Re: propagation: genetic drift in clones
- To: Multiple recipients of list <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Re: propagation: genetic drift in clones
- From: Henryanner <Henryanner@aol.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 20:22:16 -0600 (MDT)
Linda Mann, considering the possibilities of "genetic shift" asked:
<< The reason I am asking is because I am wondering if it matters in terms
of climatic adaptation what part of the country I order some of the
older historics from. >>
Now, Anner don't know diddlysquat about no "genetic shift", but, at the risk
of oversimplification she offers the thought that the older historics tend to
be fairly adapatable and tough. That is how they got to be older historics.
Having said that let me also say that irises are perennial plants and, where
possible, it never hurts to get perennial plants from a climate not
dissimilar to one's own.
And, in support of the above statement, I observe that it has been a
horticultural commonplace since the seventeenth century to note that a plant's
settling-in tended to be more difficult when it was moved into growing
conditions worse than those it came from.
Here in urban Zone 7 I've done pretty well with older historics from all over
the country. And I think that there are a great number of non-genetic
variables impacting the situation when the rhizome meets the soil.
Now, with roses I will tell you that some have indeed been thought to have
lost vigor through the passage of time. That is, having been artificially
propagated through cuttings--which is not the same, I think, as cutting off
the normal increase on an iris rhizome--they appear to have now have a
diminished capacity to flourish.
This then, for what it is worth.
Anner Whitehead, Richmond,VA
Henry Hall Henryanner@aol.com