Over Cloning and Lost Potency

Bangaman

Bangaman

Active Member
Many people have said over cloning will result in a reduced potency. I was one of the few that said it is impossible, that the biology shows if this did happen, it would be 1 in many million.

The trouble is that many people including some growers I know personally have claimed potency loss. I even tried some from a friend who called me over just to prove his point. Indeed he was right.

So, as usual, where there is smoke...So i cracked the books, browsed the net, and shot some emails around.

Chimerism from cuttings made no biological sense, none what so ever, at least not to my limited knowledge at the time. I have cloned for years, once ran the same mother for two years straight a d never once had a Chimera. After all, I knew that in plants, only grafts produced chimeras.

Without turning this into a genetics lesson I will keep it simple. This is why everyone on either side of this argument is correct:

Chimeras is a genetic mutation, where the same organism has 2 different sets of DNA. Most common in animals and only in plants as a result of grafting one plant on another.

However, when flowering plants "prepare" to flower, they change the use of parts of their stems from leaf type cells to flower type cells (keeping it simple). This process is in itself is like a mutation and very delicate because of the many cell divisions that take place. The plant's DNA is very "vulnerable" when this change takes place.

So how are chimeras formed resulting in lost potency?
  1. The size of the cutting: The more cells in a cutting the greater the odds that there will be a mutation because the plant will draw cells from a greater number of previously specialized cells. In other words the further your cut is from the apex or the bigger your clone, the more likely you will experience a loss in potency.
  2. The use of sterilizers like rubbing alcohol, hydrogen peroxide etc. Sterilizers kill germs because of an ion they create that reacts in solution much like nutrients except this free radical ends up in places it should not and binds to plant DNA, MESSING IT UP.
So there you have it. Those folks like myself who take smaller clones and do not use sterilizers never experienced potency loss and vice versa.

It is a bummer as many use large clones saves time, and someone recommended sterilizing tools with all kinds of OH producing ions and other oxidizing agents. That said, using Sterilizers when trimming may result in chimerism and loss or different potencies within buds of the same plant

Take smaller cuttings, and boil your tools if you feel inclined to sterilize.

Happy Gardening
 
Last edited:
Cyrus420

Cyrus420

Well-Known Member
You still haven't told us how this results in a loss of potency.

"A genetic chimerism or chimera (also spelled chimaera) is a single organism composed of cells from different zygotes. This can result in male and female organs, two blood types, or subtle variations in form.[1] Animal chimeras are produced by the merger of multiple fertilized eggs. In plant chimeras, however, the distinct types of tissue may originate from the same zygote, and the difference is often due to mutation during ordinary cell division. Normally, genetic chimerism is not visible on casual inspection; however, it has been detected in the course of proving parentage."

You've describe to us how a cannabis plant can have a chimerism and as this blurb above explains it's a mutation during cell division, quite like you explained.


"So there you have it."

No we don't. You've only told us cannabis can have a chimerism not how this chimerism results in a loss of potency.

So how does a chimerism result in loss of potency?

Edit: Interesting note, "Genetic Degeneration" which seems to be a common argument for loss of potency is also a TV trope. http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CloneDegeneration

Shame I can't find anything similar that actually proves the idea.

Edit 2: "Nuclear gene-differential chimeras"

"These chimeras arise by spontaneous or induced mutation of a nuclear gene to a dominant or recessive allele. As a rule one character is affected at a time in the leaf, flower, fruit, or other parts."

This seems to be what you're referring to as a mutation. It does say it can affect one character but is this necessarily always going to be a loss in potency? Couldn't this chimerism result in an increase in potency potentially?
 
Last edited:
I.G.Rowdit

I.G.Rowdit

Well-Known Member
This idea of 'loss of potency' over time seems to be cannabis culture specific. I've worked in the horticulture industry for 30 years and I've never heard this sort of argument from anyone except cannabis growers.

In fact, just the opposite seems to be the case, rooting cuttings essentially revitalizes the plant. The cuttings grow much more vigorously and are more productive until they, in turn, get too old. Then the cycle repeats.

Because 'potency' for cannabis is the net result of the interaction of dozens of cannabinoids and terpenes and who knows what else, I would always look at culture first as the cause of loss of potency.

