wrote in message
...
On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 09:00:10 -0700 in
K Barrett
wrote:
Ray, I didn't want umbel/non-umbel to be the end of the conversation.
People who passively read this news group listen to you. They may not
read
the whole post about how confusing bulbophyllums are even to taxonomists.
A
myth would persist. Neither of us want that.

I guess I'll ask the impertinant question now...
has anyone done gene sequencing on prominant plants with the Cirr
genus somtimes applied, prominant plants with the Bulbophyllum genus
applied, and the fringe cases?
I have this funny feeling that as gene sequencing improves a lot of the
existing taxonomy will be tossed on its ear.
--
Chris Dukes
"Let all the babies be born. Then let us drown those we do not like."
-- G. K. Chesterton.

I hope Rob Halgren (of Rob's Rules) chimes in here becasue he's employed in
this field. I know there are efforts to elucidate the genomes of orchids
and rank them in a new systemic order according to their DNA. This is what
the debate in Cattleyas has been about for the past 7-8 years, much of which
is open to debate. If you look at the DNA analysis of Laelia purpurata
(for example) it is closer to Sophronitis (like Soph coccinea) than to the
Mexican laelias (like L anceps). Now, to look at L purpurata and Soph
coccinea one would never think they were closely related at all, but
genetically they are. This is where the debate starts. Some say the
science is moving too fast. The cladistic analyses haven't been verified by
others in the field (a major tenet of the Scientific Method) and is stacked
in favor of these splits. However these analyses were performed by people
with huge amounts for credibility, so who's to say they are wrong? Cassio
Van Den Berg at the Miami WOC proposed lumping many species back into
'Cattleya', for to continually split and split and split was getting
ridiculous - many monotypic genera were created, interrelationships became
unwieldy. This proposal has yet to be accepted.

There is an effort to create a genetic barcode for every species
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_barcoding The 3rd International Orchid
Conservation Committee met in Costa Rica last year, its proceedings lists
had many talks about genetic identification, specifically about orchids.

So the quick answer to your question is yes, the genetic interrelationships
of every species on the planet are being elucidated and progress is
happening at light speed. Knowledge has grown by leaps and bounds since
2000 or so.

In medicine there's a push to determine personal genomes (that is to say
your own personal DNA code). The target price for this is $1000.00 It
presently costs much, much more than that, but it'll happen sooner than you
think. Then the debate about whether health insurance should have access to
that data will begin. Insurers denying coverage based on DNA has lready
been made illegal, but you know how business works, there's always wiggle
room. *G*

Then there's J Craig Ventner's effort at creating life from stock genetic
material. He's already put together one chromosome from stock which he
hopes to insert into the nucleus of a monochromosomal bacteria (its
chromosome will have been removed) and see if his kickstarts and the
bacteria continues to live. (cue: Frankenstein "Its Alive!" sequence). Not
to mention that the monochromosomal bacteria he selected for use is a
pathogen from the human urinary tract. This is an offshoot from research in
making genetic machines.

You gotta keep up, Chris!

K Barrett