Bill,
Good point re GM hybridizing being faster than traditional methods. I
hadn't thought about that important difference. I assume the scientists
still have to do observation trials for a few years after selecting the
potential hybrids. I'm wondering what the turn around time is for GM
trials compared to "decades" for conventional hybridizing?
Your idea of identifying an apple variety that already has the gene that
imparts the trait that is wanted and then using conventional hybridizing
to develop a new cultivar from that makes good sense.
FYI An interesting piece of history from here in NB that is relevant to
this topic. Francis Peabody Sharp of Woodstock, NB was doing true
scientific hybridizing in the 1850s and he sped up his trials by cutting
off the tips of the hybridized seedlings/whips and grafting them onto
mature, bearing trees. One mature tree might have a dozen or more trial
hybrids grafted onto it. The resulting hybrids when grafted onto a
mature tree would bear their first apples in 3 to 4 years rather than
waiting for the experimental seedlings to grow to bearing age (6 to 10
years). Is that also being done today in experimental stations? It's an
area of horticulture I'm not very familiar with.
Daryl Hunter
On Fri, 2/27/15, Fleming, William <w...@montana.edu> wrote:
Daryl, The reason they breed by
manipulating genes rather than conventional breeding is
because it only takes years rather than decades to come up
with the desirable result.While I don’t have a strong
opinion either way on GMOs what I feel is a better use of
the technology is to identify the gene with the trait you
desire and what variety has that gene naturally then use
conventional breeding for the desired new fruit.Seems that might go over
better with the public once it’s explained, plus the crop
wouldn’t have to be labeled GMO if that ever comes
around. Bill FlemingMontana State
UniversityWestern Ag Research
Center580 Quast
LaneCorvallis, MT
59828
-----Original Message-----
From:apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net
[mailto:apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net] On Behalf Of
Daryl Hunter
Sent: Thursday, February 26,
2015 9:09 PM
To: Apple-crop discussion
list
Subject: Re: [apple-crop] arctic
apples Keeping with the Arctic Apple
discussion. The Arctic Apple is supposed
to be like no other apple in that they have turned off a
gene so that it does not turn brown like all other apples.
That statement is
misleading since there are apple varieties/cultivars among
the thousands of varieties that can be sliced and the pieces
do not turn brown. These are natural bee pollinated
genetics, not scientifically manipulated. I wonder why they would spend so
much money developing a non-browning apple when they could
easily do it the benign way? I think there is
more cost in marketing hype here than in the actual genetic
work. For example, here in New
Brunswick, Canada we have the Tangowine apple, dark purplish
skin, snow white sweet flesh with attractive pink streaks,
and cut pieces can be set on a table for days without
turning brown. It is also very resistant to scab. It was an
open pollinated apple found growing in a gravel pit. In their promotion of
the
Arctic apple they added a challenge, "Now if we could
just get rid of the seeds!" Well, we have seedless
apples here in New Brunswick too. Daryl Hunter
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop
_______________________________________________
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop
_______________________________________________
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop
