DNA and pollen viability in hosta
- Subject: DNA and pollen viability in hosta
- From: z*
- Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 12:03:06 +0100
Dear Mr Schmid
I did read with interest your treatise on species In it you discuss
your species concept but not a single new fact is presented. I like
any comment, but as long as no new facts are presented most
remarks are considered speculative. I am not so eloquent but
should like to present the following facts:
1. Your book is based on "legally"" published Hosta species I like
to point that there are nearly 200 in that category
2. In your book you present 43 " good" species You cannot say at
the same time that in effect you did not believe your own choise.
"You cannot eat the pudding and keep it"
3.Our article is based on nearly hundred wild taxa, each of them
measured 5-10 times Therefore most standard deviations from the
species are around 0.2% as published.
4. Our article was refereed by three japanese! botanists
5. Our article is not only based on DNA amounts but also on pollen
viability Therefore I published that (longipes) Urajiro Hatchyo is a
partly sterile hybrid and its DNA content is too low to belong to
longipes or rupifraga.
6. Our article largely is in accord with the findings of Fujita , the
only person who studied the japanese species in detail in the wild
and on Chung who studied the Korean species in detail in the wild.
7. All this has been published a year ago. Copies of it are on three
places somewhere on the internet and I did send out about 50
reprints.
I am happy to be able to discuss this with you and hope that the
bureau of strategic Influence has no say on hosta matters
Ben J.M.Zonneveld
Clusius lab pobox 9505
2300 RA Leiden
The Netherlands
mintemp-16C(5F)
Zonneveld@RULbim.LeidenUniv.NL
Fax: 31-71-5274999
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE HOSTA-OPEN
