Re: The big mystery

Rick

1.There is no reason to think that we are "genetic stuck".There are 100's of
pumpkins out there that can grow big ones and I'm sure that the hobby will
never self-destruct as you seem to suggest.

In any one year there will always be the better ones that will attract
attention and the poorer ones nobody will want to plant from.So the gene
pool progresses.

2.As you know,each seed in a pumpkin is somewhat different.The diversity in
everything from seed appearance to plant characteristics to fruit appearance
is very great.In 8 years of going to official weigh-offs I don't think the
top 10 pumpkins look any more similiar now than in the past.

Considering that there are so many good seed sources I think that more and more
the top fruit each year are the results of the growers growing conditions
and skill,attention to detail,motivation etc.There are no magic short-cuts.

These are only my observations and comments,I think the future is in good
shape,the hobby is well entrenched in North America and continues to spread
elsewhere.So just go out there next year,grow your personal best and you
will automatically be a winner.That's what it's all about.
                                                       Al Eaton





&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
&&&&&&&&&&&&
At 19:52 22/11/97 -0600, you wrote:
>Al,
>
>I agree, this has been a very interesting and enjoyable conversation.  
>Enough said, hugh!
>
>A miscellaneous thought came to me while reading your last message.  Do you
>suppose that part of the reason why it seems like the larger fruit are all
>coming from a narrow genetic base is because the elite group of major
>growers that consistently grow the big ones are using similar seed?  I
>realize it  would be feasible to understand them all choosing good
>background seeds that have good size in there background,  and leads them
>all to similar stock.   This may lead me to have hope that there is more
>seeds out there with excellent potential, that have very different genetic
>backgrounds that the "few major ones"   So is the seemingly narrow genetic
>base an illusion, or should I continue being depressed thinking that we are
>gentically stuck having all our potential derived from a few individuals?  
>
>I like your idea of the big picture of all the growers creating one massive
>and evolving gene pool.  It really makes sense and I think that it is what
>has been happening for the last xxxxx years, and the progress shows it is
>working.  Would you agree that this overall approach will lead us to
>creating an open pollenated, fairly consistant group of individuals that
>will kinda turn into a "variety" in and of itself?    Further, do you 
>think there is a need, or do you think there would be an advantage to
>having a true-to-type hybrid variety?
>
>A good question:
>
>	Does anyone have or know in particular about a line or certain cross of
>AGs that has been fairly reliable in producing uniformly?  Not necessarily
>huge fruit, but producing consistantly nice fruit.  This would be nice to
>have so that someone, with a little spare time, could do some controlled
>cultural studies and find out definitively what techniques work best.   
>
>]
>
>Rick
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the
>message text UNSUBSCRIBE PUMPKINS
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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