When to 'rename' a de-hybridized hybrid?

[crmauch]

I'm in the process of de-hybridizing a hybrid (At f3 this year). I don't want to keep referring to a tomato as <tomato variety> f<x> as it is cumbersome, and probably someone has rights to the variety name. Looking for opinions on when it is appropriate for me to give the stabilized variety it's own name.

So it would be <new name>(dehybridized version of <tomato variety>).

Any thoughts?

Chris

[travis]

As the subsequent generations are grown out, in most cases, one finds "sister lines" in each filial generation that show differences that may be slight or dramatic depending upon the similarity or diversity of the two parent lines to the hybrid F1.

Rather than calling all the seeds collected from the various plants in each filial generation by the same name, for example Early Girl F3, it may be more appropriate to label each batch from each plant with its own letter/number code.

I assume here that you save seeds from individual plants separately from each other. As in the example of Early Girl, one would get 25% potato leaf and 75% regular leaf in the F2 generation. In the F3, one would get the same ratio of PL:RL from 2/3 of the individually saved seeds from RL plants, 100% RL from 1/3 of the RL plants, and 100% PL from the seeds saved from PL plants, for example. So, that is just an example of why I would save seeds individually from each F2 plant.

Back to the letter/number coding rather than using a generic name for everything from each generation:

Let's say I grew 6 F3 plants from whatever combination of seed batches I saved from the F2 plants. I might do something like EG-1402PL-1504PL ... signifying that the F1 was Early Girl hybrid, the F2 plant was grown in 2014 and was the #2PL plant in that year's growout, and is the #4PL plant this year, etc. for the other five plants in the 2015 growout.

Of course you realized that the seed saved from this year's EG F3 plants are in fact F4 seeds, so you might eve nt to include that as part of the letter/number designation: EG 1402PL-1504PL-F4, etc.

Then I would have a notebook with observations about each of the plants year to year until I arrived at a plant from which I thought the distribution of seeds would be beneficial. Then I would either release the finished product with a new name or assign it a number/letter designation as I wished.

[WhippoorwillG]

If it is intended to somewhat represent the original hybrid, the final F6 to F8 selection is most commonly referred to as "(Hybrid Name) OP" to represent an open pollinated homozygous line that will breed true to type for saved seed.

If your creation is somewhat different from the original, then it's up to you to rename as you wish.

[travis]

Originally Posted by WhippoorwillG

If it is intended to somewhat represent the original hybrid, the final F6 to F8 selection is most commonly referred to as "(Hybrid Name) OP" to represent an open pollinated homozygous line that will breed true to type for saved seed.

I think the original question implied that the name of the F1 hybrid might be proprietary. For example, Kumato, or Zima, etc.

[Heritage]

The guide travis outlined above is perfect - I would like to see every vendor who offers F2 seed include a similar printed guide with every pack of F2 seed (or otherwise unstable seed) sold. It would eliminate the problem we now have with several varieties represented by the same name.

Steve

[Fred Hempel]

I use numbers and letters in a manner similar to what Travis suggested, and then I use working names, when a line is settling down. I try not to talk about working names, so when I change to a final name, there is less confusion. That said, I have talked about working names (sometimes when I thought they would be the final name) and I have caused confusion.

[travis]

Originally Posted by Heritage

The guide travis outlined above is perfect - I would like to see every vendor who offers F2 seed include a similar printed guide with every pack of F2 seed (or otherwise unstable seed) sold. It would eliminate the problem we now have with several varieties represented by the same name.

Steve

Yes, I learned the hard way!

And what I posted is just an example. You can letter and number the segregating lines any way that suits you. I used to label them by row number/plant number/year/F-generation, etc.

NCSU tomato breeding program has a rather interesting way they number segregating individuals in a common line prior to establishing a stabilized true breeding line for their hybrid combinations.

Bottom line, don't name something with a catchy name until it is fully stable. Believe me, I learned the hard way. Yes, you may lose the opportunity to use a name because someone else used it first, that to has happened to me, i.e. Raspberry Beret, and Amarillo. Tough luck. It happens. But it's better than having twenty distinctly different lines named Wooley Blue Monday or something. Or in my case, WildThyme (fill in the blank).

[WhippoorwillG]

Originally Posted by travis

I think the original question implied that the name of the F1 hybrid might be proprietary. For example, Kumato, or Zima, etc.

Your post had not showed up when I posted my response, but I did misread the question.

Great info in your suggestions. Thanks for sharing.

[crmauch]

I am concerned that the original name of the hybrid, one of the "Husky" series, is a proprietary name (and no, I haven't researched it). And I haven't seen really any great differentiation in the F2 generation ( I now have F3 seeds). Some slight shape variation, and maybe some slight size differentiation, but anything I saw could be attributed to environmental variables. But I will starting with this f3 generation attempt to save the seeds from individual lines. And I'll wait to the F6 to name it.

Thanks

Chris