Back Cross/Selfing ?!?!

the answer is

R1's (aka Reversed F1's): When feminized pollen is used to pollinate a different female than the pollen donor. R1's will tend to act like a tradional male x female cross, only all female, while S1's appear to have some different properties that are not yet fully understood. Early reports indicatee that S1's are more consistent than R1's on average, but there are many exceptions, and more research is needed."

aka
taking R1 beans and reversing them again within the resulting generation makes the next gen R2 thank you and good night

Via. Ethos Websight

There are three main types of cannabis breeding:


• Directional Breeding

One of the two true breeding pursuits, directional breeding looks for a specific trait or cultivar and attempts to hone in and stabilize that particular expression or trait. For example, if you are particularly fond of a specific terpene profile, directional breeding would allow you to narrow your focus with each filial generation, seeking to identify that one particular phenotype that gives that exact terpene profile, regardless of other aspects.


• Compensatory Breeding

The second of two true breeding approaches, compensatory breeding attempts to take the best traits from two plants and produce an offspring with a balance that compensates for each of the parent’s shortcomings. For example, if you wanted to tame a gangly, tall strain like a Haze while getting the gassy, bushy nature of a Chem Dog or Afghan Kush, compensatory breeding would be selecting parents whose combination would compensate for each plant’s weaknesses (in this case vertical height and spacing of bud sites).

• Seed Making:


Not a true breeding type, but something colloquially referred to as “pollen chucking”. This is the least intentional of the three efforts to breed. As the name suggests, this breeding method starts and ends with having pollen and applying (chucking) it on your female plants. You’re intentionally doing it but you may not be selecting pollen or recipient plants for any reason in particular other than that you want to breed something, anything. The goal here is to produce seeds, nothing more. Hopefully they’re great, but the intention is to make something, not necessarily something special.

maranibbana said:

BC1: The first backcross generation, ie when an F1 or R1 progeny is crossed back to an F0 parent. Backcrossing can increase the influence of either parent, but continued backcrossing is too much inbreeding, according to both DJ Short and Rezdog, and should be used rarely if at all. One or two backcrosses followed by full-sib mating has beena successful strategy for many breeders, including the creator of Northern Lights.

These terms can be combined for shortand pedigrees. A second backross, followed by three generations of sib-mating, may be represented as a BC2-F3 generation.

Click to expand...

Usually backcrossing is used to attempt to lock in recessive traits.
Selfing successive generations is very difficult because of the tendency for recessive expressions to appear many times unwanted ones.

I don't seperate reversed or selfed, they are both selfed to me and genetically the same since we cannot seperate breeding traits on resultant generations. Some differences between us and other species that do show this so I wouldn't apply it to us.

Cannabis is an inbreeder, which means it suffers no inbreeding depression, self as much as you want.l, wild crosses could be up to s50 and we'll past

I can agree, S1 or R1 seems about right so you will make S2 or R2.

And the part about you deciding as before you the strain was probably a f2 bx3 S1 whatever which we are not going to carry forward and prefix endlessly so as soon as you make P1 or F1 your at the start of a new line and genetic variant.

A very enjoyable thread and discussion, I can now identify any crosses I make the same as yours R1,R2.

dbz said:

Usually backcrossing is used to attempt to lock in recessive traits.
Selfing successive generations is very difficult because of the tendency for recessive expressions to appear many times unwanted ones.

Click to expand...

Do we have recessive expressions, cannabis has always confused with its Herms. I can get stability in traits selfing two plants and breeding back to each other like this guy, backcrossing is nothing special in our species.

If we breed for stem length we would be using a different set of traits, that might encounter the recessive problem more than the oil.

These things show up in other species, ours has less of those problems, maybe we aren't changing much with our particular type of breeding.

What I find is some breeding rules are not really rules for us, it created a chuckers paradise you couldn't do with other traits or other species as well.

I think I just came to the conclusion that genetically we are changing so very little and traits that don't have negative or ressesive qualities but only ones that produce endless variety (or form).

I can't bottleneck or end up at a bad place only produce even more variety. We should find the right type of breeding patterns to explain what we're doing, they won't be the recessive types or give those results.

Genetics is profound.

BBQtoast said:

Do we have recessive expressions, cannabis has always confused with its Herms. I can get stability in traits selfing two plants and breeding back to each other like this guy, backcrossing is nothing special in our species.

If we breed for stem length we would be using a different set of traits, that might encounter the recessive problem more than the oil.