I'm not saying it could not be the way you describe it, anything is possible, but I see absolutely no evidence to support the chimera argument or the claim that potency is lost over time.
 
Bangaman

Bangaman

Active Member
Cyrus420 said:
You still haven't told us how this results in a loss of potency.

"A genetic chimerism or chimera (also spelled chimaera) is a single organism composed of cells from different zygotes. This can result in male and female organs, two blood types, or subtle variations in form.[1] Animal chimeras are produced by the merger of multiple fertilized eggs. In plant chimeras, however, the distinct types of tissue may originate from the same zygote, and the difference is often due to mutation during ordinary cell division. Normally, genetic chimerism is not visible on casual inspection; however, it has been detected in the course of proving parentage."

You've describe to us how a cannabis plant can have a chimerism and as this blurb above explains it's a mutation during cell division, quite like you explained.


"So there you have it."

No we don't. You've only told us cannabis can have a chimerism not how this chimerism results in a loss of potency.

So how does a chimerism result in loss of potency?

Edit: Interesting note, "Genetic Degeneration" which seems to be a common argument for loss of potency is also a TV trope. http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CloneDegeneration

Shame I can't find anything similar that actually proves the idea.

Edit 2: "Nuclear gene-differential chimeras"

"These chimeras arise by spontaneous or induced mutation of a nuclear gene to a dominant or recessive allele. As a rule one character is affected at a time in the leaf, flower, fruit, or other parts."

This seems to be what you're referring to as a mutation. It does say it can affect one character but is this necessarily always going to be a loss in potency? Couldn't this chimerism result in an increase in potency potentially?
Click to expand...
You change the genes of a plant you change the the potency. Just like changing the colors of a flower. These are my findings. And it does not always result in lower potency or any potency change at all, it just increases the odds of a change in potency higher or lower.

I thought it was straight forward that a change in genetic composition would change the potency. Here we are talking of odds. Does that make sense to you now?

For all technical purposes, the term "clone" is misused when it comes to clippings although it has become common practice in the horticultural undustry to call vegetative reproduction by cuttings or grafting cutting "cloning"

Just to clarify, "Genetic Degeneration" does not occur in asexual reproduction. "Genetic Degeneration" occurs during sexual reproduction in a population with a small gene pool.
 
Cyrus420

Cyrus420

Well-Known Member
Bangaman said:
You change the genes of a plant you change the the potency. Just like changing the colors of a flower. These are my findings. And it does not always result in lower potency or any potency change at all, it just increases the odds of a change in potency higher or lower.

I thought it was straight forward that a change in genetic composition would change the potency. Here we are talking of odds. Does that make sense to you now?

For all technical purposes, the term "clone" is misused when it comes to clippings although it has become common practice in the horticultural undustry to call vegetative reproduction by cuttings or grafting cutting "cloning"

Just to clarify, "Genetic Degeneration" does not occur in asexual reproduction. "Genetic Degeneration" occurs during sexual reproduction in a population with a small gene pool.
Click to expand...
"These are my findings." aka "This is my anecdotal evidence."

Are you changing the genes of the plant by cloning it? There is a chance that happens but rarely as discussed with the chimerism. You haven't proven that any genetic change results in any visible or measurable ways.

What do you mean you're talking odds? You literally said "So there you have it. Those folks like myself who take smaller clones and do not use sterilizers never experienced potency loss and vice versa." is that not your conclusion? I'm debating the idea that chimerisms cause loss in potency at all!

So this is what I want you to reply to: How does the presence of chimerism or a change in genetics due to a mutation during the taking of a cutting affect the potency of your final product? (Which to remind you, you claimed you have found is the case through your personal findings. So please present said findings, I assume you have the charts and lab results ready at hand?)


PS: On a personal note everything you're saying has nothing to back it up so far as I can find using quick google searches. The idea that a loss in potency can be achieved through a genetic mutation during the taking of cutting via the formation of a chimerism sounds likely but rare but the idea that cloning itself is the issue is highly debatable and if I say so myself bullshit.
 
Bangaman

Bangaman

Active Member
I.G.Rowdit said:
This idea of 'loss of potency' over time seems to be cannabis culture specific. I've worked in the horticulture industry for 30 years and I've never heard this sort of argument from anyone except cannabis growers.

