# My Cataloguing System - by DJ Short



## Mutt (Sep 23, 2006)

My Cataloguing System - by DJ Short 
c. 2004 DJ Short 
Perhaps one of the most useful devices used in a quality cannabis breeding project is that of catalogue techniques. This refers to the method used to categorize various traits for future reference, or how to best label traits from a given population. It is also a means to track who came from where (generational references). 

First and foremost, I cannot begin to describe the level of complexity involved with a breeding project that extends from the f-2 to the f-5 range. It took me over a decade and a half of trial and much error to fully comprehend and develop a system that actually works to this level and beyond. It starts out simple enough, until the f-2's, then the complexity expands exponentially with each generation. 

The P-1's are simple enough, they are the original breed-stock and labeled for what they are, i.e. Highland, Purple or Chocolate Thai, Oaxacan or Santa Marta Gold, Pure Afghan, etc. The f-1's were equally simple as they were of uniform expressions and I simply chose to label them &#8220;The Cross&#8221;. The f-2 generation was equally easy to identify with the label &#8220;Double Cross&#8221;, or the progeny of the f-1 cross. However, when the f-2's were grown out, extreme diversity ruled the making of the f-3's (or the descriptions of the f-2's selected to breed further with) a tougher call to make. 

It is at this level (and beyond) that some form of labeling system becomes necessary to catalogue all of the different variations found. Beginning with the plants grown out from the f-2 seeds I chose to utilize an alphabetized system with each letter corresponding to a specific trait. For example, the letter &#8220;B&#8221; came to signify the &#8220;Berry&#8221; characteristic, &#8220;F&#8221; stands for &#8220;Fruity&#8221; (sometimes &#8220;Floral&#8220, &#8220;G&#8221; is for Grape, &#8220;C&#8221; for Citrus, &#8220;O&#8221; for orange, &#8220;L&#8221; for lemon or lime, &#8220;K&#8221; equaled &#8220;Kush&#8221;, &#8220;S&#8221; for &#8220;Sativa&#8221; &#8220;P&#8221; for Purple, &#8220;X&#8221; for extreme glandular trichome production, etc. 

I must confess that it took much trial and error to finally get it right. Therefore, if one were to look at my early notes many exceptions to what developed as &#8220;the rule&#8221; can be found. I left these early &#8220;mistakes&#8221; as they were so as not to over-complicate what came next. It is also very important to note that most of these observations were relatively subjective and that no more than two traits, or characteristics were ever assigned to any one plant. Therefore, the label &#8220;BK&#8221; came to stand for &#8220;Berry Kush&#8221;, or a Kush dominant plant with outstanding berry attributes. It is also important to note that only the most outstanding plant of any given attribute was selected for future work. So the plant that ended up with the &#8220;BK&#8221; label was the most Berry-Kush of the lot. 

So, my f-3 stock became labeled with a two-letter code indicating what the most outstanding characteristics of it&#8217;s parent (primarily mother) were, and only those with the strongest expressions earned their label. When the f-3's were grown out and crossed to make the f-4 generation, these labels were coupled to indicate the parents of the f-4 progeny, i.e. BK/FS would be a cross between an f-3 Berry-Kush mother (I always list the female first, male second with a back-slash in between) and an f-3 Fruity Sativa father. 
*F-4's and Beyond *

Consider the label number: 4/5 3 96-2. This is the type of numbering symbol I use to label F-4 and beyond plants. Before we dissect this number I need to point out a few rules that I follow in a breeding project beyond the F-4 generation. 

First, I only grow out no more than six varieties at any single time. The reason is to avoid too much confusion. Six is about the maximum number of varieties an individual can realistically keep track of. These six (or five, or four etc.) varieties are then labeled as &#8220;1" through &#8220;6" (or the number of varieties used). Let&#8217;s say the 6 f-3's I use are: 1. &#8220;FK/FK&#8221;, 2. &#8220;BK/PK&#8221;, 3. &#8220;FK/FL&#8221;, 4. &#8220;GK/GK&#8221;, 5. &#8220;PK/FP&#8221; and 6. &#8220;XP/FK&#8221;. Notes are made to record this fact and the seeds are then sprouted and grown using these simple, single digit identification numbers (1 through 6 in this example). 

