Hi group,

I was thinking about naming selfed plants, and I can see why Phal ABC
'X' x self should get a different clonal name - it is not a clone of
'X'. However, why would it still be called Phal ABC? Let's take a real
life example like Phal Violet Charm = Phal amabilis X Phal sanderiana
[1924]. All Phal Violet Charm plants, clearly, will have 50% of its
genes from either parent no matter what the cultivar. If we self the
plant, it produces a genetic spectrum of offspring, some again sharing
the 50/50 split of amabilis and sanderiana, but it is also possible,
albeit unlikely, that the progeny of this selfing could result in a
plant that has 100% amabilis genes, whose exact 'clone' with respect to
it's alleles, theoretically could've been obtained through selfing the
original amabilis parent. So, genetically, why would it be logical to
call the progeny of the selfing Phal Violet Charm again? Is this just
convention because otherwise it would get too complicated?

And while I was typing up the above, another question popped into my
head. Suppose we have species A, B, C, and D. Genetically (A x B) x (C
x D) is equivalent to (A x C) x (B x D) right? And yet, since A x B, C
x D, A x C, and B x D would all have different grexes, so would these
two second generation hybrids despite the fact that they are genetically
identical in terms of what percentage of the genes came from where. For
example:

Phal. African Queen [1986]
= Phal. (Norman x Princess Kaiulani)
= Phal. ((fasciata x violacea) x (violacea x amboinensis))

Phal. Lee Koi Choon [1987]
= Phal. (violacea x Golden Pride)
= Phal. (violacea x (amboinensis x fasciata))

Percentage-wise, the genetic makeup for both these plants are identical,
so why do we give them different names?

Cheers,
Xi