Quantcast

The International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants

Slippertalk Orchid Forum

Help Support Slippertalk Orchid Forum:

eds

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2019
Messages
299
Reaction score
102
Location
Nottingham, UK
Nice comments eds. Now ------- regarding the amount of mutation ---- that will be linked to location too. Because eventually - one could assume that given a long enough time, eventually something is going to happen in a particular location. Amount also involves time, linked to rate.
Absolutely but given the length of the genome it is more likely that there won't be a mutation just where you want it, rather than there being one!

Also the cell nucleus tends to pack the more important coding sections of DNA nearer the centre so any radiation has to pass through the junk DNA first, protecting important genes and also the cell machinery to repair DNA will concentrate on protecting these vital areas too reducing the mutation rate.

And organisms that grow faster have more cell division so higher rates of mutation (as will areas of your body that grow / repair faster).

And if you will in an area of higher mutagenic influence (not just nuclear reactors...!) you can have a higher rate of mutation.

So the rate of mutation varies a lot but with some known markers in time, a lot of statistics and a bit of luck (or educated guessing) you can average it out onto a usable bit of information.

And if you've want to create mutations you can't really do much about the cells protection but you can increase its exposure to mutagenic elements. As I understand some people have done to some succulents in parts of the world to cause some bizarre mutations.
 

SouthPark

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2018
Messages
436
Reaction score
125
Location
Queensland, Australia
SB ------ yes, I think you're right. It does sound like the orchid naming system might need a review ------ or a re-think of terminology/words. Or at least an article from a major body (eg. RHS, AOS etc) be generated - that conveys a message about orchids ---- originals and divisions and clones ------- can/will mutate. So maybe even a clonal name for the original could scientifically be pointless ------ but at least still have some usage for trading, buying etc ...... as we just need to call it something in order to sell it or refer to it, or have discussions about a particular orchid.
 

SouthPark

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2018
Messages
436
Reaction score
125
Location
Queensland, Australia
Very nice post eds. I think that points like those ----- which should be considered, need to be included in an article from say AOS or RHS etc ------ so that it tells growers or warns growers (gives heads-up) on orchid names ------ such as regardless of division or clone or otherwise, the single quote names will be based on assumptions - with uncertainty involved.

This is all just ignoring other factors - such as possibility of picking up viruses and permanent disease, and also environment (growing/culture) factors - that can lead to colour and pattern differences in orchid flowers.
 

terryros

ST Supporter
ST Supporter
Joined
Nov 29, 2008
Messages
448
Reaction score
101
Location
Bloomington, MN
My reading is agreeing with what everyone here is saying. The only way to have an orchid that is truly identical to another is to get a division of the one.

What ever the tissue used and what ever chemical/physical process is used to provoke the tissue to make protocorm-like bodies that differentiate into new plants, the chance for variation is high. The change can be actual genetic change or it can be altered gene expression during development. Either way, the resulting plant may be noticeably different from the parent. We all think we should know whether we are buying a division or some type of clone.
 

southernbelle

ST Supporter
ST Supporter
Joined
Nov 18, 2018
Messages
553
Reaction score
262
Location
Spotsylvania, VA
I just took a look at the etymology of the word “clone” and it was coined in 1903 as “clon” to indicate any piece of vegetative material used for asexual reproduction (which might support what I called the “sloppy use”of the word), but it was actually further limited to tissues that were used for grafting, for which a division would not qualify.

While that might support my assessment of broad, sloppy use, if we - the orchid community - could agree to commonly use “clone” as a general term and “mericlone” to indicate a plant grown from meristematic tissue culture, we might be better off.

Hmmm... Reading what I just wrote makes me think we need to differentiate “tissue culture” a different category, as well. Just about every chrysanthemum we’ve ever seen is cultured from stem end cuttings. Not exactly a “division”, but certainly not cultured meristematic tissue, either.

So, knowing that to a plant, the meristematic tissue is a cluster of living, undifferentiated cells (equivalent to “stem cells” in animals) that can develop into pretty much any kind of living tissue, it would seem that - in terms of being identical to the “donor” plant - divisions (including keikies) come the closest, tissue cultured plants (including phal inflorescence culture) would be next, and mericlones being the least reliable.

I suppose tissue-cultured plants are also as identical as divisions, but I suppose the chemical treatments used to induce growth might cause genetic shifting, so I’ll mentally hold onto that difference.

(edit/post script). This is precisely why I really like this forum. We get into discussions of import, and help each other come to agreement or civil, settled-on disagreement, rather than just “Here’s a picture of my flowering plant”, or “Jane, you ignorant ****” commentary.
😄😁😂🤣 The last line took me back a few years!! I wholeheartedly agree, Ray. From someone who grew on windowsills for 20+ years and could get nothing to bloom but Phals, before moving to a controlled environment under lights 3 years ago, this forum is very valuable. A lot of gray matter here from deep thinking individuals (way beyond my level of expertise) who share info, experience and perspectives from all over the planet mostly with unusual humility and civility in these times when both are rare.
 

southernbelle

ST Supporter
ST Supporter
Joined
Nov 18, 2018
Messages
553
Reaction score
262
Location
Spotsylvania, VA
My reading is agreeing with what everyone here is saying. The only way to have an orchid that is truly identical to another is to get a division of the one.

