Hybrid vs. Heirloom

[Douglas_OW]

Things could be worse. How would you like to have to categorize OP Dogs:

http://blogs.discovery.com/daily_tre...-to-mutts.html

Jim

[joseph]

Originally Posted by carolyn137

Anyone grow any grexzes lately?

I grow lots of grexes and clades. I prefer growing them much more than hybrids, OPs, or heirlooms.

[carolyn137]

Originally Posted by Douglas_OW

Things could be worse. How would you like to have to categorize OP Dogs:

http://blogs.discovery.com/daily_tre...-to-mutts.html

Jim

It was announced yesterday that mutt's will allowed at the Westminster Dog show in NYCity, which is the premier event for dogs in the US.

But they can't compete for best in show in any category.

Carolyn, who was rised with purebred dogs when she was youg, for Pepper, an English Setter , then Ginger, a Beagle, then a chihuahua ( too lazy to look up the spelling, a gift not asked for,but has known more , shall we call them cutt's, as in here Kitty.

[carolyn137]

Originally Posted by joseph

I grow lots of grexes and clades. I prefer growing them much more than hybrids, OPs, or heirlooms.

I know you do Joseph, but as Keith M has pointed out to you elsewhere you aren't developing landraces, as you say, rather, you are growing populations.

But let us not turn this thread into one of landraces vs populations, thank you.

Carolyn

[joseph]

Originally Posted by carolyn137

But let us not turn this thread into one of landraces vs populations, thank you.

Sure thing... I reserve those types of discussions for other venues.

[carolyn137]

Originally Posted by joseph

Sure thing... I reserve those types of discussions for other venues.

I guess I didn't explain myself very well.

The other venue,aka, message site where I know you've posted a lot about landraces and where Keith posted in the same thread with you was at idig, as you know and where a group has now been formed that deals only with landraces.

But I was referring to here at Tville where you've also posted about landraces in several threads/posts.

My only thought was to keep the content of this thread as best as possible on a single track without veering off,again, to another track,with which you already know is contested and complicated when it comes to landraces as evidence from threads here and at idig have shown,

I'm sorry I wasn't as clear as I could have been.

Carolyn

[joseph]

I meant to say... That once I became aware that at least one moderator on tomatoville doesn't seem to me to want discussions about landraces I am avoiding any sort of detailed posting about landraces on this site. You really don't have to worry about me hijacking a thread... People that want my opinion on the topic can get it from many other venues.

The only thing I have to say in this forum on the topic of this thread "Hybrids Vs Heirlooms" is that there are other options such as grexes, clades, landraces, and populations. I have found that they fit my needs much better than hybrids, OPs, or heirlooms.

It seems to me like people in the biological/agricultural world can be divided into splitters and lumpers... The splitters like things to be categorized, and separated, and purified... This tendency gives rise to two groups of growers. The first group attracts both the people that love heirlooms/OP and the people that love standardized F1 hybrids. These seem to me to be purists who focus on keeping things separate and distinct and exactly the same from year to year. I believe in a different way of growing. I represent the lumpers. People that don't care about purity, or pedigrees, or stories, or stability, or consistency. We don't care if our dry beans are different colors, or even if all the dry beans in a lot are the same species. The lumper mentality is more about playing a game of genetic roulette and seeing what survives. When we get it right for a particular garden it's really right.

[Heirloom gard]

I like heirlooms. Personally I think that hybrids and GMO's if allowed too will destory the earth or at the very least humanity as we know it.

Fact: bees that visit GMO corn die

Fact: most corn grown in usa is GMO

Fact: bees are in serious trouble

Keep in mind that without bees many. . . MANY things will die.


That being said I do sorta like the sounds of new hybrids Sweet million/ect.

But last years experience with Heirlooms was GREAT. I grew Dragon tounge beans, blue patatos and jimmy nardello peppers

[carolyn137]

Originally Posted by joseph

I meant to say... That once I became aware that at least one moderator on tomatoville doesn't seem to me to want discussions about landraces I am avoiding any sort of detailed posting about landraces on this site. You really don't have to worry about me hijacking a thread... People that want my opinion on the topic can get it from many other venues.

The only thing I have to say in this forum on the topic of this thread "Hybrids Vs Heirlooms" is that there are other options such as grexes, clades, landraces, and populations. I have found that they fit my needs much better than hybrids, OPs, or heirlooms.

It seems to me like people in the biological/agricultural world can be divided into splitters and lumpers... The splitters like things to be categorized, and separated, and purified... This tendency gives rise to two groups of growers. The first group attracts both the people that love heirlooms/OP and the people that love standardized F1 hybrids. These seem to me to be purists who focus on keeping things separate and distinct and exactly the same from year to year. I believe in a different way of growing. I represent the lumpers. People that don't care about purity, or pedigrees, or stories, or stability, or consistency. We don't care if our dry beans are different colors, or even if all the dry beans in a lot are the same species. The lumper mentality is more about playing a game of genetic roulette and seeing what survives. When we get it right for a particular garden it's really right.