Second, I select only one male from any single breeding project. Again, this simplifies things and avoids mistakes enormously. That male is generally selected at about the third week in the flowering cycle, unless it is a clone from another project. After the single male is selected the other males are removed and the remaining females are numbered according to their variety category (i.e. if there are seven #1. females, five #2 females, etc. they are labeled #1&#8211;1 through 7, #2&#8211;1 through 5, etc.) The male simply retains the number from its variety label, in our above example the number &#8220;5" (in the 4/5), or the &#8220;PK/FP&#8221; male. 

Now we may examine the above example: 4/5 3 96-2. The first two numbers, &#8220;4/5" are the variety number of the female first and male second. So in this case that would be: a &#8220;GK/GK&#8221; female crossed with the &#8220;PK/FP&#8221; male. The third number in our example, &#8220;3" means female #3 from the #4 (&#8220;GK/GK&#8221 batch. The next number in the example, &#8220;96" is merely the year and the final number is the crop number for that year. So, translated, the number 4/5 3 96-2 is the third &#8220;GK/GK&#8221; (or #4) female crossed with the &#8220;PK/FP&#8221; (or #5) male grown from the second crop of 1996. 

Please note that the &#8220;/5&#8221; male-used indicator will be /5 for all of the seeds labeled from this batch as the #5 (&#8220;PK/FP&#8221 male is the only one used. If a male clone from a past crop is used it may be indicated by using the #7 in the initial notes (if six varieties are sprouted) and described as the male-clone-used in the #7 description. Likewise, if any of the six varieties tested are from a past clone (female), they may be selected as one of the #1 through #6 varieties, labeled and described accordingly. 

It seems complex at first, but I assure you that it works great. The same system is used for the F-5 generation, and beyond. The system merely requires that dated notes be kept and catalogued. That way, any crosses may be backtracked and referenced via one&#8217;s notes and a simple, six or seven digit code is all that is needed to label and catalogue one&#8217;s plants. 

Finally, this system works best for forward crosses mainly. Backcrosses will need another connotation to note their use . The &#8220;clone-used&#8221; labeling described prior works well for backcrosses involving clones. 

This system is good for only one grow out at a time. If multiple grows, or facilities are used then they will need to be noted as well, perhaps with a lettered &#8220;A&#8221;, &#8220;B&#8221;, &#8220;C&#8221; etc. appended onto the catalogue number. Also, detailed notes of each individual plant are necessary to fully utilize any cataloguing system and are obviously required for success. Other than that, I have found this to be a relatively simple and foolproof system for cataloguing one&#8217;s breeding projects beyond the f-3 generation.


----------



## Mutt (Sep 23, 2006)

*Background, Review and DJs Law 

*Remember; all of my seed-stock came from the cross of two distinctly different P1 parents with the mother being of pure, land-race sativa origin and the father being a pure indica. This cross produced a very uniform line Ive referred to as The Cross, or f1 generation. When The Cross was bred with itself (dubbed Double Cross at the time) the resulting variance was phenomenal in the f2 generation expressions. Beginning with this f2 generation, intense scrutiny and application of the selection rules and laws come into play. The bulk of the variation from this f2 generation were primarily discovered in the 1980's. 

I must comment here that the variation witnessed from this f2 cross, and subsequent crosses, was truly amazing in its complexity of variance. I also need to mention the fact that, as far as the numbers game is concerned (selecting from as large a population as possible), this f2, and to some degree the f3 generations are the most relevant. That is, the larger the number of f2's and f3's sprouted, the greater the degree of variance that is witnessed. It is from the f3 and beyond generations that specific traits are bred for and stabilized. Once a specific trait is recognized, the numbers necessary for success diminish with each generation successfully crossed toward the desired traits. In simple terms; the more f2's and f3's sprouted for examination the better. However, once a specific trait presents itself and is chosen for future work and appears to breed true through subsequent generation, the less f4's, f5's etc. that are needed to witness the desired results. 

There is one very simple rule that I feel is primary when considering ones involvement in a quality cannabis breeding project, or when applying Luther Burbanks law (_*Select the best and reject all others.*_). It is an extension of Luther Burbanks Law that I will refer to as:


----------



## Mutt (Sep 23, 2006)

*



The progeny must equal or surpass its parent in overall quality and desirability to be considered for future breeding. 