In fact, just the opposite seems to be the case, rooting cuttings essentially revitalizes the plant. The cuttings grow much more vigorously and are more productive until they, in turn, get too old. Then the cycle repeats.

Because 'potency' for cannabis is the net result of the interaction of dozens of cannabinoids and terpenes and who knows what else, I would always look at culture first as the cause of loss of potency.

I'm not saying it could not be the way you describe it, anything is possible, but I see absolutely no evidence to support the chimera argument or the claim that potency is lost over time.
Click to expand...
Much appreciated comment. The whole potency loss thing stems from bad scientific interpretation. If I cut parts of your body, say your foot, then cut a toe off that foot, and take a toe nail, the DNA WILL ALWAYS BE A 100% COPY OF THE ORIGINAL. If I could keep taking pieces of you or that foot or that toenail, the DNA WILL ALWAYS BE A 100% COPY OF THE ORIGINAL.

Case in point, Grapes are the largest fruit crop on earth. Wineries are Meticulous, they take extreme care to clone the same grape vine over centuries in order to preserve taste and brand. Why? Because even though vines can grow from seeds, the seeds are a result of sexual reproduction and never turn out exactly like the either of the parents. For example, seeds from a Chardonnay grape would not necessarily grow into a Chardonnay vine, because of pollination variables, gene combination variables. Keep in mind that Wine grape vines are mostly hermaphrodites and like humans, plant offspring carry the genetic material of both parents and therefore share some of its parents' traits as well as blend some of the properties into its own uniqueness. Therefore even a single strain of vine if isolated with no other strain will degenerate over time (Genetic Degeneration) developing problems from the inherent in-breeding of self-pollination due to a small gene pool.

The only two methods of grapevine propagating are practiced.
  1. Layering where a section of a year-old cane (the plan's shoots from roots) and still attached to the mother vine with its tip exposed. The cane will establish its own roots over a season and then it is detached to form a separate plant.
  2. The other method is by cutting the cane first, then rooting it and transplanting it in a new location.

Either method means that virtually all cultivated grapevines are clones of the mother, and therefore identical to the mother and only a mutation (Chimera) will cause a cloned vine to change characteristics. In order to target one characteristic such as potency, there are over a BILLION ways that DNA can recombine or combine in a DNA strand that determines potency. That is 1 in over a BILLION chances of this happening naturally (chimera in vegetative propagation). You stand a better chance at the Power Ball jackpot.

These 2 types of propagation ensure that 100% of the time the desirable traits of the parent, such as vigor, fruit-bearing capacity, grape skin color or thickness, berry size, cluster size, early or late ripening tendencies, disease resistance,and taste etc., are carried over for centuries like with Bordeaux and Chateaux Vignon in France .

Almost all wine vines to date begin as a cutting from healthy plants. Vine cuttings are called slips or scions.

Now if wineries clone the same plant for centuries, what are your odds of a mutation that will specifically lower potency?

When you take a large clone and or use sterilants like Hydrogen peroxide or alcohol, ( my buddy uses alcohol) and given the accelerated growth of annuals, you multiply the odds of a chimera by several factors. Also, sterilants have been used in lab studies to produce Rose chimeras, i.e. a rose plant with both red and white roses.

Bro science is bad for the cannabis culture
 
Last edited:
Bangaman

Bangaman

Active Member
RM3 said:
this is the 2nd post of his I have seen this with

at least the 1st post openly said to ignore post that did have scientific backup but only pics, both post have neither ?

Good luck in your debate
Click to expand...
Maybe your problem is that you do not know what you are looking for or how to search the internet. Ask some who knows to help you. The information is there
 
Cyrus420

Cyrus420

Well-Known Member
Bangaman said:
Much appreciated comment. The whole potency loss thing stems from bad scientific interpretation. If I cut parts of your body, say your foot, then cut a toe off that foot, and take a toe nail, the DNA WILL ALWAYS BE A 100% COPY OF THE ORIGINAL. If I could keep taking pieces of you or that foot or that toenail, the DNA WILL ALWAYS BE A 100% COPY OF THE ORIGINAL.