Joseph, if you go to the bottom of this page you'll see a long list of Moderators for different Forums here, then Mishka, the admin and then two Global Mods, Craig (nctomatoman) and myself, who try to keep threads moving on topic, edit where we think it best to do so, etc.. For General Discussion it's just Craig and Mischka and myself and M and C have lots on their plates right now so I'm the one who is trying to read as many threads in this Forum asI can.

So I am the Moderator you refer to in your post above.

The copy of your initial post that I received at home is quite different from what you edited it to now, and I really liked the last paragraph you wrote in the original one.

You keep speaking of other venues, so for folks who are interested, here's a couple of links to idig where you have spoken extenively about landraces and cross pollinations.

Two comments, in one of them I even gave you references on how to attract pollinators, a new book that's out now, so clearly I'm not opposed at all to discussions of landraces when done in context.

Second comment, in the one link from idig Olerist is Keith M who commented on your use of the word landrace and said they were populations, not landraces.

Here's some links;

http://idigmygarden.com/forums/showt...ight=landraces

This second one is where Keith posts and you show pictures:

http://idigmygarden.com/forums/showthread.php?t=62288

I did a search here at Tville about landraces and there were several threads where you posted a lot about landraces, but I forgot to move them to my faves, so don't have links and I don't want to go back to fetch and lose this post., but they are here at Tville as well.

So no one is saying it's wrong to post about landraces, rather, as for myself as a Global Moderator I was just trying to keep the thread on topic as best I could, that's all.

Thanks in advance for your understanding and let's go forward now with those who wish to do so .

Carolyn

[clkeiper]

Originally Posted by Germinator

I have a question
I am experimenting with grafting this year and wondering if I should try to graft a hybrid to a rootstock? Seems like the reason you use a hybrid is for disease resistance and that is exactly why I am grafting heirloom to rootstock.

Would love to hear any opinions/facts out there. Carolyn??

I attended a grafting seminar last week presented by OARDC (Ohio research and development center). The main reason (but not the only reason) grafting is needed it to overcome the soil born diseases in your particular soil/area. There is research being done and a chart being developed by them also that is a compatibility chart between available rootstock material and varieties that take well on them. Grafting won't help to avoid any diseases on the foliage such as blight. His other comment was there is an increase in production on some, but not all plants, maybe the need to use less fertilizer and fewer plants in a particular area. The roots are much larger and maybe need less additional watering in arid areas, too. THOSE were the main ideas I took away from the seminar.

[Redbaron]

I would like to point out to both Joseph and Carolyn a couple of things.

1) It is true that Joseph has created populations.
2) It is true that landraces take many generations, even thousands.

However, that does not necessarily mean that Joseph's goal of creating landraces for his regional conditions is impossible.

Every breeder, no matter what his goals, is using human ingenuity to speed along natural processes to make crops for the benefit of man. It does seem counter-intuitive that Joseph could "breed" a landrace. Since historically landraces, when they occur, are the result of NOT meddling with the genetics of domesticated species for a period of time and letting nature take it's course.

But who ever actually tried to create a landrace before? Who is to say human ingenuity couldn't speed the process along? Joseph is breaking into new ground here, and clearly has an upward battle in front of him. But I for one will not say it is impossible.

If he uses biomimicry, there is a chance he could take a process that generally takes hundreds and even thousands of years in nature, and guide it with human intervention to rapidly progress, like all breeders have done.

And this is on topic here because in order to even potentially create intentionally a landrace, you would first need to inject through hybridization a relatively large genetic diversity, before you did anything else. It also is on topic because heirloom plants often are samples of landraces. Why? Because essentially the formation of a landrace is a product of evolution. Evolution usually takes many generations to occur to any noticeable degree, but not always. Sometimes "rapid evolution" occurs. It is called punctuated equilibrium. Long years of very little change followed by very rapid change. The reason punctuated equilibrium occurs, when it does, is that those long years of equilibrium build genetic diversity in a population, and then an environment factor suddenly changes and natural selection quickly selects from that diversity the combinations giving a fitness advantage.

If Joseph can look at that natural process, and mimic it successfully, particularly artificially speeding along the long slow diversification period with hybridization, and then later letting the population undergo rapid evolution naturally or with minimal intervention, then it just might be possible for him to succeed.

[Fred Hempel]

Redbaron,

You stated that:

"Since historically landraces, when they occur, are the result of NOT meddling with the genetics of domesticated species for a period of time and letting nature take it's course."

Is this someones definition of a landrace?

I would argue that if humans are using a crop, they are meddling. They are meddling if they are saving seeds -- because it is impossible for them to not select some over others. They are also meddling if they are in any way using a crop (even if they are allowing for "natural" re-seeding", because through use they are undoubtedly skewing reproductive success in one way or another.