Click to expand...

* 
That is, if the progeny is not as good as the bud it came from, it is rejected from further breeding. The finished product from the grown seed does not need to be exactly like the bud or parent from which it came. A good example is from the land-race Thai and the plants grown from its seed. The plants grown from the land-race Thai seed, especially produced indoors, were not much like the imported Thai from which it came (primarily due in this case to very different growing environments and curing techniques). It was, however, very equal, and in some instances superior to the buds from which it came and therefore worthy of consideration. 

On the other hand, I have not had much luck in equaling the effects of certain tropical Island herbs such as Hawaiian or Jamaican indoors, and therefore these offerings never made the grade. For the record, the majority of land-race varieties grown out prove to fail DJs law, IMHO. Very few end up being of significant value or worthy of future consideration. But DJs law also applies to the selection of the f2's, f3's and beyond. 

I realize that it is sometimes impossible in the current seed market to be able to sample a true example of the bud (parent) of the seed one purchases. Sometimes these varieties are commercially available in places such as a Dutch coffee shop, but one is never really certain if the bud one is purchasing (or the seed for that matter) is the real deal. This is perhaps one of the main flaws in the current seed marketreliability. Given this situation, the seed buyer and breeder will need to employ Luther Burbanks Law first, and DJs Law after a parent is created for testing.


----------



## Mutt (Sep 23, 2006)

I am aware of concerns involving mutagens such as colchicine and their possible use on cannabis plants. Colchicine is a chemical that when applied to seeds or sprouts can cause extreme genetic mutations in future generations of the seeds that survive the treatment (often less that 1%). For the record let me state that I have never used colchicine, or any other mutagen, in my breeding work . All of my selections are from organically produced crops. I do have my suspicions, however, primarily concerning some of the Thai strains that I have used. 

I am not certain, but I suspect that the Highland and Chocolate Thai may have been the results of a mutagenic regimen. The reasons I make the speculation is due to observations witnessed in the growing cycle of the Highland and Chocolate Thai and their progeny. Both were extremely freakish in some of their expressions, as were a number of subsequent generations. These freakish anomalies are similar to many of the abnormalities documented by mutagenic experiments published in journals such as High Times and Cannabis Culture. These abnormalities include asymmetric growth patterns, albino mutations that affect parts of the plant such as half of a leaf, various polyploid expressions and mild to extreme leaf mutations. I am very interested to learn about any first hand experience anyone may have had in this capacity. Having said that, one of the most important aspects to consider in regard to a breeding regimen is that of ratios.


----------



## Mutt (Sep 23, 2006)

The math for this selection process involves watching the ratios of desirable plants from f2 to f3 and beyond generations. The ratio of plants exhibiting a specifically desired trait from the f2 generation may be 1:20 or 1:50 or 1:100 or even as high as 1:1000 (approximate ratios). Once obtained and selected, however, and crossed to the correct pollen source, this ratio will equate more and more per each successful generational cross. This is another indicator of which individuals actually breed true for the specific desired trait(s). Therefore, if the ratio of plants with desired traits presents itself in an approximate 1:100 ratio in the f2 generation, and successful crosses are made, this ratio should diminish to between 1:50 to 1:20 for the same desired trait in the f3 generation. If the cross remains successful, the ratio will diminish to anywhere from 1:10 to an absolute IBL (In-Bred Line) beyond the f4 cross of 1:2 (or 1:1 barring male sexual exclusion, i.e. the ratio among the female plants only). 

It is important to note that any 1:2 (1:1 female) IBL ratio is generally for a very specific, singular trait. When considering combinations of traits, the best obtainable ratio I have found is between 1:5 to approximately 1:10, depending on the number of desired traits sought. Please note that these ratio numbers are approximate and the true numbers may be closer to the powers of two such as 1:8, 1:16, 1:32 etc. It also needs to be noted that my ratios relate to total number of seeds sprouted and not just the number of female plants. 