Case in point, Grapes are the largest fruit crop on earth. Wineries are Meticulous, they take extreme care to clone the same grape vine over centuries in order to preserve taste and brand. Why? Because even though vines can grow from seeds, the seeds are a result of sexual reproduction and never turn out exactly like the either of the parents. For example, seeds from a Chardonnay grape would not necessarily grow into a Chardonnay vine, because of pollination variables, gene combination variables. Keep in mind that Wine grape vines are mostly hermaphrodites and like humans, plant offspring carry the genetic material of both parents and therefore share some of its parents' traits as well as blend some of the properties into its own uniqueness. Therefore even a single strain of vine if isolated with no other strain will degenerate over time (Genetic Degeneration) developing problems from the inherent in-breeding of self-pollination due to a small gene pool.

The only two methods of grapevine propagating are practiced.
  1. Layering where a section of a year-old cane (the plan's shoots from roots) and still attached to the mother vine with its tip exposed. The cane will establish its own roots over a season and then it is detached to form a separate plant.
  2. The other method is by cutting the cane first, then rooting it and transplanting it in a new location.

Either method means that virtually all cultivated grapevines are clones of the mother, and therefore identical to the mother and only a mutation (Chimera) will cause a cloned vine to change characteristics. In order to target one characteristic such as potency, there are over a BILLION ways that DNA can recombine or combine in a DNA strand that determines potency. That is 1 in over a BILLION chances of this happening naturally (chimera in vegetative propagation). You stand a better chance at the Power Ball jackpot.

These 2 types of propagation ensure that 100% of the time the desirable traits of the parent, such as vigor, fruit-bearing capacity, grape skin color or thickness, berry size, cluster size, early or late ripening tendencies, disease resistance,and taste etc., are carried over for centuries like with Bordeaux and Chateaux Vignon in France .

Almost all wine vines to date begin as a cutting from healthy plants. Vine cuttings are called slips or scions.

Now if wineries clone the same plant for centuries, what are your odds of a mutation that will specifically lower potency?

When you take a large clone and or use sterilants like Hydrogen peroxide or alcohol, ( my buddy uses alcohol) and given the accelerated growth of annuals, you multiply the odds of a chimera by several factors. Also, sterilants have been used in lab studies to produce Rose chimeras, i.e. a rose plant with both red and white roses.

Bro science is bad for the cannabis culture
Click to expand...
So what is your point here?

Your first post claims lost in potency via cloning mutations but then go on to point out that grape vines have done it for thousands of years with cloning.

I understand that you're trying to say a bigger cutting/using sterilizers can increase your chance of a chimera but if your chance of one and a billion becomes says one hundred times greater then that one hundred in a billion chance is still dismal. Or are you just ignoring me because I'm asking questions?

AND what does this have to do with your personal claim that taking a cutting too large or too sterile has resulted in a loss in potency?

Even if it's a one thousand in a billion chance the chances of YOU getting chimeras that display loss in potency is still very slim and amazing if you have but it still doesn't support the IDEA you are CLAIMING.

Your claim (from what I can tell) is that taking a larger cutting or using sterile equipment is not as good as smaller clones or non-sterile equipment because it increases your odds of a genetic mutation that has a slim to non chance of affecting your plants potency. But even you admit the chimera mutation has a super slim chance of happening, so what is your point dude?

Were you the one that made the thread about the Miracle Gro as well? I think you are. This thread is just as bunk as that one.

You are a man of a lot of word's and very little evidence or critical evaluation skill or so it seems. Please prove me wrong.
 
Bangaman

Bangaman

Active Member
Cyrus420 said:
"These are my findings." aka "This is my anecdotal evidence."

Are you changing the genes of the plant by cloning it? There is a chance that happens but rarely as discussed with the chimerism. You haven't proven that any genetic change results in any visible or measurable ways.

What do you mean you're talking odds? You literally said "So there you have it. Those folks like myself who take smaller clones and do not use sterilizers never experienced potency loss and vice versa." is that not your conclusion? I'm debating the idea that chimerisms cause loss in potency at all!

So this is what I want you to reply to: How does the presence of chimerism or a change in genetics due to a mutation during the taking of a cutting affect the potency of your final product? (Which to remind you, you claimed you have found is the case through your personal findings. So please present said findings, I assume you have the charts and lab results ready at hand?)


