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: mitotic recombination


Dr. Joe Halinar,

I want to thank you for making the extra effort in conducting the
literature review and research done in mitotic recombination ( also
known as somatic chromosome crossing over) phenomena as a possible cause
of sports in hostas, as claimed by Ben Zoneveld. Articles on this
subject in the AHJ have made these claims three times to date.

Personally, I have known of this term for more than 55 years when I took
my first class in Genetics in college. I had understood this phenomenon
to be an accepted operating mechanism in Genetics to explain how closely
linked genetic  characteristics  on the same chromosome may change their
relationships by mechanical changes in their relative  locations.

From your summary of the literature, you have convinced me that :
   1. it is not common, in fact, rare
   2.there is practically no research to prove its operation in higher
plants
   3.there is no known research of mitotic research in hostas, thus
   4.its explanation as a causal factor for sports is pure theory, not
based upon fact, without proof of any kind.

When I read Ben Zonneveld's first article in 1996, I assumed it was
based upon sound genetic information and was factual. I did not question
the POSSIBILITY that crossing over  could cause changes in gene
relationships on the same chromosome, thus I aassumed it could be a
valid causal factor. Because Ben would not answer questions raised, nor
even discuss his article, I began to DOUBT the validity of his
claims.Now you have convinced me completely that his claim is nothing
more than an unsubstantiated guess that it may be possible. This is
inadequate proof which does not pass the tests required in the
scientific method criteria. Thank you for erasing  any doubts in my
mind. I find the claims made by the author to be without merit
whatsoever. I wonder in whatever other parts  of his work, has he
demonstrated and practiced the same kind of sincerity, honesty and
ethics?.

Jim Hawes



---------------------------------------------------------------------
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