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: Line breeding vs hybridization

  • Subject: Re: Line breeding vs hybridization
  • From: Lewandjim@aol.com
  • Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 10:29:21 -0500 (CDT)

In a message dated 6/26/2001 1:56:40 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
edggon@hotmail.com writes:

<<    What I am trying to say (in my Tarzan's English) is that now we know 
lots 
 of examples of spontaneous or semi-spontaneous hybrids being treated as good 
 species by Linnaeus. >>

Eduardo,

We have no basis for disagreement. Hybridization has played a major role in 
the evolution of many plants and animals. Linnaeus' early work however did 
not separate "natural self-replicating populations" from man-induced 
non-stable genomes that were cultivars created by humans for our own pleasure 
(e.g., Canis familiaris). I think you would agree that only the natural 
populations fulfill what systematists consider to be "species".

    Jim Langhammer





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