I know when you purchase items sold in bulk (even in small quantities) like 10 or 20 packs of seeds, they’re going to be from different plants, maybe some grown outdoors and some indoors, fed differently, etc. But am I the only one seeing drastic differences within 4 plants from the same pack of seeds, in identical growing conditions?
Example is a 4 plant GDPAF grow- plants ranging from 35-25” at 8wks, all fully flowering, but 2 super dense, 1 super sparse, and the shortest, dense but the buds look totally different, and it’s producing ducks feet leaves.
I guess what you have to do is look at ‘the crop’, and assess what the ‘average production’ is, to determine what future yields may be… instead of assuming all will be like your best, or your worst, in the crop.
I guess if you’re cloning your photos, you’ll obviously see consistency.
But we split a mix pack of photos last year, buddy and I got drastically different results in similar climates and conditions… so if your ‘mother’ isn’t as strong, neither will her ‘children’ be.
And worse yet, half of mine sprouted and one month in, died. Too late to attempt to restart, so I decided to give Autoflowers a try.
The landscape of online seed sales has changed dramatically.
The relationship used to be a breeder or a small group of breeders would sell to customers. There were big individual players like DJ Short and groups like Dutch Passion and RCMC.
This has migrated to big seed banks who aggregate seed from a bunch of breeders and groups of breeders. This is how you are able to sign on to a site like seedsman or ILGM and see the huge variety - way more than any breeder or collective could ever produce. Some seed banks are up front and clear about which breeders their seeds come from. Some do not disclose this info. None of them produce it all on their own.
Back when the relationship was more breeder specific the breeders had a big stake in the quality of the genetics they produced. There was more attention paid to stabilizing genetic lines to reduce phenotypic differences. More time spent backcrossing to produce stable genetics. This is part of the reason why you’ll notice so little phenotypic variation in stuff like NL#5 or White Widow.
The fact that there’s so much phenotypic variation in many of the newer lines tells you that you the work of stabilizing the line hasn’t been done to the degree it should have been. If this was coming from an individual breeder the market would have no tolerance for it and they’d be out of business. Since the breeders are being shielded by the anonymity of a seed bank the pressure is off as far as producing a reliable line and instead left to focus on the things that drive the market today: THC Content and clever names. The focus shifts to volume sales and recurring transactions. A steady supply of new genetics keeps buyers looking for the next thing and banks shifting towards selling nothing but Femm’d seed ensures buyers who don’t clone need to keep coming back. It’s smart business if nothing else. How’s this gonna play out for cannabis breeding in the long run?
Makes sense, we never had many choices in the past. I could buy the ‘natives’ up in Mendocino and Humboldt, $150-250 for a dozen seeds in 2018-19, and they were about all that was readily available… maybe 10 strains, all Fems.
Over the past couple of years, there’s a wide range of Fems, Autos, CBD rich, and lots of new ‘cute’ names… almost all with similar claims of THC and production. I don’t have access to a lab to validate the THC, or strain… but I know production is always lower than stated, especially when you’re growing outdoors under sunlight. not a complaint, just an observation.
Autos are all over the place for me too. Bruce banner auto specifically has the most messed up genes I’ve ever seen. Grow ten and get ten different looking plants of all different heights.
Only the ones that have been bred awhile are somewhat stable like White Widow. Autos are for outside, as I see no reason to waste valuable indoor space on inferior weed. Plain and simple.
Well, so it’s like I’m seeing for Errybody it seems.
I was sorta hoping grow 3-4 each of a few strains, see the production, check out the results, select a ‘preferred’ and then alternate/s.
And there’s better turnaround, and decent (enough) volume, and lower space requirements with autos, so I’ll see what I get from 3-4 plant grows (7/1, 8/1, 9/1 starts) and then decide on next years plan.
The most efficient (best turnaround and yields) grows are done with clones in a SOG style grow with photos and clone mothers, producing only copies of the best specimens rather than whatever the seed provides and the variety that comes with it (best, worst and in-betweens).
Want to kick it up to another level and have the best unicorns of the strains, then need to get into photos, pheno hunting, cloning, and the keeping of clone mothers or your’re always stuck with whatever you get from seed.
No question this is the route to go, if you’re full time into it and gearing for super ‘high’ production!! I don’t have the area to setup a SOG, and I’m lacking the skill set for some of this, but I’m sure I could learn .
Thanks for everyone’s input- biggest take-away is my seeds are about the same as everyone else’s and if I get inconsistencies? Then I’m doing it right . No WONDER there’s ‘10 free with 10’ offers!
not a complaint, just an observation.