These things show up in other species, ours has less of those problems, maybe we aren't changing much with our particular type of breeding.

What I find is some breeding rules are not really rules for us, it created a chuckers paradise you couldn't do with other traits or other species as well.

Click to expand...

The rules are loose and yes I agree bc that’s the fun of breeding. Yes selfing could result in traits coming through but that’s the whole point is popping beans and finding the one and carrying it over.
I’m not looking for a quick fix lol.
I just wanna play.
That being said I’ve heard good things and bad things about selfing and I think the result comes down to the strength and stability of the genetics used in the first place.

the only reason I take into consideration what the seeds are labeled that I’m working with is bc he reversed his fav stable mandarin sunset and pollenated his fav stable ghost train haze making the resulting seeds R1

I take those R1 genetics (which according to internet will be closer to an F1 cross and not as stable as an S1 cross) and find in the variations I like the best, reverse one and pollenate it’s sibling and make an R2...
Pop the R2 and choose desirables and then back cross to my fave R1 parent to see what pops up and if I like the resulting BX1 generation then sib mate in there bx1r2 bx1r3 etc then back cross again to R1 mom to make bx2 etc

and if it proves to fail genetically in the long run then restart...

i think it gets made a little easier to hone in on a tailored Pheno when I’m working with seeds/genetics that a breeder has already made strong

BBQtoast said:

I think I just came to the conclusion that genetically we are changing so very little and traits that don't have negative or ressesive qualities but only ones that produce endless variety (or form).

I can't bottleneck or end up at a bad place only produce even more variety. We should find the right type of breeding patterns to explain what we're doing, they won't be the recessive types or give those results.

Genetics is profound.

Click to expand...

Well there are always recessive traits. Sometimes they may be more desired or less. Colors whatever. The difference when selfing relates to the fact that it is homozygous, while breeding with a male and female os heterozygous. This results in recessive traits being selected more often with homozygous breeding. I don't mean it has anything to do with hermies. I don't think i mentioned them. It could be that in selection of subsequent generations you find a great trait that gets borne out more easily by homozygous breeding at which point back crossing it may be desires to try and produce the trait with more stability. Really most of it comes from the filial offspring you choose. Choose wisely and be rewarded. Ah the never ending pheno hunt. Either way you can produce gold diamonds or shit.

BBQtoast said:

I think I just came to the conclusion that genetically we are changing so very little and traits that don't have negative or ressesive qualities but only ones that produce endless variety (or form).

I can't bottleneck or end up at a bad place only produce even more variety. We should find the right type of breeding patterns to explain what we're doing, they won't be the recessive types or give those results.

Genetics is profound.

Click to expand...

dbz said:

Well there are always recessive traits. Sometimes they may be more desired or less. Colors whatever. The difference when selfing relates to the fact that it is homozygous while breeding with a male and female os heterozygous. This results in recessive traits being selected more often with homozygous breeding. I don't mean it has anything to do with hermies. I don't think i mentioned them. It could be that in selection of subsequent generations you find a great trait that gets borne out more easilu by homozygous breeding at which point back crossing it may be desires to try and produce the trait with more stability. Really most of it comes from the filial offspring you choose. Choose wisely and be rewarded. Ah the never ending pheno hunt. Either way you can produce gold diamonds or shit.

Click to expand...

agreed

dbz said:

Well there are always recessive traits. Sometimes they may be more desired or less. Colors whatever. The difference when selfing relates to the fact that it is homozygous, while breeding with a male and female os heterozygous. This results in recessive traits being selected more often with homozygous breeding. I don't mean it has anything to do with hermies. I don't think i mentioned them. It could be that in selection of subsequent generations you find a great trait that gets borne out more easily by homozygous breeding at which point back crossing it may be desires to try and produce the trait with more stability. Really most of it comes from the filial offspring you choose. Choose wisely and be rewarded. Ah the never ending pheno hunt. Either way you can produce gold diamonds or shit.

Click to expand...

It's hard to find what your saying, it probably is the case it just doesn't show well. I can be dismissive of things by genetic rules and think we should be more so with our terminology.

But that's the hard part, people say purple trait when every plant will purple under some stress, we have a loose genetic terminology as it doesn't describe a purple trait over non purple just susceptibility to stress or climatization, Mendel is not satisfied. Then we have plants that produce purple flowers, there is a purple trait visual and satisfying a Mendel.

At no point did the first breeders take this seriously, now it's fucked up it could easily be overhauled. Not their fault this isn't a lab but why it continues and stays confused or unidentifiable.