Genetics: what to look for in a plant

To someone new to the growing scene selecting a winner iis not the easiest thing to do. Learn to clone. Grow a plant out see if it works for you situation. Most can. Vigor is very important. Flower density and overall structure of the plant, ie ropey limbs or strong upright limbs, minimal branching or bush. To know what to look for specifically is subjective and is easier with experience.
Oh yeah lets not forget to throw all selction out the window when we find one that when cconsumed hits all the receptors and you find a floppy small flowered super stretch in flower beast. Just saying it will take time a grow out different varieties to find what you like. Always will come down to flowers though. This we all know.
Good luck

ProfessorPotSnob said:

Never understood the term low stress training as it is very stressful for a plant to be forced against the natural order regardless of technique or method , then comes the term super crop and lollipop . I still get a kick out of these newer terms as they are funny sounding and not really accurate in a botanical sense .

Click to expand...

What's old is new again:

SCROG = "trellis"

Low stress training = "bending"/"tying".

Supercropping = "breaking"

FIMming = fancy "pinching"/"topping"

Lollipop = stripping off side growth (ie pinching "suckers").

Sea of Green = "plantlet method".

While the names have changed, ultimately, all of these techniques are probably hundreds if not thousands of years old. I'm not quite that old, but I do remember hearing about all of these techniques going back into the 1980s. As a refined technique, SCROG is sort of new, but trellising plants isn't, and people used to do the same thing (maybe less efficiently) by topping plants and tying the tops.

The difference is a new vocabulary, popularized by the internet, and a little bit of extra refinement for indoor growing. Of course these techniques are "unnatural"; growing highly worked medical strains indoors under static artificial light is also highly unnatural!

The techniques are basically all aimed at controlling a plants vertical height in limited height setups, and maximizing light usage from a static point source (when in nature, the sun moves, and to some extent even so can the plant in wind).

Jogro said:

What's old is new again:

SCROG = "trellis"

Low stress training = "bending"/"tying".

Supercropping = "breaking"

FIMming = fancy "pinching"/"topping"

Lollipop = stripping off side growth (ie pinching "suckers").

Sea of Green = "plantlet method".

While the names have changed, ultimately, all of these techniques are probably hundreds if not thousands of years old. I'm not quite that old, but I do remember hearing about all of these techniques going back into the 1980s. As a refined technique, SCROG is sort of new, but trellising plants isn't, and people used to do the same thing (maybe less efficiently) by topping plants and tying the tops.

The difference is a new vocabulary, popularized by the internet, and a little bit of extra refinement for indoor growing. Of course these techniques are "unnatural"; growing highly worked medical strains indoors under static artificial light is also highly unnatural!

The techniques are basically all aimed at controlling a plants vertical height in limited height setups, and maximizing light usage from a static point source (when in nature, the sun moves, and to some extent even so can the plant in wind).

Click to expand...

Well said as this is how I would have explained these modern pot growing terms , I grew up on a farm and studied Botany so to me the terms are irrelevant as I prefer to just coin them as they were always known . Nice write up for those following and to clarify I just wont ever understand the need to coin a new name for a tecnique that predates us . But as you stated new times and new growers . I learned most of my knowledge from the pioneers and I appreciate the old school terminology more than the modern is all . Peace

HappyMan420 said:

Dear ProfessorPotSnob,

NOT understanding something should inspire one to gain insight, not mock what is misunderstood.

I think it's funny that you posted the above as if it were funny.

Click to expand...

It was meant to be read without humor , take it as you like , but in the end I am not the one referencing seemorebuds bullshit . I learned to grow back in the late 80's and early 90's and I have not misunderstood the modern era of new age growers as I just do not agree and follow , old school is where it all began and I will humbly stay true to my roots - no pun meant but you can laugh if you like !

It was a far cry from mockery as it was simply an observation that I share with many old timers and vets .

Beeve said:

Hey there all,
I'm a newb to this forum, but not that new to the hobby.
I want to know what physical charateristics you look for when selecting a good mother plant to carry on your grows, for high yields and hardyness in growing. I see Uncle Ben's posts and those are some KICK ASS buds. I see others have also obtained some similar yields with minimal work to the plant. Any tips? Do you buy 10 seeds and keep the cuttings from the best looking one? How do you determine what the best looking one is? How do you predict what kind of yield you'll be getting?

All this bullshit about dialing in your grow in my harsh opinion with all these over priced nutes with fancy cartoon labels and gimicks only lends me to believe that you get a semi-decent yield. Is it true- do you have to spend $200 on seeds to get the genetics to achieve this? I don't know.. I've got some northern lights and bagseeds going right now in my grow journal. They are doing amazing without all the crazy nutes that people add. I just give them what they need.

Anyways, thanks!

ps, don't be so hard on the Beave....

Click to expand...

The optimal mother is the one that is what -you- are looking for.. for example, if your lighting can't sustain more than a 2ft height with decent/better penetration - that's not something you want. Internode spacing is a critical, as well as density and overall hardiness of the plant. Depending on if it were indoors or out, you'd also look at the genetics and if they have resistances to anything you are likely/more likely to encounter to help curb that/those issue(s) before they start. I think you get the idea behind what I am saying. If you're running hydro, there's also 100s, if not 1000s of well known homebrew recipes that would allow you to mix up veg and flower tanks hella cheap. By hella cheap, I do mean close to 20000 gallons of hydro solution for under 250 USD, which you could always scale down as you felt the need/appropriate. On the same token, you could also adjust the recipes to dial in your strain legitimately. Pre-mix goes well for nutes most of the time, but some strains simply won't like something without modifications. Some blueberry strains can be like this, as an example - depending on which breeder the seeds came from.

My .02,

FI-

I like to imagine the plant is an organic factory. Input X mechanics = End Product.

light, nutrients, genetics... these are the raw materials so to say. The actual plant production is the mechanics. and we all know the end product.

Having said that, light will only go so far, and unless you grow outside, it cost you money. Training my plants to utilize what I've provided absolutely makes sense. True, energy is "wasted" by the plant by topping or training, but i have serious light efficiency due to training. I can't provide enough for the plant, assuming that it could potentially grow at an infinite rate in the right settings, so I manipulate the endlessly growing plant to the way I have found to be most productive. 50 colas a plant

too much work and setbacks...I top once and sidelight adequately ...much easier and allows older plants thereby increasing yield and potency