience, stress is the leading cause of mutation and phenotipic variation which can only be avoided in a regulated, controlled environment. Cell mutation occurs when the cells are dividing and if the plant is under a good amount of stress then it's possible that these cells will begin to mutate. More than likely though, you can simply take away the stress and the plant will bounce back to its former glory.
(clone from clone genetic variation) Case in point; we sent out a couple hundred clones to a local grower. A couple years later I visited him to see how things were doing. When he showed me the 9th generation clones of mine, I though that he was mistaken because these plants definitely did not look like my strain. The leaves were more broad, the flowers had taken on a more rounded shape, the smell was a lot more piney, the color was off and if anyone compared mine and his they would 100% say that they were different strains. After further investigation we found that his, temperatures, humidity ranges, ph, airflow, etc.... were all completely different than what the original plants were brought up on. He had effectively changed a number of phenotypical expressions of the plant strain simply by changing the plants environmental stress factors. Being the scientists I like to think myself as, I took a couple of clones from him to see what would happen once I put them back into the environment whence they came. I vegged them and then forced them into flower. Even though I had reintroduced them back into their original environment, they held on to their new traits. I cloned from them aand second time and again they held strong to their new phenotype. Not only did these plants look different, but they also tested different with fluctuations in their entire cannabinoid profile.
The point I am hopefully making is that if you have a great grow setup that provides an atmosphere with the least amount of stress where the variables are kept at the same constant with each crop, then you would be hard pressed to see any sort of degradation. On the flip side, if you are growing your plants in a high stress environment then I guarantee at some point you will begin to see the loss of not only potency, but of the vitality in the plant itself because you are taking a clone, an exact duplicate of that plant at THAT moment in time, you are not taking a duplicate of the original after it sprouted. So if you are taking clones of plants that are being stressed then you will most likely end up with a plant that is very far from the original. This doesn't mean that the genetics have changed, it's the same genotype, it just means that the genes are being expressed in a different pattern than it was expressing before.
Just to clarify, in case someone points out that the grower we had sent the clones to may have mislabeled the plants, at that moment in time he was only growing our strain.
Last edited:
Odin*
Well-Known Member
"The irreversible DNA damages, generated by the environmental and genotoxic stresses affect plant growth and development, reproduction, and crop productivity. Thus, for maintaining genome stability, plants have developed an extensive array of mechanisms for the detection and repair of DNA damages."
Stress that exceeds a plants coping mechanisms is "permanent", the term is "Cumulative Stress".
A plants ability to cope with stressors is dependent on strain, health, and environment.
Stress that exceeds a plants coping mechanisms is "permanent", the term is "Cumulative Stress".
A plants ability to cope with stressors is dependent on strain, health, and environment.
Peter Vakomies
Member
Hi Everyone ! If I may chime in, the answer is yes it goes both ways, "epigenetics" is the mechanism by which plant clones can lose or re-acquire vigour. We can increase and decrease plant growth and vigour epigenetically.
Epigenetics affects flowering, autoflowering, cold acclimation, loss of vigour, sex determination, loss of pest resistance and many other phenotypes that show variability each generation. Epigenetic factors can build up in cells and change phenotype, or be totally reset by the environment, releasing full genetic expression again, like when we see hybrid-vigour or heterosis.
Epigenetics is how plant cells develop an inheritable "memory" of their previous environment. The DNA and genome stays the same over successive generations, but the epigenome changes daily or hourly. This refers to the proteins, small RNA molecules and enzymes that build up in the cell, and cause interruptions to normal DNA transcription and protein synthesis. Plants do this to very precisely adapt to their environment. Plants are "masters of epigenetics".
There is a lot of recent scientific research out there that has shown how plant cells have a "memory" that is epigenetic. This is when small interfering RNA molecules block regular RNA molecules from making proteins, or when certain enzymes add methyl groups to the genes in DNA. These epigenetic factors reduce genetic expression.
Over time the DNA and gene-expression gets clamped-down on by these epigenetic factors, and unless we provide an environment that undoes the clamping-down, we get less and less of the full potential genetic expression.
http://www.indiana.edu/~pikweb/reprints.pdf files/Pikaard and Mittelsten-Scheid.pdf
http://www.nature.com/nrm/journal/v16/n12/abs/nrm4085.html
https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-015-0770-6
I have taken a worn out strain of Grapefruit / Jamaican and revived it by simply growing it outdoors under full sun. After 3 years of indoor growing, and taking cuttings of cuttings it no longer produced the same. One cycle outdoors and it was back with full genetic expression. Strains will all be different this way, some may be really sensitive epigenetically and others not.
