When is it ok to rename a variety?

[fortyonenorth]

This question is inspired by a post in Kath's SASE thread. Here it is:

Is it ever ok to rename a variety?

For example, if I received seeds of Super Italian Piza or Fred's Wild Dworf, I would probably record them for my records as Super Italian Pizza and Fred's Wild Dwarf - and further disseminate them as such. However, as is the case with Vjerino Paradajiz Sjeme, if I received something that was foreign to me (and misspelled), I wouldn't know enough to make the change. I'm not suggesting the Vera's should be changed at this point - as you pointed out, Carolyn - too much time has passed and it's been widely distributed with the current spelling. I've seen numerable listings at Tania's site (mostly for Eastern European varieties) where she has noted discrepancies in the spellings and, hence, in the translated names.

Originally Posted by carolyn137

Iva, I faithfully copied down the name that Leslie used that she said her Mother-in-law in Bosnia used and she spelled it Paradajiz so if Leslie made a mistake there's nothing I can do about it now since I got those seeds from her many years ago and the name as she spelled it is out there both as she named it and typed it at the site where I was at the time as well as when I first listed it in the SSE Yearbook using her spelling of it.

And yes, her name is Vera. Leslie's husband was from Bosnia but I doubt that Leslie herself knew the Bosnian language.

But I do thank you for the correction.

[Tania]

if there is spelling mistake in a name of a tomato someone received in a trade, and there is a known 'correct' name for it, I'd say - go ahead and correct it asap!

Obviously, not everything is so simple as the above situation...

Sometimes a tomato is widely spread under a misspelled name - let's take 'Kimberly' as an example (which should be 'Kimberley'). In this case, I list the tomato under a correct name at TOMATObase, but I will also list all the other known alternative spellings.

Another example would be Yablonka Rossii - http://tatianastomatobase.com/wiki/Yablonka_Rossii

[carolyn137]

With respect to the reference about the first word of the variety being discussed, I spelled it Paradajiz, as received from Leslie and Iva says there should be no "i" in that first word.

Second question.... is it ever OK to name a variety?

Yes, I think in some instances it is. Right now I'm thinking of the variety I received called Jean's Prize, which I've been offering in my seed offer. It was named that b'c Jean had received so many prizes with it at church fairs.

The person who sent me the seeds said that it was known that it once had a name but no one could remember it. And I think the same scenario is true for quite a few varieties listed in the SSE YEarbook, as in the name was lost and then renamed.

I don't have a big problem with that but I do have a big problem with Lisa at Amishland giving new names to known varieties as well as fudging on histories and I could write a book on that. Right now she's listing two varieties, Todd County Amish and Amish Potato leaf and I got those seeds from Doug in MN who posts here and we named them together b'c they came to him just as low acid and I think high acid. But when you read Lisa's blurb about thise two varieties, well, go read them unless she too has changed something.

Her name for Cherokee Purple was Native American and her name for Green Grape was Eenie Weenie Greenie, or something like that and there are so many other purposely renamed varieties that I can't remember them all right now.

Same with Penny's site that several of us saw initially as in totally renamed varieties for many there which to many of us is totally unacceptable as the posts showed. I haven't taken a look to see if she changed names ASAP after being called it by some here, nor have I looked to see if she removed the pictures she scanned from other sites. Italian Tree was her exclusive but has been known for ages and ages elsewhere.

I don't have a huge problem if a variety is not spelled correctly b/c it's usually easy enough to check that out except when it's written in a foreign language which I don't know.

And there are often alternate spellings for the same variety as well and 41 pointed that out re Tania's site where she has indicated alternate spellings as well.

Serdtse Buivola and Bawole Cerce are the same variety, heart of the Buffalo, the first name translated from the Russian and the second in Polish language. I had the first one from Andrey, saw the second one at Reinhard's site, didn't know it was the same as the first one until I think it was Gunnar who told me, and the second part of the Bawole one is spelled variously as Cerce and Serce depending on where you look.

Ah, if only the world of tomatoes was perfect, we wouldn't have these problems would we, and if only we could trust the information given at some seed sites as well as other links on the net discussing this and that tomato, but the world of tomatoes isn't perfect and not all the information out there is correct, either for pictures or the blurbs that accompany variety descriptions.

[roper2008]

I don't know if this applies, but I don't like it when someone renames a
tomato because of the change of leaf form from RL to PL or vise vera.
If it's the same tomato don't rename it because of leaf change. It's
very misleading, at least to me.

[carolyn137]

Originally Posted by roper2008

I don't know if this applies, but I don't like it when someone renames a
tomato because of the change of leaf form from RL to PL or vise vera.
If it's the same tomato don't rename it because of leaf change. It's
very misleading, at least to me.

Yes I think it applies and I've posted about it at several message sites over the years.

I used to think that the only way that an original RL could become a PL was if there was a single spontaneous mutation of an RL that was heterozygous for leaf form.

But I was wrong and should have known it.

In posting back and forth with someone who knows a lot about mutations he pointed out to me that RL to PL could also occur by mechanisms such as repeats, inversions and looping out of the DNA. I know of those mechanisms only with bacteria and viruses with which I worked and never transferred tha t info to tomatoes.

What it means is that MORE than one gene can be affected if those mechaisms were at work. And what that means is that an RL original probably isn't the same as the PL b'c there could well be other gene changes such as taste, production, you name it/

Take the situation with the folloing.

Cherokee Purple, the original RL
Cherokee Purple Potato Leaf, found in Jere Gettles garden
Spudakee, a PL Cherokee Purple named by Bill Malin

I know of several folks who have grown out all three in the same season and say that the two PL's are identical to the RL original in all ways except for leaf form.