Therefore, if I sprout 100 f2 seeds and find one female plant with any number of desirable qualities, and I successfully find a male f2 pollen donor to cross with, and the ratio of these same desirable plants in the f3 generation becomes at least 1:50 (preferably 1:30 or better) then I consider myself on the right track and proceed from there. If a subsequent cross of the f3's provides a ratio of desirability in the f4's of 1:20 (or closer), I am definitely on the right track. In essence these are the (general) numbers I look for in the early breeding trials. Suffice it to say that my informal observations have proven true enough for me to be able to judge desirable results with adequate success, despite the approximations. 

Suffice it also to say that I have a large collection of f3's and f4's and beyond that merit further investigation. These f4's (and some f3's and f5's) are the primary source for all future breeding work along the lines established by the ratios of plants with the desirable traits expressed therein.


----------



## Mutt (Sep 23, 2006)

Anomalies, individuals that are markedly different from the general phenotypic expression of a given variety, are rare, but occur with a near predictable ratio. Beyond the f-3 generation (and from my personal seed-stock) anomalies present themselves at the ratio of approximately 1:100. Because there are both positive (desirable) and negative (non-desirable) anomalies, the overall ratio of positive (desirable) anomalies is probably somewhere in the neighborhood of approx. 1:200. Desirable anomalies are very valuable to cannabis breeding providing that they are viable. So always keep an eye out for desirable anomalies and put sufficient energy into their reproduction. More often than not however, anomalies can be very finicky and therefore difficult to work with


----------



## Mutt (Sep 23, 2006)

Originally, in the late 1970's, I was growing up to 100 plants at a time using over 1000 watts of light, and also outdoors in a backyard garden space. These were all land race sativa that fortunately cloned well. The ratio of highly desirable individuals from these plants was about 1:100. One of the most annoying traits of these varieties was hermaphroditism. Approximately 60% of all of these plants from seed were unmanageable hermis, and about 25% more were what I referred to as manageable hermaphrodites, meaning that with close observation and intense scrutiny the male pods could be seen and eliminated as they appeared. About 15% of these sativa plants were female enough to produce marketable sinsimilla bud, with a constant vigilance toward the occasional stray pollen sack. In other words the hermaphroditism expressed in these equatorial sativa was extreme and nearly total. 

A quick word about the virtues of hermaphrodites: Ask any old-time herbalist, one who has been experiencing fine herb since at least the early 1970's, what their favorite all-time herbal variety was, and the answer will be something to the effect of; Santa Marta or Acapulco Gold or Highland or Chocolate Thai or Punta Roya (red-tipped gold Highland Oaxacan) or Guerran Green or Panama Red etc. et. al., all of which were equatorial, or sub-tropical, origin sativa and hermaphroditic. Even the great hashish of the era such as Lebanese Red and Blonde, all Moroccan and Nepalese were produced from seeded stock. 

This is not so much in praise of the hermaphrodite as it is a suggestion in regard to the cannabinoid profile of seeded verses non-seeded herb. It has been my experience that the cannabinoid profile of seeded herb produces a wider range of effect than from non-seeded, or sinsimilla, herb. The equatorial environment also probably contributed to a wider range of cannabinoids. One of the aspects of the equatorial environment is its consistent day/night temperature range, there is little difference between day and night temps on the equator supposedly inspiring a wider cannabinoid profile. Couple this with the seeded cannabinoid profile and it becomes easy to understand the popularity of the equatorial produced sativa, despite its hermaphroditic problems. I am curios as to what future research in this capacity may provide. 

Once the indica was introduced into the mix the hermaphrodite problem became controllable. It only takes a few zero-tolerance generations indoors to fully eliminate hermaphroditic tendencies. As a matter of fact, this, coupled with shortening the flowering cycle, became the first main concerns of the indoor or commercial horticulturist. This unbalanced focus may be the strongest contributing factor to the blandness of much of the herb to follow. The author R did a cover piece for High Times magazine in the mid-1980's calling for a Ban the Bud campaign, against the indica onslought, due to how bad and bland the quality of some herb was becoming then. I remember the times clearly. 

During this period I was beginning to venture out into larger satellite grows (indoor and out) that kicked my selection numbers up to around 1000 plants at a time for awhile. It was from these trials that I was able to do the bulk of my f2 experimentation and selections. I worked with these numbers for enough trials to manipulate and witness the phenomenon of quality production to a high degree of certainty. Once I was certain how to produce the f3's, the f4's and beyond became much easier to produce. 

