Have read about clone fade. Theory is that if you clone a clone over and over eventually you will wind up with dna errors. Kind of like making a photo copy of a photo copy over and over. Am wondering if anyone has a clue how many clones of clones of clones you can do before you start to see problems.
-
Do you need help identifying a 🌶?
Is your plant suffering from an unknown issue? 🤧
Then ask in Identification and Diagnosis.
cloning Clone Fade
- Thread starter AJ Drew
- Start date
Its a BS theory IMO. In another growing industry I can think of at least three cutting only strains that are over twenty five years old. And are in excellent condition. They have and continue to dominate the industry in quality. I'm assuming they are anywhere from 40+ generations of mothers. If there is a diminishing capacity, I don't think you will see it in your lifetime. Grant it, Maybe other species of plants act differently than the one I'm talking about.
thats my Two bits.
thats my Two bits.
As far as I was aware it wasn't so much a loss of genetic quality, it was a loss of core plant structure that causes the problem.. A branch of a branch of a branch of a branch ... The genetics of the plant has a set structure and when the smallest part is grown large and then has an offshoot grown large again and again eventually the plant says to itself , I've grown this extension as far as it should grow and the result is a smaller less productive clone at the long end of cloning .. Cloning the top of a plant can somewhat slow down the quality loss but it still only stretches so far through cuttings
Did you read about this in a high times from the 90's ? 
Cuttings of cuttings are known to lose vigour. I doubt that the "sea of green" is the same clonal material. Probably cuttings of fresh plants. Cos if you're growing clones to flowering then where you getting veg material from. The Dutch are very good at hiding business IP.
Anyways. I keep parent plants from seed and chop those up. Never cuttings from cuttings. Except if it is something that has a propensity for reproducing that way e.g. bulbs or succulents.
Anyways. I keep parent plants from seed and chop those up. Never cuttings from cuttings. Except if it is something that has a propensity for reproducing that way e.g. bulbs or succulents.
I certainly know little about this subject, but I do see a couple of flaws to this core structure theory.
I grew clones last year from established "woody" stems. If the plant was thinking about growth "behavior", it would have said "hey, I shouldn't be growing roots out of my higher branch wood stem". But it did, although it took 2 months in a cloner to do it.
Also, what about the Cavendish banana? These have been grown from "pups" for over 6 decades.
I grew clones last year from established "woody" stems. If the plant was thinking about growth "behavior", it would have said "hey, I shouldn't be growing roots out of my higher branch wood stem". But it did, although it took 2 months in a cloner to do it.
Also, what about the Cavendish banana? These have been grown from "pups" for over 6 decades.
MadDog said:
I'm more talking about the structure of a plant and its general areas for production.. a trunk is designed to support branches which in turn support fruit... when a branch becomes a trunk and the off-shoots become branches there is less availability in its genetics to grow as large an produce as much fruit.. and on cloning it further restricts it further... grow me fresh plant from a seed 10 feet tall... then try and grow a fourth generation plant as high.. if you get 4 feet I would be happy.
I'm not saying a plant doesn't grow anyway other then its original design.
I understand what you're saying, I'm just in agreement with hog leg. Just from an observational view I see holes. My example was a top level established branch, you could say it wasn't "designed" to sprout roots, and yet I've seen them do it. So a branch of a branch of a branch should be able to produce as much fruit given the right conditions.
My understanding of genes are they are software, and the coding is there for the entire structure. If I copy a copy of a copy of Adobe Photoshop, I end up with a complete identical working version of Photoshop. I realize that's simplified and there's a lot more going on in a living organism, but that's the gist of it.
There are no seeds in the Cavendish banana and they've been cloned for over 60 years, they haven't lost genetic material in the process.
Also, think about adult stem cells, these have the code for the complete structure available to them and can morph into what is needed at the time.
My understanding of genes are they are software, and the coding is there for the entire structure. If I copy a copy of a copy of Adobe Photoshop, I end up with a complete identical working version of Photoshop. I realize that's simplified and there's a lot more going on in a living organism, but that's the gist of it.
There are no seeds in the Cavendish banana and they've been cloned for over 60 years, they haven't lost genetic material in the process.
Also, think about adult stem cells, these have the code for the complete structure available to them and can morph into what is needed at the time.
So why does the clone loose 'Vigour' as its described . Because it's not a complete plant, merely a grown out part of one ..
Just as if I was to grow a human ear on a mouses back, the rest of the body doesn't grow back with it, but it will still get bigger until it reaches its intended genetic size ..
