Dutchmasters Reverse,a study of hermie's.

terrance.jbatey

Active Member
nope not at all im sorry i was way stoned that night......drinks too.............but changing up brands and using diff nutrients does improve ur plants ill post up sum pics in tym....but i bullshit you not....bn growing a awfull long tym ..its done wonders for me...and no its not just that one product was differnt from another in quality......brands i use are all basicly the same price and have the same overall quality .....idk exactly what&how it it is but id does spice ur plants up alot....its sumthin to do wit either chem's changing up molecular strucute or nutrient change causes different colours and a higher potency idk...and helps them become better strains..works wonders out doors also .......im doing both indoor and outdoor grows atm......should have sum nice results to post up.........
 

terrance.jbatey

Active Member
my theory is basicly the changing of nutrient brands imo fills in possible nutrients that lack .or maybbe the change up enhances nutes.....but it does by far create better buds swtiching up formulars\brands during flowering(when ur bloom a&b is gone...choose another brand...like i said...and carry on doing that) but i think b the dif variety of chems that are nutrients changing up the plant especially buds.so it slightly adpts and changes each tym based on the nutrient being used at said tym,..i have other theorys but right now i cant b bothered...bit buisy......reverse is worth a try.......if u need to ....just use potash plus ,i have found it to increase effects of the reverse
 

bdonson

Well-Known Member
I'm a new grower with great grow room six or 7 different strains I've tried over the last 3 years. All have gone hermi. Obviously I must take some of the blame for an over nute issue but I've tried Reverse the last 2 grows per instructions. I contacted Dutch Masters for specific info and they replied to follow the nutrient schedule, WTF, Reverse wasn't on the schedule. On a side note my litre of Penetrator is very high in ph vs the ph neutrality of another brand I never measured the ph of the Reverse/Penetrator mixture but Reverse must be very acidic by itself to balance the solution. Goes without sayin that I'm begining to believe that buds without seeds is a fairytale. My vote? snakeoil for Reverse.
 

Ken3531

Well-Known Member
If you read this entire thread youll notice that reverse works amazingly if you pre treat before any signs of hermie. I use it alot
 

Maximus cannabis

Active Member
I'm a new grower with great grow room six or 7 different strains I've tried over the last 3 years. All have gone hermi. Obviously I must take some of the blame for an over nute issue but I've tried Reverse the last 2 grows per instructions. I contacted Dutch Masters for specific info and they replied to follow the nutrient schedule, WTF, Reverse wasn't on the schedule. On a side note my litre of Penetrator is very high in ph vs the ph neutrality of another brand I never measured the ph of the Reverse/Penetrator mixture but Reverse must be very acidic by itself to balance the solution. Goes without sayin that I'm begining to believe that buds without seeds is a fairytale. My vote? snakeoil for Reverse.
Yeah, this is a grow problem, or you keep getting your genetics from someone who doesn't like you...

This sounds like light leaks to me too. Or constant interruption from in and out traffic. 7 strains in three years all hermies is an environment issue. I've grown 10 times that and never had a hermie. Maybe a nanner or two, but no hermies.
 

bdonson

Well-Known Member
no light leaks I've checked. I used Reverse per instructions with Penetrator on 2 different grows and yes i too read the thread. I am disapointed that Dutch Masters hasn't jumped in here with some do's and dont's. Most vendors want consumers to have a positive experience with their products and from reading this thread some have and some haven't.
 

Maximus cannabis

Active Member
no light leaks I've checked. I used Reverse per instructions with Penetrator on 2 different grows and yes i too read the thread. I am disapointed that Dutch Masters hasn't jumped in here with some do's and dont's. Most vendors want consumers to have a positive experience with their products and from reading this thread some have and some haven't.
Yeah, but I've never used a drop of reverse and I've never had a hermie. I guess my point is maybe try and treat the problem, not the symptom. either your starting with the worlds worst genetics, or you have other factors that are causing your problem.
 

terrance.jbatey

Active Member
hermies reversed........was try out a new shed...got the veg cycle wrong cause i thought it could veg more(bad choice)but it stressed it a bit....anyhow reverse has made it turn back female lol........gonna b a bitch to clean the grow room after this grow....spewing.....:leaf:
 

Attachments

bdonson

Well-Known Member
I took the liberty of sending a link of this thread to dutch masters and got some additional questions answered. Here is more info from Rob at DM.

"My name is Rob and i'll try to help you out with Reverse. If you're consistantly having hermaphorite plants i would start hitting them with Reverse just prior to flipping into flower. I would spray them again after day 7 of flower and once more on day 17 of flower.
Always mix Reverse undiluted with Saturator at 10ml/quart. Do not adjust the PH and mix only as much as you plan to use at the time. Spray with the lights on." He replied again to a follow up question "As far as the time of application goes i'd spray during the beginning of the light cycle. In regards to follow up treatment i'd go by flower formation as an indicator of when to stop spraying; when the flowers start growing in mass i'd stop spraying... you could spray your plants every 10 days until then to extend the effectiveness of the reverse." Anyway I think it's worth another try from my perspective I'll let you know how it works. Cheers Bob
 

jondamon

Well-Known Member
I will first admit that i havent read all 18 pages of this thread just thought i would chime in with my experience with REVERSE.