During the late 1980's, and due to the harsh political realities of the times, the high numbers game became too dangerous. The war on some drugs and spooky ops such as Operation Green Merchant forced my experimentation deep underground. Fortunately, the lessons learned prior proved fruitful and progress was possible despite the political weather. I had already learned to produce f3 and f4 Blueberry (et. al.). However, doing so with diminished numbers actually helped boost my learning curve. Between 1987 to 1990 I was able to do so using less than 100 plants from seed at a time. And by 1991 I was able to do adequate selection work from past produced stock using less than 50 plants (seeds) at a time.


----------



## Mutt (Sep 23, 2006)

*Holland 

*By the early 1990's I was extremely interested in the burgeoning seed market developing in Holland. I had known about the seed banks since 1983 and was always only interested in obtaining more pure, land-race varieties. Unfortunately, there were only hybrid crosses ever available at the time and I had more than enough of my own to work with. By 1993 I finally made the pilgrimage to Amsterdam where I made new connections. In 1994 I connected with the first company that I worked with in Europe. By 1995 I was supplying this company with seed-stock both for sale and for breed work. I had contracted with this company to produce Blueberry, Flo and Blue Velvet. 

The first company I worked with in Europe sprouted only 25 seeds of each of these varieties to make selections from. Other than supplying seed-stock, I was only minimally involved in the selection process. I did get to see the mother and father plants alive, however, the selection process had already been done prior by others. Unfortunately, my relationship with this company was short-lived as all the owner really wanted was my seed-stock. Once he had it I became a very low priority in his scheme. In all honesty I was never paid one red cent for any of the Blueberry (or Flow or Blue Velvet) that company number one in Europe produced (plus having over 3,000 seeds that I produced completely ripped off). 

Needless to say this lack of concern prompted me to seek other possibilities that culminated in my relationship with the second company I worked with in Europe. At this company about 50 seeds of each variety were sprouted, but I was once again mainly left out of the selection process except for sampling a number of finished products and making selections based on those (which is enough, actually). I never got to see any of the live plants from this selection process at company number two in Europe. I also contributed seed-stock for three more varieties there; Blue Moonshine, Blue Heaven and Purple Passion. The owner of this company was satisfied with paying me the minimum amount I would consider adequate. Fortunately, part of the deal was my ability to remain independent and work with whomever else I pleased. 

*Switzerland *

The third company I worked with in Europe was in Switzerland. The owner of this company was able to dramatically push the envelope there and some interesting results blossomed. I visited Switzerland three times between 1999 and 2001 and was truly amazed at what I witnessed on each visit. Out of all of the companies that I worked with in Europe, I felt the most involved and productive in Switzerland. I was involved with selections of finished products and with live mother and father plants as well. I even got to help plant, transplant and harvest a few of the gems produced there. 

The varieties produced by the third company that I worked with in Europe included Moonshine Rocket Fuel, Rosebud and Blue Satellite. I must admit that the bubble hash from the Blue Satellite is among the finest and most desirable product I have sampled (outside of my own) since the 1980's! Unfortunately, the owner of this company was unable to successfully work with the local authorities and was forced to leave Switzerland. Some truly intrepid tales were spun during the brief stay there and I will remember many of them with delight.


----------



## Mutt (Sep 23, 2006)

*Canada, The True North Strong and Free 

*With glimmers of hope on the horizon, Canada is fast becoming the Cannabis Breeding capital of the world. With the much-appreciated activism of entrepreneurs such as Marc Emery (et. al.), a new haven for a seriously dedicated cannabis community is developing. One such entrepreneurial dedicate is Red of Legends Seeds. I met Red in Switzerland where he was very busy and involved working for the happening community there. Red is a high-flying, free spirit with a savvy sense of taste. 

Red was able to orchestrate the necessary requirements to produce a very large selection process. This grow consisted of about 400 plants (over 200 Blueberry phenos and over 100 Flo). Out of these there ended up being over 160 Blueberry and over 70 Flo females and about 60 males that made the initial cut. Copies of each of these were cloned and meticulously maintained by the crew. This actually turned out to be a slight overkill, but a testimony to the absolute dedication of the crew. 

