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: Hosta Buds


Dear Jean Carpenter,

You asked a series of questions about "buds" in your post of May 3. I
can repeat a couple of posts written back in August 1998 discussing this
subject. I will repeat the two posts independently. I hope the
information answers some of your questions.
> 
> >
> > Good Morning, Robins...
> >
> > Sometimes I initiate an e-mail discussion, sometimes I react. This one
> > is a reaction type. My apologies if it becomes a little longwinded and a
> > wee bit technical. It deals with my natural reaction to several previous
> > discussions made on "second flushes", bud cuttings, saving streaky forms
> > that have reverted, and similar related subjects which touch on hosta
> > morphology and physiology. I do not recall if the previous posts
> > emanated from the OLG, hosta-open or AHSE-MAIL Robin. It doesn't matter
> > except that my response may not go to all groups unless someone on any of
> > these groups takes the intiative to direct it there...(I do not want to
> > be an e-mail traffic cop directing cyberspace traffic).........but that
> > is another problem which I will not address herein.
> >
> > I want to talk (figuratively speaking) about the slightly incorrect
> > impressions which were laid on us by several participants in the various
> > discussions about "buds". Let me summarize these  impressions in a
> > manner which paraphrases the conclusions that were presented ( and
> > probably accepted because the subjects were not discussed further).
> > Several terms were used (IMHO) in a slightly incorrect fashion which
> > perhaps  further lead us toward incorrect conclusions. My purpose is to
> > try to diplomatically correct, modify, explain some of these
> > misinterpretations which may have arisen without starting a WAR. This is
> > not about personalities.......it is about concepts regarding plants,
> > their structure, functions and how we describe them.
> >
> > An anonomous Robin in responding to a question asked  about "second
> > flushes of growth" described it as a  "forcing of side shoots, being a
> > response of the plant to the failure to produce seed......(being) a
> > second try"................
> >
> > TO WHICH A SECOND GUY, WHO SHALL ALSO REMAIN ANONOMOUS,ASKED IN
> > UPPER-CASE LETTERS.......
> >    "DOES THAT MEAN THAT IF I TERMINATE THE SCAPE....AND IT FORCES ITS
> > DORMANT BUDS TO TRY AGAIN....WILL I HAVE MORE DIVISIONS IN THE SPRING??"
> >
> > That's when I threw up my hands and exclaimed.....this explanation is
> > too anthropomorphic, and furthermore, the terms used (for example, in
> > this case the term "dormant buds", give the wrong impression of what is
> > occurring morphologically and physiologically within the plant. The
> > discussion continued and evolved into questions being asked and answered
> > about bud cuttings, isolating buds.....then about streakiness being lost
> > and attempts made to recapure it by various means. The term "resting
> > buds" arose in the discussion to further complicate the physiological
> > phenomena involved.And no one caught the errors being made in describing
> > the bud "UNDER THE LEAF PETIOLE". ( If you have excised as many as I
> > have, you will know why I suggest that they be described as being
> > ABOVE...or in the axil of the petiole..... not below it.I lurked along
> > in the discussions even while in Canada, reading on Bill's computer in
> > the evenings but decided to await the final outcome and my return home
> > before entering the intellectual fray about buds. My name was mentioned
> > somewhere among the numerous messages so perhaps that means its my turn
> > and obligation to comment next.
> >
> > Since this message is getting long, I prefer to break it into two parts.
> > This part describes the background of the discussion so far. The next
> > installment represents my contribution to its continuation. OK?
> > (To Be Continued Later Today)...........................
> >
> > Jim Hawes Oakland MD
> > hawesj@gcnet.net


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE HOSTA-OPEN





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