PS: On a personal note everything you're saying has nothing to back it up so far as I can find using quick google searches. The idea that a loss in potency can be achieved through a genetic mutation during the taking of cutting via the formation of a chimerism sounds likely but rare but the idea that cloning itself is the issue is highly debatable and if I say so myself bullshit.
Click to expand...
If you cited genetic degradation in vegetative cloning I doubt that if I spelt out the science for you and gave you the research that you have the background to understand it.
 
Cyrus420

Cyrus420

Well-Known Member
RM3 said:
this is the 2nd post of his I have seen this with

at least the 1st post openly said to ignore post that did have scientific backup but only pics, both post have neither ?

Good luck in your debate
Click to expand...
It's not even a debate at this point. I'm just asking questions and getting zero relative answers. :/

Disappointing really, I like being proven wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RM3
Cyrus420

Cyrus420

Well-Known Member
Bangaman said:
If you cited genetic degradation in vegetative cloning I doubt that if I spelt out the science for you and gave you the research that you have the background to understand it.
Click to expand...
"Spelled" out the science. I never cited degeneration, I just didn't want you to use it because it's not a real thing. DNA never degrades, it only changes.

Please do give me the science. Show me where what you're saying is true.

Assuming that I won't understand or don't have the background is just immature and surely just a retreat on your part.

Do you have the evidence or not? SHOW ME.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: RM3
RM3

RM3

Well-Known Member
Bangaman said:
Maybe your problem is that you do not know what you are looking for or how to search the internet. Ask some who knows to help you. The information is there
Click to expand...
Maybe ?

and maybe, I'm a grower/breeder that has done over 2000 hours of research and written two books not to mention, grown for over 40 years 8)

Maybe, I have copies of damn near every paper ever written on cannabis as well as a complete library on Botany ?

Maybe I have a collection of rare books like the first book on hydro by the guy that invented it, or an 1811 book on Electroculture and perhaps even a rare book on alchemy for plants ?

Maybe ?
 
Cyrus420

Cyrus420

Well-Known Member
RM3 said:
Maybe ?

and maybe, I'm a grower/breeder that has done over 2000 hours of research and written two books not to mention, grown for over 40 years 8)

Maybe, I have copies of damn near every paper ever written on cannabis as well as a complete library on Botany ?

Maybe I have a collection of rare books like the first book on hydro by the guy that invented it, or an 1811 book on Electroculture and perhaps even a rare book on alchemy for plants ?

Maybe ?
Click to expand...
Nah dude you're full of shit. You've only been an RIU member for two years, have well over 6,000 likes to your nearly 3,000 messages. That is two likes a message...nah. Your need to learn to search the internet man.

Let me teach you how to grow weed:

Place seed in water-bowl for 72 hours on a heating pad before manually prying it open with a knife.

Take yard mud and mix with equal parts baking soda before mixing into your Miracle Gro. (This is a sick soil recipe I made myself it works I swear.)

Now you'll need at least two incandescent light bulps, string them up over the old laundry bucket you got your seeds in. (Did you remember to put them in? I doubt it, search the internet to learn how to do that!)

Keep the lights on for twenty four hours a day for three months. If you see little white hairs she is ready to smoke.


Geez...learn something you newb. I grow at least a pound every two weeks with this method.
 
RM3

RM3

Well-Known Member
Cyrus420 said:
Nah dude you're full of shit. You've only been an RIU member for two years, have well over 6,000 likes to your nearly 3,000 messages. That is two likes a message...nah. Your need to learn to search the internet man.
Click to expand...
it's the new camera, they like my pics LOL

My Riddleme account has over 6000 post with only 400 some likes (twas before they changed the software) and all the pics were with the old camera LOL
 
Bangaman

Bangaman

Active Member
Cyrus420 said:
"These are my findings." aka "This is my anecdotal evidence."

Are you changing the genes of the plant by cloning it? There is a chance that happens but rarely as discussed with the chimerism. You haven't proven that any genetic change results in any visible or measurable ways.

What do you mean you're talking odds? You literally said "So there you have it. Those folks like myself who take smaller clones and do not use sterilizers never experienced potency loss and vice versa." is that not your conclusion? I'm debating the idea that chimerisms cause loss in potency at all!