So here is what happened.

I got myself some NIRVANA PPP. After 11weeks of Veg i threw this lovely looking lady into flowering and during week1 she started breaking out some NANA's. Nothing major just mainly from some of the bracts on the stems.

So i popped on over to my Local Hydro shop to see if they stocked Reverse, after reading all the hype i was willing to pay the price. Here in the UK it was £20 for the REVERSE and £16 for the SATURATOR. Now i did SOME research on it. How it was developed for Pumpkins and stopping the male flower from creating the seeds inside a pumpkin. I too wasnt sure how it worked and to be honest i am still unsure how it properly works.

So after i got my reverse and the saturator i gave my PPP a spraying down then 10days later another spraying.

The one thing i did notice was that my leaves became slightly burned from the reverse. It mentions about spraying during lights on etc and i do agree its probably needed but i would personally recommend raising your lights up. So after around 4days i noticed a couple of NANAs still there. On day 10 i sprayed again and had no further NANA occurances.

Now it could be the strain or the phenotype but my PPP was a supposedly 9 week flowering strain and i harvested it yesterday after 13weeks of flowering. The buds did not swell into hard colas but more into foxtail specimens.

NOw i dont have any more of this strain to work with and to be honest the last 24weeks have made me not want to try the nirvana PPP again. I still have plenty of REVERSE and the SATURATOR left for any problems further down the line with any breakouts etc.


Sorry if this wasnt experience that you were looking for but i had to chime in with it.



Peace



J
 

Life Goes On

Active Member
IMO the Reverse and Saturater are a BIG rip off. I bought both when one of my Bubba's hermied on me. I followed the application directions verbatim and it did absolutely NOTHING. All 9 of my girls ended up with seeds and I ended up with a lighter wallet and a ruined crop. Oh and by the way all the saturater is, is dish soap that they are charging about $30.00 for a small bottle.
 

riddleme

Well-Known Member
An old thread brought back to life by discussion, I love it

The OP was looking for the science and I read the whole thread and discover that he never found it so I figured for others reading the thread I would post it and perhaps it might lead to some more research/experimenting???

[
Self-Incompatibility: Avoiding Inbreeding

  • Evolution seems to favor (and be favored by) genetic variability.
  • Genetic variability is promoted by outbreeding: sexual reproduction between genetically dissimilar parents.
  • (Just why sexual reproduction is so popular throughout the world of living things is still a hotly-debated question, but the fact remains. Link to some of the speculation as to why.)
Plants, being anchored in position, have a special problem in this regard. Many employ the services of animals (e.g., insects, birds, bats) to transfer pollen from plant to plant. But if the flowers have both sex organs:
what is to prevent the pollen from fertilizing its own eggs?
A variety of solutions have been tried in the plant kingdom.

These include:
  • Having imperfect flowers; that is, flowers that are either male or female.
    • Dioecy. The imperfect flowers are present on separate plants. Dioecy is the equivalent of the separate sexes of most animals. But it is rather rare. Some examples:
      • poplars
      • hollies
    • Monoecy. The imperfect flowers are present on the same plant. But if they mature at different times, self-fertilization is avoided. Corn (maize) is a common example.
But the vast majority of angiosperms have perfect flowers; that is containing both male and female sex organs. So how do they avoid self-fertilization?
  • Heteromorphic flowers.

    The flowers are perfect but come in two structural types; for example
    1. long stamens with a short style and
    2. short stamens with a long style.
    A single plant has one type or the other.
    If the pollinator has a short tongue, pollination is favored from the first type to the second - but not the reverse.
    Heteromorphic flowers are not common, and even in the angiosperm families that favor them (e.g., primroses, flax), the same biochemical mechanisms of self-incompatibility that we will find (below) in homomorphic flowers are usually present as well.
  • Homomorphic flowers. All flowers have exactly the same structure. Avoidance of self-fertilization depends on genetic/biochemical mechanisms. There are two quite different types of self-incompatibility.
    • Sporophytic self-incompatibility (SSI)
    • Gametophytic self-incompatibility (GSI)
Sporophytic Self-Incompatibility (SSI)

This form of self-incompatibility has been studied intensively in members of the mustard family (Brassica), including turnips, rape, cabbage, broccoli, and cauliflower.

