back / zurück
Abgeschickt von Darcy Gunnlaugson am 13 Februar, 2000 um 20:56:40
Antwort auf: Re: Hybrid names von Björn Johansson am 12 Februar, 2000 um 13:49:35:
: A hybrid is always a hybrid...
Yes, no argument with that. And it is deserving of named statis so confusion will not exist as to what it is. However, what is the name of a backcross of Gisela with Macranthos? And the name of that backcross, backcrossed with Gisela, or Macranthos, or Calcelous? If they all look the same there is no need to worry about names, but chances are far greater that these, and even many siblings in the original cross, will have very different characteristics. Hence my reason for suggesting names for distinct forms when referring to say X Ventricosum that has a white pouch and pink sepals/petal, as opposed to one that is an all pink form or an all white form.
: If two species have been crossed, and been registered with a greex name, then that name applies to ALL later plants with that cross.
This is the current state of thought on classification, but, is it not in need of some fine tuning??
All that you have explained and subsequently that which Michael has appended, is correct in terms of today's nomiclature. However, is it really accurate, and does it reflect accuracy? For example, I am one of three children, and we are not all called the same thing as the result of the cross between the same parents. My last name designates parentage, but my first name designates the differences in this cross between me and my other 2 siblings who are quite different from me. I believe this form of recognition will, and must eventially be seen in hybrids which show the genetic diversity I commented on in my first post. For this reason I suggested using previous names for X Ventricosum to designate distinct forms within this cross ( I see it as a variable complex).
For example Aki is the cross macranthos x pubescens. And all later crosses with the species macranthos (ANY form) crossed with pubescens (any form), is Aki. However - and this is important - if one turns the hybrid around, and make a pubescens x macranthos cross, then it is NOT Aki. To be the same hybrid, the pollen donor and seed pot plant has to be the same. So if pubescens have the seeds, then it's one hybrid, and is macranthos has them, then it's another one.
I beleive you are accurtate in your thinking here, but as Michael has noted, this is not recognized as it should be today.
So, I understand and generally agree.. and although Michael brings up an interesting point which is the standard of current thought on the matter, does it not bear further fine tuning? That which is current thought is only that, and things are destined to change and evolve as the result of forums like this. It was the reason for this topic in the first place. I believe there must be change as completely different colored clones, different shaped clones, etc...all from the same cross, need to be identified as different and not called the same thing.