hort.net Seasonal photo, (c) 2006 Christopher P. Lindsey, All Rights Reserved: do not copy
articles | gallery of plants | blog | tech blog | plant profiles | patents | mailing lists | top stories | links | shorturl service | tom clothier's archive0
 Navigation
Articles
Gallery of Plants
Blog
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Patents
Mailing Lists
    FAQ
    Netiquette
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
Links
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
Disease could hit Britain's trees hard

Ten of the best snowdrop cultivars

Plant protein database helps identify plant gene functions

Dendroclimatologists record history through trees

Potato beetle could be thwarted through gene manipulation

Hawaii expands coffee farm quarantine

Study explains flower petal loss

Unauthorized use of a plant doesn't invalidate it's patent

RSS story archive

Re: Gold Standard changing to ?


zonneveld wrote:
 Why is is that if a single gene change can be so important
> that changing the identity of a pair of chromosomes as is happening
> in a mitotic recombinant  is to difficult to accept that it can
> give  al kind of new characteristics to such a sport.. Example of the
> latter:a green edged sport from a whole yellow plant. There is no
> suspicion, Ran,  that divisions of a single plant (originator stock!)
> can lead to different plants, that is a fact, even if they look
> similar at first sight.
> Ben J.M.Zonneveld

> Ben I have no intention of getting into a protracted discussino on this one.  You have veried my statment.  I said that a "reverting " (to all green) of a hycanthina "sport" let's say Arctic Rim, will be Hycanthina!  Same for Fortunei!  There is such a thing as becoming so scientific about the analsis of this that your thinking looses all pratical application.  We see in many plants slight variations within a maned cultivar.  The plant world allows for these samll variables for a good reason.  THEY ARE NOT IMPORTANT!  I really don't care if some tiny differences can be speculated on, you are in almost all cases specualting, and most dont need any more lookalikes to deal with, that someone says are (in theory) "perhaps" slightly different!  I have lived with this notion (promoted by several folks) for years, and yet there remains no actual case proof , that I am aware of.  Give me some proven cases.  While you are at it, Explain why I need to worry about why there are so ma!
 ny!
 small differences , even in a given "non reverted" cultivar.  The fact is for most of us it really is not important.  
Ran
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE HOSTA-OPEN





 © 1995-2015 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index