In this system,
  • Rejection of self pollen is controlled by the diploid genotype of the sporophyte generation.
  • The control lies in the "S-locus", which is actually a cluster of three tightly-linked loci:
    • SLG (S-Locus Glycoprotein) which encodes part of a receptor present in the cell wall of the stigma;
    • SRK (S-Receptor Kinase), which encodes the other part of the receptor. Kinases attach phosphate groups to other proteins. SRK is transmembrane protein embedded in the plasma membrane of the stigma cell.
    • SCR (S-locus Cysteine-Rich protein), which encodes a soluble, secreted ligand for the same receptor.
  • Because the plants cannot fertilize themselves, they tend to be heterozygous; that is, carry a pair of different S loci (here designated S1 and S2).
  • However, dozens of different S alleles may be present in the population of the species; that is; the S-locus in the species is extremely polymorphic (analogous to the major histocompatibility locus of vertebrates — Link).
  • The difference between the alleles is concentrated in certain "hypervariable regions" of the receptor (analogous to the hypervariable regions that provide the great binding diversity of antibodies — Link).
The rules:

  • Pollen will not germinate on the stigma (diploid) of a flower that contains either of the two alleles in the sporophyte parent that produced the pollen.
  • This holds true even though each pollen grain — being haploid — contains only one of the alleles.
  • In the example shown here, the S2 pollen, which was produced by a S1S2 parent, cannot germinate on an S1S3 stigma.
The explanation:

  • The S1S2 pollen-producing sporophyte synthesizes both SCR1 and SCR2 for incorporation in (and later release from) both S1 and S2 pollen grains.
  • If either SCR molecule can bind to either receptor on the pistil, the kinase triggers a series of events that lead to failure of the stigma to support germination of the pollen grain. Among these events is the ubiquination of proteins targeting them for destruction in proteasomes.
  • If this path is not triggered (e.g., pollen from an S1S2 parent on an S3S4 stigma, the pollen germinates successfully.
Gametophytic Self-Incompatibility (GSI)


This form of self-incompatibility is more common than SSI but not so well understood. It occurs in nearly one-half of all the families of angiosperms, including
  • the Solanaceae (potatoes, tomatoes [wild, not cultivated], and tobacco)
  • petunias
  • beets (Beta vulgaris)
  • buttercups (Ranunculus)
  • lilies
  • roses
  • many grasses
The rules:
  • The S loci are (as in SSI plants) extremely polymorphic; that is, there is an abundance of multiple alleles in the population.
  • Incompatibility is controlled by the single S allele in the haploid pollen grain.
  • Thus a pollen grain will grow in any pistil that does not contain the same allele (so, as shown here and in contrast to what happens in SSI, S2 pollen from an S1S2 parent will grow down an S1S3 style.
This appears to be the mechanism in the petunia:
  • All pollen grains — incompatible as well as compatible — germinate forming pollen tubes that begin to grow down the style.
  • However, growth of incompatible pollen tubes stops in the style while compatible tubes go on to fertilize the egg in the ovary.
  • The block within incompatible pollen tubes is created by an S-locus-encoded ribonuclease (S-RNase), which is
    • synthesized within the style;
    • enters the pollen tube and
    • destroys its RNA molecules
    • halting pollen tube growth.
  • The RNase molecules contain a hypervariable region, each encoded by a different allele, which establishes each S specificity (S1, S2, S3, etc.).
  • The pollen tube expresses a protein designated SLF that binds S-RNase. SLF also exists in different S specificities (S1, S2, S3, etc.).
  • In compatible ("nonself") tubes, the SCF triggers the degradation (in proteasomes) of the S-RNase thus permitting RNAs in the pollen tube to survive and growth to continue.
  • In incompatible ("self") tubes the interaction of, for example, the S1 SCF with the S1 S-RNase blocks its degradation so the RNAs of the pollen tube are destroyed and growth is halted.
An entirely-different mechanism of gametophytic self-incompatibility is found in poppies (Papaver rhoeas).
Switching from Cross-Pollination to Self-Pollination

A substantial minority of angiosperms have abandoned cross-pollination for self-pollination. For example, while its wild relatives continue to be cross-pollinated, the domestic tomato is not.

Two steps are needed for this change:
  • abandoning its mechanism of self-incompatibility
  • changes in flower structure to reduce the chance that pollinators will transfer pollen from another plant to its stigma.
Unlike its wild relatives, the stigma of the domestic tomato does not protrude beyond the anthers. Of the several genes involved in this change, the most important one is Style2.1. The mutation in Style2.1 responsible for the change in phenotype in our cultivated tomatoes is found in the promoter region — the protein-encoding portion of the gene is exactly the same as in wild tomatoes.
Here, again [Link], is evidence that much of the diversity of life arises not from mutations in the protein-coding portion of the genes that we share but mutations in their regulatory regions (promoters and enhancers). /QUOTE]

here is the link
http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/S/SelfIncompatibilty.html
 
Top