Perheaps an equal number or more. I don't keep count, will say that neither is the same as the RL original and some will say that the two PL's aren''t even the same, and ther're going on taste primarily.

Smeone posted here about Aker's West Virgina PL and I remember Craig coming back and saying no such thing or woods to that effect. And there have been other examples of PL being just tacked onto an RL original without the PL form beinggrown at the same time.

This season I grew Indian Stripe PL and yes, my one plant was PL but it was a lousy year and I only got one fruit and I wasn't growing out IS RL in this same season to compare. So that will have to be done in a future year, at least for me.

Like many, I often prefer to grow PL varieties, but I'll grow only those that are known to be PL as originally introduced or ones where I've grown the original RL and the PL variant in the same season andmadeupmy own mind about it.

OK, sorry for my mini-rant but I really feel very strongly about this issue with so many PL variants of original RL's appearing these days and most folks assuming they are exactly the same except for leaf form.

Are there exceptions where indeed only a single spontaeous mutation has led to the PL and RL forms being identical except for leaf form? Some say that's true for KB and KBX, others don't. So there you go again.

[roper2008]

Earl's faux is suppose to be a PL of Red Brandywine. Linda's
faux a PL of Akers West Virginia. If they are different besides
leaf form, fine rename it, but if it's the same, don't rename it.
Hey I don't mind a tomato having the name Linda, since that
is my name too, but I would prefer it being named Aker's West
Virginia PL, if they are the same except for leaf form. Same thing
with Earl's Faux, and I know there's more out there. No offense
to the people that named them.

I don't know about repeats, inversions & looping out. That's too
confusing for me. What I'm getting from your post Carolyn is that
you think most or some of the PL's are different besides the leaf
form, but the jury's still out on that.

[carolyn137]

Originally Posted by roper2008

Earl's faux is suppose to be a PL of Red Brandywine. Linda's
faux a PL of Akers West Virginia. If they are different besides
leaf form, fine rename it, but if it's the same, don't rename it.
Hey I don't mind a tomato having the name Linda, since that
is my name too, but I would prefer it being named Aker's West
Virginia PL, if they are the same except for leaf form. Same thing
with Earl's Faux, and I know there's more out there. No offense
to the people that named them.

I don't know about repeats, inversions & looping out. That's too
confusing for me. What I'm getting from your post Carolyn is that
you think most or some of the PL's are different besides the leaf
form, but the jury's still out on that.

I could explain what inversions and repeats and looping out are, but trust me, you don't need to know. What is important to know is that they can lead to mutations in more than one gene

The statistical probability that all PL variants of an original RL arose by single spontaneous mutations is very very low to almost non-existant in my opinion and I know of no data to back that up b'c one would have to do DNA sequence analyses to prove that and that isn't going to happen.

So all we can do is to make comparisons in the same season by the same person in the same place to eliminate the variables and make close observations and taste tests.

I discussed the situation with Cherokee Purple and its PL variants above b'c I know it and b/c there is some feedback data from those who have done that.

A summary comment? Yes, I do think that there's a good possibility that many of the PL variants of an original PL do have other gene changes such that the only difference is not just leaf form.

[feldon30]

As far as translations, the two tomato varieties that come to mind for me are Jaune Flamme (yellow flame) and Monomakh's Cap (the bejeweled skullcap of the Russian autocracy).

Originally Posted by roper2008

I don't know if this applies, but I don't like it when someone renames a tomato because of the change of leaf form from RL to PL or vise vera.

If it's the same tomato don't rename it because of leaf change. It's
very misleading, at least to me.

I don't know much about tomato genetics, but I've always been skeptical about reports of tomato varieties spontaneously switching from PL to RL or vice versa with no other change to its genes. I suspect that these tomatoes are a cross between two fairly similar varieties in the same garden, and that more than the leaf type changed as a result. Of course I don't have the money and equipment to do genetic testing on tomatoes, so this is a gut feeling.

Originally Posted by roper2008

Earl's faux is suppose to be a PL of Red Brandywine.

Earl's Faux bears little resemblance to Red Brandywine. It's a pink beefsteak in the vein of Brandywine (Sudduth's) but with a different taste profile.

[tam91]

A bit off topic, but I am curious Carolyn - why do you prefer to grow potato-leaf varieties?

[carolyn137]

Originally Posted by tam91

A bit off topic, but I am curious Carolyn - why do you prefer to grow potato-leaf varieties?

Before the summer of 2004 I'd grown a lot of varieties, many of them PL varieties, and I found that towards the end of the season they wouldn't go down as much as the RL/s, with foliage diseases. I could see the PL plants still nice and green while the RL's were brown and dying.

I've sugggested in the past that perhaps if PL leaves are thicker than RL leaves that it might be harder for the foliage pathogens to infect. But I have absolutely no data to suggest that thicker leaves are important/ But the same also occurs with most rugose foliaged varieties I've grown and I also think that rugose leaves are thicker.

Some would agree with my observations and some do not.

That was pre-summer 2005 and when selecting varieties to grow I did have a preference for PL varieties, all things considered.

Since then, as you know, I ( meaning Freda) can no longer grow the hundreds of plants and varieties I used to grow b'c of this walker. And that's when I switched to growing varieties that might be new to all or most and that means I'll take anything of that kind that anyone sends me, PL or RL.

[tam91]

Thanks Carolyn. In my (very limited) experience, I seem to get the same results as you.