Indoor Magic's "Auto Gene" Theory

Magic

Canna Engineer
Joined
Sep 11, 2013
Messages
4,426
Reputation
10
Reaction score
8,711
Points
0
Age
37
Hello All, This is something i think should be discussed. Lets talk about the Auto Gene you hear being thrown around all the time.

Simply put i think there is no such thing. Sorry photo breeders.

My Belief is that Autos are actually Photo-period Plants with there "Flowering Gene" (Real Thing) Turned off.


Explanation: It all starts with plants, they are one of if not the most efficient working things on the planet. If you look at the many theories of Breeding a Auto plant its is always put in the wording of "Locking in the the Auto Gene" now we are all great breeders but i don't know how we can do that without any scientific background, but its all good! Cannabis does it for us all we had to do is teach it, a flowering trigger is not needed to make it from point a to point b and we all know that's all plants want to do is live there life cycle the best way possible.

This is what i believe happened, Autos where cause by Enviormental Extremes that would normally cause a plant to die, since the harvest season is so short, the plants evolved to the conditions by "turning Off" there flowering gene in order to survive. Take a look at these two definitions


-Gene mutation: An error during cell division can create a new type of gene. That new gene is a small part of the gene pool. It can be passed on to the next generation. If the new gene is useful, it might become a common part of the gene pool.

-Natural selection
: Some genetic differences will improve the chance of survival of individuals that have them. For instance, hawks with large sharp talons may be more likely to survive than hawks with small talons. Since the surviving ones make the next generation, the genes for large talons are more likely to be passed on. Eventually, the gene pool shifts towards large talons.


Read this article

the important paragraph was this

*The Wisconsin scientists discovered the gene in Arabidopsis thaliana, a small plant used worldwide to study plant genetics, physiology and molecular biology. Arabidopsis plants typically flower quickly when days have 12 hours of light or more but take a long time to begin flowering when the day length is eight hours. Scott Michaels and Fritz Schomburg in Amasino's lab created tens of thousands of plants with individual genes inactivated and Doyle grew them in conditions where the day length was eight hours. He identified a plant that bloomed early despite the eight-hour days because the plant was a mutant in which the ELF4 gene was inactivated. He then isolated ELF4.


The Cannabis plant is a very smart plant it has be cultivated for thousands of years and most believe the very first cultivated pant, To conclude the explanation "Auto Gene" is a mutation that is useful to the plant of cannabis if it wasn't through Natural selection it would not be passed on to offspring, but it is not a "New Gene" per-say it is the same Flowering Gene but inactivated like the article explained with ELF4.


Thanks for listening
:pass:
 
Last edited:
scientists led by University of Wisconsin-Madison researchers report that they have discovered a gene that regulates when plants flower and is critical for keeping a plant's 24-hour clock running accurately.

auto gene? IDK what you mean by that but this article is pretty straightforward, they discovered a gene that regulates flowering in Arabidopsis thaliana I would imagine a similar gene is responsible for the autoflowering trait in cannabis.

Phytochrome
is a photoreceptor, a pigment, that plants, and some bacteria and fungi, use to detect light. It is sensitive to light in the red and far-red region of the visible spectrum. Many flowering plants use it to regulate the time of flowering based on the length of day and night (photoperiodism) and to set circadian rhythms. --------------( why its okay to use green light in a 12/12 room on dark cycle without interrupting)

so the gene that is responsible for shutting off the proteins used by plants to signal flowering through dark and light cycles is what you would consider the "auto gene" and yes it can be very reliably "locked in" or fixed by using simple mendelian genetics and a punnett square. You dont need to be a scientist to understand the laws of heredity, the autoflowering trait seems to behave as a qualitative monogenetic recessive trait and as such can be fixed within only 3 or 4 generations (generally speaking).

the thing that piques my curiosity is the fact that semi autos exist as well so maybe it isnt qualitative since there are varying degrees to autoflowering and since no one really knows where the first rudis used in drug cannabis crosses came from (conflicting reports) there could very well be multiple genes among seperate families responsible for the autoflowering phenomena.

The autoflower gene may very well be a throwback from cannabises earliest days in the himalayas (my opinion) that allowed populations to survive high altitude, poor growing conditions, extreme cold or long night cycles and just hid itself away in the genepool to pop up later. Or it might have mutated much more recently with the spread of hemp to all the corners of the world alongside human civilization (much less likely considering how many places it shows up[russian rudis, british weedy rudis, american ditch weed rudis, mexican rudis]) or maybe it just recently mutated in the past hundred years or so..... it doesnt really matter to be honest but its pretty fun to think about :)

but the 1 thing i think we CAN agree on is that environmental stressors, natural selection and mutation certainly led to the autoflower trait being expressed, reproducing and made available to us growers for working psychoactive indicas, sativas and hybrids into the autoflowering strains we love today :D

thanks for presenting your findings and giving me a chance to ponder some cannabis theory ;)
 
It's not a new gene, there is no such thing as a "auto gene" this is a slap in the face to all photo breeders who feel autos are inferior because they have some imaginary "auto" gene there is no such thing. That was the whole point of this discussion thanks for stopping in:pass:
 
Last edited:
unless you have proof, saying there is no auto gene is no different than saying there is. Until we have a scientific study on autoflowering cannabis itself, it remains conjecture. The study you qoute suggests the possibility your right, but one study on a non-cannabis plant is far from adequate proof.

That said, your theory is an interesting one! Hope we see the answer to this someday soon!

:cool1:

It's not a new gene, there is no such thing as a "auto gene" this is a slap in the face to all photo breeders who feel autos are inferior because they have some imaginary "auto" gene there is no such thing. That was the whole point of this discussion thanks for stopping in:pass:
 
I believe you @Magic, in as much as I think it is quite possible for natural selection to have isolated a rare mutation when it makes the difference between completing a lifecycle or not.

It also fits with why Ruderalis is found in some places and why we get photo period plants dominating elsewhere in more favourable conditions. When conditions allow photo period plants to get bigger and finish they should outcompete any small autoflowers with a defective "veg gene".

Maybe it's a bit like dogs with floppy ears lol....that's a genetic defect that we have selectively bred with too.
 
I grow differently than most people here. I grow small plants in smaller containers, and I grow on a windowsill. I have my own strain that performs well in these conditions. I believe, that in at least some autos, autoflowering has a root trigger. I will grow siblings that are identical in every way. When I differ the containers( one in a 16 oz cup, and another in a 32 ounce cup) the plant in the 32 ounce cup takes longer to flower. I often see root tips in the holes in the bottom of the cups, shortly before flowering.
 
I grow differently than most people here. I grow small plants in smaller containers, and I grow on a windowsill. I have my own strain that performs well in these conditions. I believe, that in at least some autos, autoflowering has a root trigger. I will grow siblings that are identical in every way. When I differ the containers( one in a 16 oz cup, and another in a 32 ounce cup) the plant in the 32 ounce cup takes longer to flower. I often see root tips in the holes in the bottom of the cups, shortly before flowering.
That is one the main difference between photos and autos, when I photo gets root bound it can cause the plant to die, an auto will never die from being root bound it will only finish faster
 
Really not low and readin this right now so just tossing out a random stoner thoughts...

Been reading up on anxiety in people a little lately and there is some chemistry at work there. Could there be a sort of genetic and/or chemical tendency in auto plants to have a kind of super heightened survival instinct that lets them flower over anything or nothing at all, whichever comes first? If so, would there be ways to induce the right kind(s) of stress on photosensitive strains and trigger flowering under other than 12/12 light cycles? Furthermore, could the stress be induced over multiple generations to create autoflowering strains?
 
Back
Top