Re: HYB: sterility (was CLARENCE is a winner; so is SUKY)
- Subject: Re: HYB: sterility (was CLARENCE is a winner; so is SUKY)
- From: c* s*
- Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 11:26:24 -0600
From: celia storey <storey@aristotle.net>
Dr. Zurbrigg writes:
>SUKY is pod
>sterile, so do not bother to try to cross on it; use its pollen instead,
>which is quite fertile.
This is a basic question, perhaps too basic to be answered here. Perhaps I
should go get a botany text. But can anyone tell me in layman's terms why
-- why -- sometimes a plant is pod-sterile even though its pollen is
fertile?
Just so you'll know I'm not totally lazy, I searched the archives for "pod
AND sterile" and came up with 23 postings, none of which explain why it
happens. Rick Tasco suggested that most irises are pod fertile and that pod
sterility is rare. Someone else suggested sterility may come and go from
year to year. Another fellow quoted someone else who said there are no
infertile irises, only irises who haven't found the right partners. (I
think that last was a joke.)
To remove one level of difficulty from whatever answer may arise, I do
understand (I think) the concept of limited fertility, and also that
different species may have too little in common chromosome-wise to
fertilize one another. But why are some plants pod-sterile but
pollen-fertile?
Could such an iris be considered, well, male? Shouldn't it get a boy name? ;->
celia
s*@aristotle.net
Little Rock, Arkansas, USDA Zone 7b
-----------------------------------
257 feet above sea level,
average rainfall about 50 inches (more than 60" in '97)
average relative humidity (at 6 a.m.) 84%.
moderate winters, hot summers ... but lots of seesaw action in all seasons
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, or to change your subscription
to digest, go to the ONElist web site, at http://www.onelist.com and
select the User Center link from the menu bar on the left.