The definition of "landrace", like the definition of "heirloom" is not at all clearly delimited, and many reputable dictionaries and other sources do not clearly distinguish landraces from populations.

Personally, I think the keys to the definition of a landrace is whether or not a population has been grown in one place for multiple years, and whether or not selection (or lack of) has been done in such a way that it promotes the continuation of genetic diversity in the population.

Joseph's "landraces" meet these criteria.

I also really can't see how the "not meddling" criterion can be applied to plants which are used by humans. I can see where it might apply to feral animal populations during a period when they are not used by humans, but at the time that humans start using them again in any way (even if they are only hunting them), by the "not meddling" criterion they would immediately stop being a landrace, and I don't think this conforms with common usage of the term.

[joseph]

Thanks Carolyn for clarification.

-------

When I started my spinach synthetic/composite/grex/population/landrace with commercial seed, every packet of seeds that I planted was labeled "slow bolting". There were huge differences in how they grew. Some bolted when they were an inch tall. Others grew a couple feet across before going to seed. Yes I meddled by chopping out the plants that grew poorly. But they would have self-selected anyway. With butternut squash about 75% self-eliminated the first year by not producing fruit. I observe that sort of self-selection and directed-selection in everything that I grow. It can't be avoided so I might as well use it to my advantage (Both to preserve rarer phenotypes and to encourage higher productivity). I also use it to watch for natural hybrids among the mostly inbreeders so that I can give them higher odds of surviving the following year or two. I can't directly observe DNA, but I can look at a plant that is growing differently than the rest and presume that it might be due to genetics.

One of the reasons that I prefer landrace type growing is that it allows me to inexpensively trial thousands of new genetically unique varieties per year, because i have grown my own unstable cross-pollinating seeds. If I am growing heirlooms, OPs, or F1 hybrids, I have to obtain seeds in packets and at minimal pay for postage, and those fees add up really quickly which makes it uneconomical for me to grow heirlooms/OPs or F1 Hybrids. And every seed in the packet is essentially a clone of every other seed in the packet. I grew about 10,000 genetically unique sweet corn plants this summer. Are there even 10,000 varieties of sweet corn that could be purchased if I wanted to trial that many heirlooms, OPs, or F1 hybrids? We were only able to acquire about 200 OP and Hybrid sweet corn varieties when we were looking for parents for my sweet corn landrace. My watermelon landrace started with around 300 varieties.

[Redbaron]

Originally Posted by Fred Hempel

Redbaron,

You stated that:

"Since historically landraces, when they occur, are the result of NOT meddling with the genetics of domesticated species for a period of time and letting nature take it's course."

Is this someones definition of a landrace?

I would argue that if humans are using a crop, they are meddling. They are meddling if they are saving seeds -- because it is impossible for them to not select some over others. They are also meddling if they are in any way using a crop (even if they are allowing for "natural" re-seeding", because through use they are undoubtedly skewing reproductive success in one way or another.

The definition of "landrace", like the definition of "heirloom" is not at all clearly delimited, and many reputable dictionaries and other sources do not clearly distinguish landraces from populations.

Personally, I think the keys to the definition of a landrace is whether or not a population has been grown in one place for multiple years, and whether or not selection (or lack of) has been done in such a way that it promotes the continuation of genetic diversity in the population.

Joseph's "landraces" meet these criteria.

I also really can't see how the "not meddling" criterion can be applied to plants which are used by humans. I can see where it might apply to feral animal populations during a period when they are not used by humans, but at the time that humans start using them again in any way (even if they are only hunting them), by the "not meddling" criterion they would immediately stop being a landrace, and I don't think this conforms with common usage of the term.

Fred, please read that again. We are not so far off as you seem to think. You start with a domestic species. That in itself denotes there was interference by man to begin with. Then there is a period of time when man does little to no meddling of the genetics, diversity builds, nature takes its course, and the domestic population can potentially evolve by standard evolutionary process to create a "landrace".

Generally speaking it is not necessarily required that the domestic species go feral to create a landrace, only that humans for a period of time stop meddling with the genetics by artificial selection, and the changes in the population are instead driven by natural selection instead. That could happen in a feral population, but it can also happen in a population that stays domesticated. A great example is the many thousands of landraces found in India prior to the "green revolution"

[carolyn137]

I ascribe to the original definition of landraces.

To me, speaking of old and modern landraces is an oxymoron.

Someone in a post above said that Joesph was breaking ground with his work, but if you read one of the links I put in my post you'll see that he said he hopes to be invited to the group since someone else started the group and many have been involved if you read that link.

The word landraces has become a buzz word just in the past few years.

Worth has put up a new thread on landraces.I'm not going to post there what I've posted here at Tville about it in several threads as well as what I posted about it at idig in several threads, and two of those links from idig I gave above.

The rest of you can duke it out as long as I can keep quiet my fingers.

All I asked above is that we not continue talking about landraces/populations, etc., as a help for keeping on topic in this thread, but you can see what others here thought of my request.

Carolyn