*The Crew *

Mighty-G is a green-thumbed master gardener whose success with cannabis is phenomenal. Mr. G was able to provide and maintain a near-perfect growing environment for a lengthy period of time as the plants were kept in an extended vegetive state to insure 100% clone success. The plants were absolutely beautiful. Kermit was in charge of clone reproduction and maintenance. Kermit has been a respected part of the local cannabis community for many years. Chimera appeared online a few years ago and has proven himself to be an intelligent and dedicated soul, along with being a focused horticulturist with excellent credentials in the field of genetics. I first learned of Chimera online where he posted to a few message boards that I occasionally lurk and I appreciated the information he shared. The Cannabis Cowboy also added his expertise, especially considering the collection, purification and pressing of the dry-sieved resin. 

I just want to give a big shout out and a huge thank you to all of the crew for their very successful efforts on this project. You cats rock! Thank you.


----------



## Mutt (Sep 23, 2006)

*The Process 

*The main room was divided in two with the Blueberry on the left and the Flo on the right. The plants were relatively huge considering how long theyd been in veg. Lush growth dominated as three distinct Blueberry phenotypes and two distinct Flo presented their development, along with a small number of unique anomalies. Of course, all individuals were numbered and labeled and notes were made over the course of several inspections during the flowering cycle. 

During this period all of the males were isolated in a separate room and watched closely to enable the best selection from them. From this particular gene-pool, I find it relatively easy to select the best males as they tend to express their traits regardless of environment or light cycle. There were so many to choose from during this process that the difficulty became who to cull out. Most of the males were at least to some degree resinous with glandular stalked trichome, some more than others. This usually makes it easy to test certain profiles such as overall flavors. 

Only after the most desirable males are selected (i.e. all the others rejected) are issues of structure and growth pattern considered. Sweet, fruity and floral expressions are most desirable, but attention is paid to other possibilities as well. Top quality candidates of indica, sativa and mutant anomaly are picked by process of elimination. Then those with the best structure; hollow stems, good color and flower density, become the final candidates. 

The females also pose the same problem in regard to who is eliminated. Notes are made as to any outstanding qualifications that present themselves during the bud cycle. But it is not until the sixth week in flower, and sometimes not until the eighth week (or longer if the variety is strongly sativa), that the real differences in individuals becomes apparent and the truly amazing qualities shine. And even then, it only amounts to field-notes until well after harvest and the cut-and-dried product is totally cured. It is then that the final selection process begins. 

During our selection-crop numerous individuals could have passed the requirements to be a great mother plant. By and large, the overall ratio of desirable plants that qualified for final selection from this crop was approximately 1:10 (employing DJs Law). As it turns out the elite ratio of final candidates turned out to be approximately 1:30the best of the best as it were. By the eighth week in bud approximately two dozen individuals stood out as primary candidates. After these samples were individually labeled and jar cured for about two months, a total of eleven were of supreme quality. Believe it or not, the final elimination process among these eleven was perhaps the most difficult to complete. Part of the sprocess involved selecting one of each of the three Blueberry phenotypes, one of the Flo, one Blue Moonshine and deciding on the possibility of something new.


----------



## Mutt (Sep 23, 2006)

*The Varieties* 

After the fourth week in bud, generally speaking, certain characteristics become apparent. On the Blueberry side of the room three distinct phenotypes presented themselves, while on the flo side two less distinct phenos appeared. The three Blueberry phenotypes could be referred to as indica, sativa and variegated or mutated. The indica were shorter, denser and had larger calyx and bract leafs making the buds look plump. The sativa were taller, more slender leafed with more elongated buds of dense, smaller calyx. The indica tended to be of a stronger, more musky odor where the sativa were more delicate and floral. The variegated or mutated individuals varied more in their aromatic palate with some seeming more potent than others. On the flo side the difference was less pronounced between phenotypes but two distinct types developed. The primary difference was in bud structure and formation with one type growing with its bract leaves pointing more up and the other with its bract leaves pointing down. Both were more sativa looking with dense buds of small calyx. There was also a difference in potency of aroma between these individuals. 