What ever the tissue used and what ever chemical/physical process is used to provoke the tissue to make protocorm-like bodies that differentiate into new plants, the chance for variation is high. The change can be actual genetic change or it can be altered gene expression during development. Either way, the resulting plant may be noticeably different from the parent. We all think we should know whether we are buying a division or some type of clone.
Not to go off on another rabbit trail, but it begs the question of how (other than the obvious 3N, 4N, 5N changes) colchicine treatment fits into all of this?
 

SouthPark

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2018
Messages
436
Reaction score
125
Location
Queensland, Australia
This is precisely why I really like this forum. We get into discussions of import, and help each other come to agreement or civil, settled-on disagreement, rather than just “Here’s a picture of my flowering plant”, or “Jane, you ignorant ****” commentary.
Ray --- you ignorant ******!!!!! -------- is certainly not a nice thing to say to somebody for sure heheh. Us guests on somebody's forum have to set good examples for everybody. Good to have you as a moderator here.
 
Last edited:

southernbelle

ST Supporter
ST Supporter
Joined
Nov 18, 2018
Messages
553
Reaction score
262
Location
Spotsylvania, VA
Thank you Belle for contributing with your twin story - I think, we can conclude from it and Ed's expounding on it, that genetics is a much more complex thing than most of us imagine!

Maybe, it actually is like snowflakes: all built on a hexagonal foundation, but with myriads of forms - and inuits having hundreds of ways of describing snow!
#wisdom
 

monocotman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2009
Messages
1,973
Reaction score
615
Location
Cambridge, UK
Southernbelle, the issue of polypoids in meristem culture is interesting. I remember in one of the cattleya forum talks on YouTube, one of the speakers spent time looking for them in populations produced from tissue culture.
He looked for plants that were slower growing and smaller than their peers in a group of mericlones. His idea was that these could be tetraploids which would be more useful to him in breeding. He did find them at low frequencies. When they eventually flowered they could be slightly different to the others, larger blooms with fuller petals etc. These would be ok to rename as they were clearly different to the rest of the group.
 

Ray

Orchid Iconoclast
Staff member
Moderator
ST Supporter
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
3,537
Reaction score
396
Location
Oak Island NC
Ray --- you ignorant ******!!!!! -------- is certainly not a nice thing to say to somebody for sure heheh. Us guests on somebody's forum have to set good examples for everybody. Good to have you as a moderator here.
In case you’re not aware... There used to be a political debate show called “Point, Counterpoint”, that got a bit heated at times (but nothing like the BS on tv these days). Saturday Night Live did a comedy take on it with Dan Ackroyd and Jane Curtin. His opening response was “Jane, You ignorant s l u t.”. (Had to space out the letters to avoid having the forum software asterisk it out again...)
 

NewYorkBuilt

ST Supporter
ST Supporter
Joined
May 18, 2016
Messages
8
Reaction score
6
Location
Sayville, New York
I have thoroughly enjoyed reading through this thicket of opinion and fact on nomenclature and practical applications of science and academic compromises. After thirty years of moderating panels of arts managers and artists gathered to award philanthropic and tax-based arts funding, this same process occurred in conflicted detail over things like "performance art" or "video documentation versus live audit."

If memory serves me, one might, in keeping with the SNL theme retort, "Dan, you pompous ass!" But I prefer this genteel and erudite conversation.

Y'all are not alone! But I jus' like the purtty flowers, in my humblest opinion. Please continue!
 

Phred

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2015
Messages
634
Reaction score
564
Location
New Jersey
That is why we need a clear distinction between a division (the vegetatively propagated plant) versus the mericloned plant. However, witch no agreement on how to denote this on a label and with so many uncertain plants out there, we are probably lost anyway. I am only confident that my Paphiopedilum Maudiae ‘Bankhaus’ (aka ‘The Queen’) is a division of the original plant from way back and this is because of provenance AND the fact that slippers are minimally cloned. I couldn’t have much confidence that any classic species or hybrid Cattleya was a true division from the original line.
And just to add another twist to the conversation... divisions of a plant are not always genetically identical. In the genus Hosta many of the plants registered each year are plants referred to as ‘Sports’. A ‘Sport’ is a mutation that occurs as a plant increases in numbers of eyes (growths). At a point the plant may produce an eye... leading to a new growth that is totally different from the original plant. The new growth can be different in many ways... color, solis or variegation, size of plant, size of leaf, leaf shape, texture, wavy or not, shiny or not etc. an example of one of my Hosta with a sport is below. The original plant is variegated and the sport is gold. I wish Paphiopedilum did this.2A7DF113-0E6A-4AB6-84DD-31ED822AB487.jpeg
 