Tissue culture allows one to scrub-away the epigenetic brakes and allows us to start plants with their cellular memories "reset". Epigenetic factors may protect plant genomes from virus DNA being viable inside the cell, so they are necessary in many subtle ways.
When newly cut clones develop a variegated colouration (yellow and white leaves with green) but their mother didn't show this trait, is an example of how epigenetic effects suddenly manifest after a major disruption in growth. The varigated colouration results from the epigenome changing, but will then vanish in new leaves, after a few more days of growth and the epigenome has settled back to normal..
The worst kind of growing environment is one in which we unknowingly cause the epigenetic brakes in our crops to become engaged beyond the normal range. The best growing environments release full genetic expression in plants, and trigger epigenetic changes in synchrony with ripening. The brakes need to be "tapped" on to induce phenotypic changes and crop maturation.
One day we will know how to grow our crops and use these epigenetic factors to our advantage. The right breeding or a little genetic modification can create plants with different epigenetics that are even 'easier' to grow. Applying cold stresses, UV-B, plant hormones and hormone-inhibitors are some examples we use already to do this, but it's still kind of a shot-gun approach. Hermaphrodism can be prevented with the right epigenetic tricks, and we can even make plants change sex this way.
Epigenetics affects flowering, autoflowering, cold acclimation, loss of vigour, sex determination, loss of pest resistance and many other phenotypes that show variability each generation. Epigenetic factors can build up in cells and change phenotype, or be totally reset by the environment, releasing full genetic expression again, like when we see hybrid-vigour or heterosis.
Epigenetics is how plant cells develop an inheritable "memory" of their previous environment. The DNA and genome stays the same over successive generations, but the epigenome changes daily or hourly. This refers to the proteins, small RNA molecules and enzymes that build up in the cell, and cause interruptions to normal DNA transcription and protein synthesis. Plants do this to very precisely adapt to their environment. Plants are "masters of epigenetics".
There is a lot of recent scientific research out there that has shown how plant cells have a "memory" that is epigenetic. This is when small interfering RNA molecules block regular RNA molecules from making proteins, or when certain enzymes add methyl groups to the genes in DNA. These epigenetic factors reduce genetic expression.
Over time the DNA and gene-expression gets clamped-down on by these epigenetic factors, and unless we provide an environment that undoes the clamping-down, we get less and less of the full potential genetic expression.
http://www.indiana.edu/~pikweb/reprints.pdf files/Pikaard and Mittelsten-Scheid.pdf
http://www.nature.com/nrm/journal/v16/n12/abs/nrm4085.html
https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-015-0770-6
I have taken a worn out strain of Grapefruit / Jamaican and revived it by simply growing it outdoors under full sun. After 3 years of indoor growing, and taking cuttings of cuttings it no longer produced the same. One cycle outdoors and it was back with full genetic expression. Strains will all be different this way, some may be really sensitive epigenetically and others not.
Tissue culture allows one to scrub-away the epigenetic brakes and allows us to start plants with their cellular memories "reset". Epigenetic factors may protect plant genomes from virus DNA being viable inside the cell, so they are necessary in many subtle ways.
When newly cut clones develop a variegated colouration (yellow and white leaves with green) but their mother didn't show this trait, is an example of how epigenetic effects suddenly manifest after a major disruption in growth. The varigated colouration results from the epigenome changing, but will then vanish in new leaves, after a few more days of growth and the epigenome has settled back to normal..
The worst kind of growing environment is one in which we unknowingly cause the epigenetic brakes in our crops to become engaged beyond the normal range. The best growing environments release full genetic expression in plants, and trigger epigenetic changes in synchrony with ripening. The brakes need to be "tapped" on to induce phenotypic changes and crop maturation.
One day we will know how to grow our crops and use these epigenetic factors to our advantage. The right breeding or a little genetic modification can create plants with different epigenetics that are even 'easier' to grow. Applying cold stresses, UV-B, plant hormones and hormone-inhibitors are some examples we use already to do this, but it's still kind of a shot-gun approach. Hermaphrodism can be prevented with the right epigenetic tricks, and we can even make plants change sex this way.