Re: 300 pound stock

Steve:
       Can't help myself;  your opion compaired to Al  Eatons.
Not in the same ball park, basketball court or any other court.
Kindergarden for you, masters degree for Al.
       You have a lot of gall trying at least, some may listen to
their demise & I feel sorry for them.




At 06:04 PM 5/10/00 -0400, you wrote:
>
>
>
>>Chris-you raise a classic question and I sometimes wonder about that too.
>>
>>My view is that every case is different but the odds are that the 800
>>pounder came from a sound plant but the 300 pounder could be a "dud".
>>
>>Under good conditions could the 300 pounder have been 400? 1000?.There is
>>no
>>way to know,therefore most people stay away from that question by growing
>>the heavier ones.
>>
>>It is interesting to speculate but facts are facts and it so happens I just
>>recently looked at 85 official pumpkins over 700 pounds from the last 2
>>years here in Canada and grouped the mothers by weight.
>>
>>mother weight 1000+  average offspring weight=808  number of cases= 7
>>                900+                           845                  22
>>                800+                           771                  20
>>                700+                           789                  17
>>                600+                           829                  11
>>                500+                           757                   8
>>
>>These are facts but what do they say re mother weight vs offspring??
>>
>>Are the results random or is there a pattern?
>>
>>I don't know the answer but would like to invite others to comment??--AE
>>
>
>Al, GREAT comparison! Interesting that over 1000 mothers actually produce
>lower than the 600 range! I think the problem is that there aren't enough
>pumpkins that the data is drawn from. I think that if there were a few
>thousand pumpkins all compared, it would show an increasing offspring weight
>with increasing mother weight, in the obvious order. It is simple "plant
>evolution". If only the plants that produce the biggest fruits are allowed
>to survive (well, reproduce anyway), eventually the "big" genetic traits
>will be dominant.
>Just like certain plants that can survive on mountain tops where no other
>plants can survive, they evolve that way, starting from a few plants that
>had the genetic stuff to allow survival long enough to reproduce. The
>genetic diversity paid off by allowing only the traits that will enable
>survival to be present in the gene pool for that species in that area.
>Therefore, over time, the plants will evolve to have these traits dominant.
>It is all a matter of survival. We are basically doing the same things with
>A.G.'s. If only the biggest fruited plants are crossed, they will just keep
>getting bigger. But of course we know there are faster ways to do this, by
>singling out and purifying some genetic traits, crossing, backcrossing to
>pick up other traits, etc.
>
>
>-Steve
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>Pumpkin-growing FAQ: http://www.mallorn.com/lists/pumpkins/search.cgi
>To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the
>message text UNSUBSCRIBE PUMPKINS
>
Thanks,
Bill Van Iderstine
Personal Best 862
AGGC : http://aggc.1wh.com/aggc.asp
 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Pumpkin-growing FAQ: http://www.mallorn.com/lists/pumpkins/search.cgi To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the message text UNSUBSCRIBE PUMPKINS
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index