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


> --- In iris-talk@egroups.com, Gerry Snyder <gerrysnyder@m...> wrote:
> > PAUL BLACK wrote:
> > > ....  That is one of the hazards of
> > > working with recessive patterns is that they are usually weaker.
> > Any ideas about how much of this effect is directly caused 
> > by the visible recessive patterns, and how much by other genes 
> > that got concentrated in these cultivars by the line-breeding 
> > used to develop them?
> This is a good question, one that I have pondered myself. Part of it 
> seems to be the number of idividual plants that you are selecting 
> from.  When you have more individual plants of the same pattern to choose
> from, you have a better chance to get a hardy, good formed plant.The
> recesive genes will produce less plants in the initial cross and thus you
> need to work with what you have. I also expect that there is some weakness
> from the line breeding. I have also noticed that some combinations will
> reduce vigour and form , just by their genes (apparently). An example of
> this is the broken colour TBs.  In crosses that produce broken colour and
> regular plicata seedlings, the broken colour seedlings have poorer form
> and are less vigorous than their regular plicata siblings when otherwise
> their genetics should be very similar.
I don't know iris genetics specifically, but I hypothesize that the "bad
form" gene and the "broken color" gene are close together on the chromosome.
The original "broken color" genetic material may be from a single or limited
number of sources and that particular link on the chromosome just hasn't
been broken.  Or maybe it has by now; some "broken color" iris are beginning
to show improved form.  I absolutely agree that line breeding is likely the
culprit in habitually weak classes of iris.  The recessive pigmentation
patterns themselves are unlikely to be inherently linked to poor growth
habits, although the same "adjacent genes" theory might apply.

Does anyone know the dominant/recessive nature of the gene(s) responsible
for the neglecta pattern?

John Reeds

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!

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