southernbelle

ST Supporter
ST Supporter
Joined
Nov 18, 2018
Messages
553
Reaction score
262
Location
Spotsylvania, VA
And just to add another twist to the conversation... divisions of a plant are not always genetically identical. In the genus Hosta many of the plants registered each year are plants referred to as ‘Sports’. A ‘Sport’ is a mutation that occurs as a plant increases in numbers of eyes (growths). At a point the plant may produce an eye... leading to a new growth that is totally different from the original plant. The new growth can be different in many ways... color, solis or variegation, size of plant, size of leaf, leaf shape, texture, wavy or not, shiny or not etc. an example of one of my Hosta with a sport is below. The original plant is variegated and the sport is gold. I wish Paphiopedilum did this.View attachment 23603
Phred, interesting!! I've never seen this in Hostas, but I did have it happen in a Hybrid Tea Rose. A variety I grew, Color Magic, that is changing depths of pink in one flower had a particular bud eye develop a sport which was white with a light pink edge. I noticed the difference (pretty obvious) and mentioned it to someone in the American Rose Society who brought it to Jackson Perkins attention. We sent it to them and they grew it for a few years but it did not materialize into an exceptional flower, so was never marketed. However, this was not a division as the eye on your hosta produced. It took tissue grafting to grow this rose sport apart from the mother plant (as Hybrid Teas are grafted and don't divide). But, would sports not be more obvious genetic mutations (jumps if you will), versus minor changes over time in certain other things we've been discussing?
 

terryros

ST Supporter
ST Supporter
Joined
Nov 29, 2008
Messages
448
Reaction score
101
Location
Bloomington, MN
I know that Orchids Limited, and probably many active breeders, has started using a chemical other than colchicine for the induction of polyploidy. This can be used on a germ cell cross or during the mericloning process. Sorry that I am not remembering the name, but it is safer (and maybe easier) to use. They are producing more tetraploid species and hybrids with some types of orchids. For example, I have a plant from a polyploid conversion (this one with colchicine) they did on a mating of two typical diploid Cattleya trianae. The buds are currently clearing the top of the sheath. I might get deformed flowers or something substantially larger and improved. If the future is tetraploid/polyploid, our standards for things will change. New hybrids using tetraploid species could be as good as many outstanding old complex classics that we can only obtain expensively through suspect divisions and mericlones. I think many of the outstanding species and hybrids in the past were spontaneously polyploid during natural or artificial breeding. Polyploidy was with us from the first outstanding species cultivars that were imported; there may now be a resurgence of polyploid species and hybrids. Some will prefer natural diploids. Others will want the larger, prettier flowers of polyploids. With current judging standards, I think polyploids will almost always win.
 

Phred

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2015
Messages
634
Reaction score
564
Location
New Jersey
(as Hybrid Teas are grafted and don't divide). But, would sports not be more obvious genetic mutations (jumps if you will), versus minor changes over time in certain other things we've been discussing?
southernbelle... with woody plant material, and I assume this applies to roses as well, the mutation is called a 'Witches Broom'. Most oddball varieties of tree and shrub come from this kind of mutation. Someone notices a new type of growth that is interesting. Cuttings from the mutated growth are taken and, as with your rose, are grafted onto a hardy rootstock and grown on for sale or display. Not all are commercially viable though so many never make it into trade. An example would be the White Pine (Pinus strobus) and the numerous mutations that came from it. The mutations are called 'Cultivars'
Some commonly available P. strobus cultivars include:
P. strobus 'Nana' - Dwarf White Pine.
P. strobus 'Fastigiata' - Narrow upright growing White Pine.
P. strobus 'Pendula' - Weeping White Pine.
 

southernbelle

ST Supporter
ST Supporter
Joined
Nov 18, 2018
Messages
553
Reaction score
262
Location
Spotsylvania, VA
southernbelle... with woody plant material, and I assume this applies to roses as well, the mutation is called a 'Witches Broom'. Most oddball varieties of tree and shrub come from this kind of mutation. Someone notices a new type of growth that is interesting. Cuttings from the mutated growth are taken and, as with your rose, are grafted onto a hardy rootstock and grown on for sale or display. Not all are commercially viable though so many never make it into trade. An example would be the White Pine (Pinus strobus) and the numerous mutations that came from it. The mutations are called 'Cultivars'
Some commonly available P. strobus cultivars include:
P. strobus 'Nana' - Dwarf White Pine.
P. strobus 'Fastigiata' - Narrow upright growing White Pine.
P. strobus 'Pendula' - Weeping White Pine.
Interesting!
 

Latest posts

Top