I don't admit to being any sort of expert in clones but I have grown other plants in clones, branches never cloned to more vibrant plants, however the top part of a plant was usually better as the top part is the most productive and features its own predetermined branching structure , it doesn't need to produce lobes in which to grow branches that where not part of the original design ..
I'm not saying clones are bad, I'm saying that a seventh gen clone can be not as good as the original plant, in peppers.
And about bananas , I'm not saying you loose genetics or DNA from cloning .... A clone is not a whole plant, it's part of a plant adapting to full fill the tequirments it needs to survive... More roots, leaves, branches, fruit .. But it won't be and can't be a whole plant it's merely a piece of one surviving as best as it can
And all plants are different, some plants are better as clones because a certain part of the plant responsible for fruit that only grows to a certain size can be used in a clone and it gives it the chance to grow larger making and more productive result ...
Just as if I was to grow a human ear on a mouses back, the rest of the body doesn't grow back with it, but it will still get bigger until it reaches its intended genetic size ..
I don't admit to being any sort of expert in clones but I have grown other plants in clones, branches never cloned to more vibrant plants, however the top part of a plant was usually better as the top part is the most productive and features its own predetermined branching structure , it doesn't need to produce lobes in which to grow branches that where not part of the original design ..
I'm not saying clones are bad, I'm saying that a seventh gen clone can be not as good as the original plant, in peppers.
And about bananas , I'm not saying you loose genetics or DNA from cloning .... A clone is not a whole plant, it's part of a plant adapting to full fill the tequirments it needs to survive... More roots, leaves, branches, fruit .. But it won't be and can't be a whole plant it's merely a piece of one surviving as best as it can
And all plants are different, some plants are better as clones because a certain part of the plant responsible for fruit that only grows to a certain size can be used in a clone and it gives it the chance to grow larger making and more productive result ...
We'll just have to agree to disagree, I think a clone is a whole complete plant, but I have heard research recently suggests that the clone's biological clock is still synced to the mother as far as age and lifespan.
I've got right now both a dragon and a mushroom clone I overwintered and they both already put their mommas to shame. Their fruit is bigger and there is more of it. They're growing in inferior conditions to what their mothers grew in too. Not very scientific though, could they just be superior because they're now 2 seasons old? Probably.
I've got no strong feelings towards clones one way or another and I do find what you're saying to be interesting ideas.
I've got right now both a dragon and a mushroom clone I overwintered and they both already put their mommas to shame. Their fruit is bigger and there is more of it. They're growing in inferior conditions to what their mothers grew in too. Not very scientific though, could they just be superior because they're now 2 seasons old? Probably.
I've got no strong feelings towards clones one way or another and I do find what you're saying to be interesting ideas.
I would have gone with " what's a high times?" for 500 alexajdrew said:
Clones do provide at least one very important purpose for someone like me that grows non isolated, I had 2 of 10 dragons last season that had some ridiculously giant fruit and I wanted to ensure their lineage in case my seeds crossed (which some did).
I think this question was for me. No I wasn't, but plants do have adult stem cells similar in some ways to mammals.hogleg said:
Robstar, because everything goes outside in the spring I do not run into the problem. Not enough cycles for the problem to show itself. But I do grow clone of clone, in part to keep down seed cost but also so I can grow sea of green of sorts. I lob off the tops and start clones to keep the plants at the same height. That way I can cram plenty of seedlings in the same area without growing palm trees. Cloning also saves tons on seeds. Will probably start ordering in my 2016 seeds soon as the process worked so very well last year. Not sure why more people dont do it.
Maddog - On isolation there are really easy solutions. You can bag a single plant or even just a branch. If growing in pots, you can stick a stake in the pot that is taller than the plant, cover it with a bridal cloth bag, and then tape the bottom around the pot. Works great.
Maddog - On isolation there are really easy solutions. You can bag a single plant or even just a branch. If growing in pots, you can stick a stake in the pot that is taller than the plant, cover it with a bridal cloth bag, and then tape the bottom around the pot. Works great.
I can think of a few people that are more like vegetables.hogleg said:
hogleg said:
Spot on.
Clones losing vigour is cannabis grower mumbo jumbo. It's too easy to apply common sense logic to plants and to come to believe that your well thought out theory is fact. Many of the cannabis "bibles" are the source of or contribute to the spread of much misinformation that is not supported by conventional horticulture or any scientific research.
Perhaps bible is the correct term, in that they are both collections of unverified information. (Forgive the offense, he knows not what he does. And is also a godless heathen.)
I've yet to see anyone support their argument with anything substantial, short of anectdotal references. While this type of evidence has its merit, the claim being made is that a genetic change is occuring through successive cloning. How one can confirm this mutation with the naked eye is beyond me.