Re: 23 species or less?
- Subject: Re: 23 species or less?
- From: h*@open.org
- Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 11:42:02 -0800 (PST)
Ben:
>Thanks very much for your valuable and sound reply This must be
>about the first I received from anyone of the Hosta society since
>my paper appeared a year ago.
I think a lot of hosta people like the idea of your research with DNA
content in hostas. What they don't like is your refusal to give
details or to respond to criticism of your techniques.
First, I appreciate your research with DNA content and this is
valuable information, BUT it is only ONE piece of information. This
information has to be used in conjunction with other data, such as
geographic distribution, karyotype, chromosome banding, anatomy and
various genetic traits. You can't just take your DNA content and say
one hosta is a species and another isn't just because of the DNA
content.
Second, you have not given us any indication of what the standard
deviation is for you data. If the SD is 1 pg, then your 95%
confidence level is plus or minus 2 pg. Thus, if you say a certain
hosta has 30 pg DNA, then at the 95% confidence level your DNA content
is 30 +/- 2 pg. Thus, the hosta can have a DNA of 28 to 32 pg. If
you have another hosta with 29 pg, it's 95% confidence level is 27 to
31 pg. Since there is so much over lap of the results there is no way
you can say they really have different DNA content.
I've seen some of the flow cytomotery work done by lily hybridizers
and they generally feel good just to be able to seperate diploids from
triploids from tetraploids. I don't know of any research in any other
plant genera where people are claiming that the DNA content can be the
sole criteria for seperating species. Your DNA research is cetainly
valuable, but it has to be used within its limititations.
Joe Halinar
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE HOSTA-OPEN