So this is what I want you to reply to: How does the presence of chimerism or a change in genetics due to a mutation during the taking of a cutting affect the potency of your final product? (Which to remind you, you claimed you have found is the case through your personal findings. So please present said findings, I assume you have the charts and lab results ready at hand?)


PS: On a personal note everything you're saying has nothing to back it up so far as I can find using quick google searches. The idea that a loss in potency can be achieved through a genetic mutation during the taking of cutting via the formation of a chimerism sounds likely but rare but the idea that cloning itself is the issue is highly debatable and if I say so myself bullshit.
Click to expand...
I can help you understand. Seriously I am not kidding.

You see, in plants Chimeras can come about by a mutation in cells of rapid growing region such as the apex of a cannabis plant. that not only grows rapidly, but because of a short season, the same tips differentiate into flowers .
I have to first explain the concept of APICAL ORGANIZATION and you will see why and how size of your clone or the use of sterilants would take place in flowers.
Go ahead, in your browser type "APICAL ORGANIZATION' use the quotes. In fact I think ever weed grower should understand APICAL ORGANIZATION because its the site of bud formation.

Now, after you read up on Apical Organization you I can now tell you that Chimeras in plants come about when a cell undergoes mutation. This mutation may be spontaneous (rare in plants) or we can force by radiation or with the application of chemical mutagens like alcohol and peroxide for example into the vascular system.In fast growing plants like cannabis mutagens like alcohol and peroxide will be transported quickly to cells located near the crest of the apical dome,and therefor possibly causing the mutation cells produced by the rapid cell division in the apical dome. The result will be cells of different genotypes growing adjacent in a plant tissue, hence the definition of a chimera. Potency is determined by the genotype.

Now you as, what does size alone have to do with it? Well, if you read about APICAL ORGANIZATION, then you will see that the bigger the clone, the greater the source of already differentiated cell material you have to make more cells that mutagens have to mutate.

Without the presence of mutagens, in a bigger clone the same holds true that the greater the source of already differentiated cell material you have to make more cells the more likely you end with chimeras.
 
Last edited:
Cyrus420

Cyrus420

Well-Known Member
Bangaman said:
I can help you understand. Seriously I am not kidding.

You see, in plants Chimeras can come about by a mutation in cells of rapid growing region such as the apex of a cannabis plant. that not only grows rapidly, but because of a short season, the same tips differentiate into flowers . it is number of chromosomes is altered.

I have to first explain the concept of APICAL ORGANIZATION and you will see why and how size of your clone or the use of sterilants would take place in flowers.
Go ahead, in your browser type "APICAL ORGANIZATION' use the quotes. In fact I think ever weed grower should understand APICAL ORGANIZATION because its the site of bud formation.

Now, after you read up on Apical Organization you I can now tell you that Chimeras in plants come about when a cell undergoes mutation. This mutation may be spontaneous (rare in plants) or we can force by radiation or with the application of chemical mutagens like alcohol and peroxide for example into the vascular system.In fast growing plants like cannabis mutagens like alcohol and peroxide will be transported quickly to cells located near the crest of the apical dome,and therefor possibly causing the mutation cells produced by the rapid cell division in the apical dome. The result will be cells of different genotypes growing adjacent in a plant tissue, hence the definition of a chimera. Potency is determined by the genotype.

Now you as, what does size have to do with it? Well, if you read about APICAL ORGANIZATION, then you will see that the bigger the clone, the greater the source of already differentiated cell material you have to make more cells that mutagens have to mutate.

Without the presence of mutagens, in a bigger clone the same holds true that the greater the source of already differentiated cell material you have to make more cells the more likely you end with chimeras.
Click to expand...
Dude, I understand it.

just show me how this backs up your potency claim and we're clear. I'm tired of repeating myself.

Show me where you got a chimera that resulted in a loss in potency and I'll be wrong. But until then your post has zero to do with what I'm asking for.
 
RM3

RM3

Well-Known Member
Cyrus420 said:
Dude, I understand it.

just show me how this backs up your potency claim and we're clear. I'm tired of repeating myself.

Show me where you got a chimera that resulted in a loss in potency and I'll be wrong. But until then your post has zero to do with what I'm asking for.
Click to expand...
Still no science either ??? well unless we count tellin us to google big words that we already understand and know about ???
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top