Re: Pumpkin size - Seed size
In a message dated 5/19/00 4:21:45 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
pumpkinsandchess@yahoo.com writes:
> Steve, you say that "Evolution doesn't really have anything to do with
> "babying" our plants." That doesn't really affect the genes at all" I
>would
> have to disagree. Babying our plants doesn't allow undesirable traits
>fall
> away, thus they are not evolving since evolution is the process of
> eliminating these genes. Babing the plants in the AG community is
>selecting
> some good genes but also a lot of bad genes. There are many genes that
>would
> be selected against that we as growers don't allow. And I would
How the plants are cared for would not make any traits "fall away" or make
any be gained, but it could MASK traits, especially bad ones (as you said in
an earlier post), so that they do not factor into our decisions on making
crosses. But the traits a plant is "born" with are always there, no matter
how the plant is taken care of culturally.
Plant evolution has nothing to do with any individual plant changing in any
way. It is simply the process of which plants are allowed to thrive, (either
determined by nature, or us), which determines the makeup of the available
gene pool. It is basically the process of elimination by what seeds from
which plants are allowed to grow on and breed. Individual plants do not
spontaneously change their own genetics.
>also have to
> say that seed production is caused by stress. Try keeping the nitrogen
>high
> when trying to set fruit. It doesn't work too well. This is because the
> plant feels no need to reproduce itself.
I don't think that plants really can make intelligent decisions like this!
(Although wouldn't that be cool?)....but evolution of them might have made
them more likely to produce seed FIRST. So if there is a limited supply of
nutrients, it could trigger more energy to be focused on seed production.
When there is a good supply of nutrients and there is no stress, more energy
might be put into fruit production as well as seeds. Remember that the fruit
os also a necessary part of reproduction, since the purpose of the fruit was
a way to get animals to eat and distribute seeds, over millions of years,
only the plants that produced edible fruit that were most attractive to
animals were able to repsoduce, passing on these traits. Over time, if we
allow plants with less seed to pass on it's traits by planting those few
seeds, eventually seed production of this line will get weaker and weaker,
until there are NO seeds, then (unless we start cloning) obviously this will
cease to happen. But how do you think seedless watermelons were developed?
Not stress. It is all genetics.
> You also said "Of course we should also focus on seed production,
>too.
> But over time, this will take care of itself, since obviously if there
>are
> not many seeds, the trait that causes this will stop being passed on! "
>I
> don't think it is a specific gene that can be selected against. I think
>it
> is more of a gene that all plants have. Greg
>
I'm not sure what you mean. It isn't one "gene", it is just another trait
like any other property of a plant. If we tried, we could probably breed
them to be seedless (or almost seedless). But who would want to do that, (on
purpose, anyway)?
-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
