Growers Beware

[syk613]

It seems to me they are not talking about genetics but the make up of certain elements that can be used to ID the source of a drug shipment ie a large amount seized and then the grow is also busted as is indicated in the report, links the source with the shipment. It seems a reasonable scenario that from the Nitrogen/carbon and their isotopes that a busted grow could be matched with a stash of mj but I doubt it has much relevance to ppl growing for perso. As far as fingerprinting goes they have already done a lot of work on mj sattelite markers andso before long they will probably have many strains readily id'ed by genetic analyse an eg of this work is in the MJ research forum (abstract)

[Chev]

I'm with sols, the only ppl I think it will be of concern to, is commercial/profit growers. I can't see this kind of testing for someone who's been busted with maybe 1 or 2 plants, and several clones or something. or even a few more. Just more scaremongering as pipe's already pointed out To a certain extent.

[wassily]

I'd like to be able to pull a little thingy out of my pocket and go to other stoners "Hey man, that pot came from Davo" or whoever.. That's about the only use I can see for it. Good party trick. Can you buy one on the web?

[RobbieGanjaSeed]

I think Sol's right. I read about this a while back, and I understood the impact to be more in line of being used to track large grows, and where they end up. I was reading the impact of this technology in USA, regarding it's supply of large quantities of weed from Canada. They want to try to track down "routes" of drug movment.

 

Hell, I might be wrong, but I can't see how clones/cuttings could be tracked. I could have a plant here that came from a commercial supplier, and then multiplied it several times to several people. It's such a mess of interaction, trying to prove a specific strain came from a specific address would never stand in court. it would be like trying to get a conviction because an offeneder was wearing blue jeans during a robbery, so all who wear blue jeans are in trouble? Just too diverse, and easily mutiplied quickly.

 

I really think it's for tracking what kind of quantities a big dealer is dealing and who might be involved in the line of sale. Say the cops bust a whole stack of weed in New york, or Sydney for that matter, over a period of time. All the same genetic gear.

 

Then say they happen on a large grower, and they test his genetic make up 9well the grass anyway), then they can try to get an idea how much business he's been doing. Even this is going to have more headaches in court than it will be worth I think.

 

I think if you're doing large sales, then aybe this is a concern. But other than that...

 

rob

 

PS. unless I'm missing something .

[Wezz]

I agree with Pipeman...It's not really a concern here unless -

a)it is grown outside and imported they may be able to find the source.

b)some one is busted and tells the cops where they got the pot and the cops can use this to identify the pot is the same

cIf it is an outside grow they will be able to source what country and where but not if it has been grown Hydoponitcly indoors unless they have a reference.

 

As mentioned...the only people who this could affect are big commercial growers. or some one who may have been Dobbed in by a informer.

 

 

btw Cuttings are not clones?...bullshit...Cuttings are clones... cuttings of a plant will have the IDENTICAL genetics to the parent plant.

I have a Qualification in Hoticulture and owned a wholesale nursery bussiness and can assure you Cuttings are clones.

[Luke Skywalker]

"Clones" are technically identical meritematic cells. The "cloning" you do when you take a cutting is not technically the same. If you were to "clone" mj properly you would need a laboratory and sterile specialised equipment. "cuttings" much as we'd like to think are genetically identical, aren't, they are different in microscopic subtle ways. This is why when you take 40 cuttings there is a difference between them, in growth and vigour. They may be genetically identical, but the environment they've been exposed to is different to that of the mother plant.

 

Cloning is different from cuttings, but we call it cloning because for all intents and purposes the mother and daughter plants are identical. The daughter plants are only identical to a branch of a plant the same age as the mother it was taken from, and that mothers expression itself is affected by the environment and conditions it grows in. A cutting is not the same as a clone because cuttings are not identical to the mother tissues they were taken from.

