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
Gallery of Plants
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Mailing Lists
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
New Trillium species discovered

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

RSS story archive

Re: TC and OS

Chick wrote:
> Any time I can start a discussion that gets people upset with one another I get
> a rare sense of accomplishment.
> Jim, I don't do tc and don't know a lot about it, but question why if tc is as
> reliable as division, why are there so many culls in tc.  Are the culls only
> related to variegation patterns or do they cull plants that are not identical
> for any other reasons.  According to Alex Summers, the 'Aphrodite' tc plants he
> got had many different petal counts, so there are apparently some differences
> there too.  It also seems to me that some of the tc I have had don't seem to
> grow well as a group, but that could be due to cultural conditions.
> Chick
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the
Dear Chick, Ran and others interested,

- When two or more people enter into a discussion over a controversial

-When these participants have differnet experiences, interests,
backgrounds and scholastic training,

-When participants have different motives, personalities and skills in
expressing themselves,

-When terms used and meanings of words are different among these

-When no guidelines have been decided upon, regarding what is being
discussed and why.................

Then there is bound to be some differences of opinions and different
final positions taken by these participants in the discussion. This is
what has happened in our discussion about hostas derived from tissue
culture and originator stock. The discussion has nothing to do with
friendship between Ran Lydell and Jim Hawes which has been firmly
established and will last a lifetime. Nor has it to do with Chick's
skill in instigating a debate and getting people upset.

As I analyze the evolution of the discussion, it has wandered all over
the hosta landscape but has not focused on a principle issue. There is
no agreement of what we are talking about. One or two people may believe
that the issue of the relative merits of tissue culture rests on how
many "culls" result in tissue culture...as opposed to division
separation from originator stock parent plants. In my view, this is not
even the issue being discussed. Why? Because some among us are obviously
trying to compare two phenomena without fully understanding the
phenomena themselves.  This is obvious to me because of the erroneous
use of terms, lack of knowledge by some participants about the tc
process, the parameters used in defining measurements and their lack of
uniformity. I can give an extreme example to make my point..........

How can one say that OS is better, more reliable, works better....or any
other defintion to describe a qualitative or quantitative measurement
when you are comparing different things under different circumstances? 
For example, one can assume that OS may mean dividing a known,
true-to-type OS clump of a green Hosta cultivar into 20  divisions in
one specific season. They are all true to form next spring and may sell
for  a total of 100 dollars.

                     as opposed to:

An example of tissue culturing  an OS of Spilt Milk ( or any other
unstable, high priced  variegated cultivar) over a period of two years,
resulting in the production of 40,000 plants, of which 4000, let us say,
are true to type to the original OS plant and 35,000 are reversions
given a name 'Green Milk' which sell for two dollars each (70,000
dollars total) and 999 are worthless, unsaleable culls. There was one
sport which won some prizes and Mildred sold it to a rich Dutch
propagator for 2000 dollars, let's say.

In this example, which is "better"?

Now you get my point in this rediculous , exaggerated example! You can't
measure with validity the merits of one thing against another without
standardization of the parameters and the criteria used and without
evaluating the end products which result. Also, all of your assumptions
in the "model" being used must be accurate, understood and agreed
upon......and we haven't even initiated this essential task.

So fellows, let's back off this meaningless discussion. If you wish to
"formalize" it, organize it into a legitimate format with rules, agreed
assumptions, recognized accurate definitions of terms, etc. , then I
will continue. But if not, I don't want to waste valuable time on
meaningless disagreements.

Jim Hawes Oakland MD

PS I will try to address some of Chick's questions on tc in another
post......but even here, I have discussed these topics over and over so
many times before in various formats that I am becoming weary. Whatever
became of study on your own instead of asking others for their comments?
I know full well that a controversy is likely to continue.
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the

 © 1995-2017 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index