The seed stock True Blueberry currently under scrutiny derived from f2s that were very BK or Berry Kush-like. These f2 BKs were crossed with very TF, or True Floral, sometimes referred to as Temple Flo, mates in the f3 and/or f4 generation to brighten the head considerably. Once the right mix was discovered these f4s (and beyond) crosses were inline bred (filial crossed) to stabilize the proper traits. The flo phenos are closer to the TF (True Floral, Temple Flo), headier side of the mix, most reminiscent of the Highland Oaxaca Gold. 


*Grape Krush* (or *Blue Krush*)a productive, deep-colored hybrid of very high quality. This plants exhibits partial to full leaf-deformities of the krinkle type, but with good structure and heavy bud production of large calyxes. The buds express a strong sharp/fruity odor with a distinct sweet/grape flavor brought out in the cure. A strong, long-lasting head/body mix is evident in the finished product with an exciting, but not racy, head and a mild narcotic body. Very euphoric and desirable effects that most seasoned connoisseurs prefer. 50-60 day flowering time. 

*Flodica*  a mostly indica phenotype from the flo line. A rare, near-total recessive indica found by chance in the TF line (TF= Temple Flo or True Floral). Generally, the flo line sports very sativa like structures of taller plants with slender leaves and spear-shaped buds. The Flodica, however, is a near-pure indica phenotype of short, stout, yet productive, structure with very large, dense, dark indica buds. Very resinous with heavy gland production of an earthen palate to the buds that produce a very strong, narcotic-type experience. 50-55 day flowering time. Unfortunately, the Flodica (and the True Blue Moonshine) were nearly sterile--i.e. no (or very few) seeds developed, and were therefore culled. 

*True Blueberry*the ultimate hybrid of Blueberry expression. Selected for its superior quality from a large pool, this hybrid contains the best from both worlds (indica and sativa). Medium height with long, fruity and productive buds of medium sized calyxes. Beautiful lavender hues become apparent soon into the flowering cycle. The finished product is of the highest quality with sweet, elongated Blueberry buds destined to please the most finicky palate. High resin production as expected from the Blue family. 50-60 days flowering time. 

*True Blue Moonshine*a true hash-plant. Selected for its outstanding production of large, clear gland heads, this mostly-indica hybrid really packs a musky/fruity punch. Medium height producing parge, dense buds glistening with trichomes. More musky than fruity with a burgundy/earthen flavor at cure. Top-notch Moonshine. 50-60 days flowering time. 

*F-13*"a Holy Grail plant of four-star excellence. Previously unreleased, a very desirable product and potential breeder. A more-sativa hybrid of medium height with long, spear-shaped, dense and resinous buds and an earlier finish time than most sativa. The superfluous quality of the finished product is remarkable: a clear, clean, crisp head of the kindest order with a sweet/floral flavor. This girl really rings the bell every time! Not for the couch-lock crowd, this heady sativa is for those who truly enjoy its stimulating yet comfortable appeal. A real day (or night) brightener. My personal favorite from this batch. 50-65 days flowering time. 

Stay tuned for future re-releases of Velvet Luna (formerly Blue Satellite and Blueberry Sativa), Moonshine Rocket Fuel and Rosebud in the not-too-distant future. Have fun and best regards toward your horticultural ventures. Enjoy!


----------



## can of ownage (Sep 26, 2006)

Wow i would of logically thought of going about the "breeding" all wrong... i would of thought of looking for which genes or alleles were dominate over the other ( dominate and recessive genes), would of picked out the desired pool ( lets say tatse was an allele... if a berry taste was recessive and lets say a limey taste was dominate, i would pick out what i wanted in the appropriate magnitudes) and bred like no tomorrow...picked winners out of a batch and so forth so on... im not sure if cannabis traits can be recessive or dominate like human genes.... in my opinon it would be easier to pick something out that way if possible.... that way u could veg a certain promising plant until u knew what the alleles where... whether it was homogeneous dominate or hetero dominate or whatnot and would make future breeding so much more predictable....again its just the way i would approach it...mutt do u know if some genes or alleles are expressed as dominate or recessive? or is it just pooled and mix with all alleles being recessive and as such "mixed" in a phenotype or overall flavor?

if u were to mix a berry tasting plant with one that tasted like lime ( an example) would the result always have a mix of the 2 flavors or would it sometimes go either way with some tasting like only berry or only lime and some tasting of both? im interested...very interested in this​


----------