[boulder]

Micro-propagation

http://www.agnr.umd.edu/users/ipmnet/99-4nnws5.htm

[love4sensi]

I have spoken to the authurs of the research paper and asked if this testing can be used for clones. The answer is no. As they would require the mother plant for the test as well as the seized plants. The main purpose of the testing is for outdoor crops

[sols]

g'day; found this bit of info......

http://www.newscientist.com/hottopics/mari...dnaprofiles.jsp

DNA profiles link dope to its source

 

Forensic scientists in the US are applying DNA fingerprinting methods to the cannabis plant. They say the technique, which is being used to create a database of DNA profiles of different marijuana plants, will help them to trace the source of any sample.

 

"It links everybody together: the user, the distributor, the grower," says the database's creator, Heather Miller Coyle of the Connecticut State Forensic Science Laboratory in Meriden. "That's the real intent of it, to show it's not just one guy with a little bag of marijuana, but it's a group of people."

 

A method for spotting the tiniest traces of marijuana, based on detecting DNA unique to cannabis chloroplasts, has already been developed in the UK (New Scientist print edition, 7 August 1999). But the profiling method, based on the same principles as DNA fingerprinting of people, can distinguish between closely related cannabis plants (Croatian Medical Journal, vol 44, p 315).

 

In a case awaiting trial in Connecticut, prosecutors plan to use cannabis DNA profiles to show that two apparently separate cannabis growing operations were actually linked. The two operations, in different parts of the state appeared separate until analysis of the plants revealed that some had identical DNA fingerprints, showing that the growers were sharing material. "From the investigative point of view that was phenomenal," says Timothy Palmbach, director of scientific services at the laboratory.

 

Potent plants

 

The big difference between human and plant DNA fingerprinting is that in people, each fingerprint is almost certainly unique to one person. So if a crime scene sample matches a person's profile, there is little doubt that it came from that individual.

 

In plants, by contrast, identical clones are easily created by taking cuttings, a method growers often use to perpetuate potent strains of dope. So showing two samples have matching DNA profiles does not by itself prove they come from the same grower, let alone the same plant. But Palmbach says that growers tend not to give away cuttings of their best plants, so linking samples in this way is an important lead for investigators and will still be useful in tracing samples.

 

"What growers have done to get more potent plants has played right into our hands," says Palmbach. And if several matching profiles are found in separate samples, the chances are high that they are somehow linked.

 

Terrorist ties

 

Coyle is establishing a database of DNA profiles from hundreds of marijuana samples seized in Connecticut. "We want to track how many varieties are out there, what the trends in distribution are, the probability that a plant can be related to another," says Palmbach. The database is being extended to include samples from all over the US and the rest of the world. "We invite anyone to send us samples," says Coyle.

 

Exactly how law enforcement agencies will apply the method remains to be seen. If a link can be established between a user and a grower or dealer, casual users might find themselves in deeper trouble than they bargained for. "If you're buying marijuana from somebody with terrorist ties, it could be traced back to that person," warns Gary Shutler of the Washington State Patrol's crime laboratory division.

 

On the other hand, he says, where medical uses of marijuana are legal, the technology could help characterise strains with the desired medicinal properties. Several US states have voted to legalise the medical use of cannabis, though these efforts are being fought by federal authorities.

 

The technology will not help police investigating the production or sale of highly processed or synthetic drugs such as cocaine and ecstasy. Nor does the team think it would work with hashish, which is made from resin exuded by cannabis plants, as not enough cellular material can be recovered. If the cannabis profiling technique does prove to be an effective tool in investigations and in the courtroom, dealers may switch to selling hashish.

 

Sylvia Pagán Westphal

 

From NewScientist.com's news service, 09 July 2003

[Guest Guest]

ok,ok... what about this:

 

Someday it'll be legal. By then this test will probably be quick and easy to do. Then "they" can check if your dope is genuine government approved weed for which tax has been paid or if it's off the black market.

 

I haven't been stoned for days so this is a clear head writing ::