[SpaceAgeRobin] RE: RE: Space Age Genetics
- To: "Space Age Robin" S*@yahoogroups.com
- Subject: [SpaceAgeRobin] RE: RE: Space Age Genetics
- From: "Neil A Mogensen" n*@charter.net
- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 19:55:01 -0400
Chuck Chapman wrote: "A test of this would now
involve crossing TB X the plants that seem to "Inhibit" SA or could be 0 dosages
of SA. If the partial dominance theory is correct then this cross should produce
almost no SA as would the inhibition theory but F2 would sort out in a punnett
square analysis. I havn't yet checked if F2 would distinguish one idea from the
other."
The SAGE plan cross type 2 is exactly what you
suggest--non-SA-producing parents X SA. Francelle's seedlings suggest she
has this sort of thing going with those she mentions in her recent post. I
am in hopes she will let one of us try one or more of those seedlings, even
though they have not got the merit for "keepers" otherwise, they do have the F1
genetic profile, perhaps, you are describing.
It will take a back cross to the SA's to generate
SA's, one would assume. Interpreting those results, however, could get
hairy.
One thing that fascinates me are the
varied reports from Mike Sutton. Mike mentions that *most* TB's give
at least some SA seedlings when crossed with them. A few, such as YAQUINA
BLUE give not only advanced type (flounced for example) but quite a percentage
of them.
On the other hand, he mentions several that give
few or no SA's, such as Quito and Dynamite. Romantic Evening is another
that is a non-producer of SA offspring.
Yet, a child of Romantic Evening, WILD WINGS,
showed a single fall in a row in their field with a fully developed
flounce. This demands explanation, as normally such an event would be
iterpreted to be a sectional chimera where an enzyme or hormone had its DNA or
RNA track disrupted, allowing the flounce to be expressed.
Suggesting a deletion type event or a single locus
change of some sort is far easier to account for than any addition of a genetic
element. Chimeras of this type are nearly always destructive, not
constructive in nature.
We have much work to do!
Yahoo! Groups Links
|
- Prev by Date: Re: [SpaceAgeRobin] Re: Daubing report
- Next by Date: Re: [SpaceAgeRobin] RE: Re: More Mischief [Francelle]
- Previous by thread: Re: [SpaceAgeRobin] Re: Daubing report
- Next by thread: Re: [SpaceAgeRobin] RE: RE: Space Age Genetics