Kay Lancaster wrote:

On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 00:38:12 -0600, sherwindu wrote:
Why put all this effort into an apple tree that will produce lousy tasting
apples. I mean, isn't growing

You're sure about that? cv Delicious was a chance seedling (and they're
very nice apples when they haven't been subjected to storage!) Likewise,
most of the heirloom apples are chance seedlings, and I'll take a Cox's
Orange Pippin or an Arkansas Black over a Fuji any day.

Naturally, only the successful chance seedlings were passed down through the
years.
The thousands, or perhaps millions of them that were just awful are not
around anymore.
Statistically, the successful chance seedling is a rarity. I personally
would not put a lot
of time and care into an apple tree with those kinds of odds.



Kids enjoy having their own plants... or at least I sure did. Kay's
Pear, while it never produced world-class commercial fruits, produced
acceptable home fruit, and it was *mine*.

There are a few things I have grown that I'm glad no one knows about.
Exactly how did you grow this Kay pear? Was it a sport of some well
known pear, a seedling of some known pear, or a complete chance seedling?

And I've gotten some
very good no-name apples out of local roadsides, probably planted by birds.

Or, they came from a known variety tree that lost it's identity somewhere
along
it's lifetime. Speaking of modern genetically produced apples, have you
tasted
some of the newer ones like Cameo, Honeycrisp, Rubinette, etc., etc. If you
look
in the Fruit, Nut, and Berry Inventory book of available varieties, you will
find
the chance seedlings there, but only a small percentage of the total
offerings. I
say, leave it up to the experts to do the experimenting, when there are so
many
good apples of known parentage out there. Encouraging a kid to put his
energies
into a losing venture is not a good introduction to gardening.

Sherwin D.



Sometimes, especially when you're a kid, it's nice to go against the
flow of uniformity and find out what happens in an uncontrolled
experiment.

Kay

Carl 1 Lucky Texan wrote:

Kay Lancaster wrote:
On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 00:38:12 -0600, sherwindu wrote:

Why put all this effort into an apple tree that will produce lousy tasting
apples. I mean, isn't growing


You're sure about that? cv Delicious was a chance seedling (and they're
very nice apples when they haven't been subjected to storage!) Likewise,
most of the heirloom apples are chance seedlings, and I'll take a Cox's
Orange Pippin or an Arkansas Black over a Fuji any day.

Kids enjoy having their own plants... or at least I sure did. Kay's
Pear, while it never produced world-class commercial fruits, produced
acceptable home fruit, and it was *mine*. And I've gotten some
very good no-name apples out of local roadsides, probably planted by birds.

Sometimes, especially when you're a kid, it's nice to go against the
flow of uniformity and find out what happens in an uncontrolled
experiment.

Kay



Couldn't you just surreptitiously swap the seeds for known, 'quality'
cultivar seeds?

You missed the point. The resultant apple will have the genetic makeup of some

recessed genes, and will not resemble the original apple, no matter what. You
can't
faithfully reproduce apple trees from seed, and in most cases, not even come
close.
Leave it at that.

Sherwin D.



Carl

--
to reply, change ( .not) to ( .net)

"Farm1" please@askifyouwannaknow wrote in message
...
"sherwindu" wrote in message
Kay Lancaster wrote:
On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 00:38:12 -0600, sherwindu
wrote:
Why put all this effort into an apple tree that will produce
lousy tasting
apples.

You're sure about that? cv Delicious was a chance seedling (and
they're

Naturally, only the successful chance seedlings were passed down
through the
years.

I think that many chance seedlings produce fruit that is not only
edible but quite good.

Each year we visit a lot of chance seedling trees and eat and harvest
the fruit. If we can beat the birds to them, most are good to very
good and those that aren't are fine for cooking. These trees grow
along a very quiet country road and we are sure have grown from apple
cores thrown from passing cars. There must be at least 100 of these
trees and we watch and check with interest each year.

"Farm1" please@askifyouwannaknow wrote in message
...
"sherwindu" wrote in message
Kay Lancaster wrote:
On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 00:38:12 -0600, sherwindu
wrote:
Why put all this effort into an apple tree that will produce
lousy tasting
apples.

You're sure about that? cv Delicious was a chance seedling (and
they're

Naturally, only the successful chance seedlings were passed down
through the
years.

I think that many chance seedlings produce fruit that is not only
edible but quite good.

Each year we visit a lot of chance seedling trees and eat and harvest
the fruit. If we can beat the birds to them, most are good to very
good and those that aren't are fine for cooking. These trees grow
along a very quiet country road and we are sure have grown from apple
cores thrown from passing cars. There must be at least 100 of these
trees and we watch and check with interest each year.

Are you saying that natural selection through the history of the apple has
led to a fruit that is desired by birds/animals, and a more desirable apple
for the propagation vector to eat spreads the seed better than apples that
are bitter and tasteless?

Who woulda thunk...

On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 01:07:55 -0600, sherwindu wrote:
You missed the point. The resultant apple will have the genetic makeup of some

recessed genes, and will not resemble the original apple, no matter what. You

Please, please... pick up a good basic genetics book and do some reading.
"Recessed genes"? You think they're on holiday break? Better yet, a
good basic plant breeding text sounds like it needs to be on your list.

There are some really interesting issues in apple genetics, including
ploidy levels, polygenic inheritance and a tendency to "bud sport". In
fact, it's fairly common to find an oddball branch on a grafted tree,
clearly tissue grown from the graft, but with different fruit characters
from most of the rest of the tree. Chimerism and mosaicism have played
an important part in the development of a lot of tree fruit cultivars.

Genetic diversity isn't something to be scorned...

Kay

On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 01:04:03 -0600, sherwindu wrote:
Naturally, only the successful chance seedlings were passed down through the
years.
The thousands, or perhaps millions of them that were just awful are not
around anymore.

So are the thousands of older cultivars that didn't withstand shipping or
long storage, or weren't "pretty enough" in someone's eyes, or just didn't
get recognized by a commercial nursery. And they were good apples, some
much better than the half dozen or so cultivars you get in most US grocery
stores today.

Exactly how did you grow this Kay pear? Was it a sport of some well
known pear, a seedling of some known pear, or a complete chance seedling?

A cross between an ornamental pear of unknown parentage and the Bosc in my
grandparents' backyard. Grandpa helped me make it (I was all of 4 or 5
at the time), and then we grew out the seeds. And it wasn't a bad
pear at all. Finally succumbed to fireblight many years later.

And I've gotten some
very good no-name apples out of local roadsides, probably planted by birds.

Or, they came from a known variety tree that lost it's identity somewhere
along
it's lifetime.

Doubt that... old roads, old fencelines, and most of them don't look
anything like currently favored cultivars.



Speaking of modern genetically produced apples, have you
tasted
some of the newer ones like Cameo, Honeycrisp, Rubinette, etc., etc.

Sure. Have you tasted some of the "wild" apples being currently imported
for germplasm use? Some really good stuff there.

If you
look
in the Fruit, Nut, and Berry Inventory book of available varieties, you will
find
the chance seedlings there, but only a small percentage of the total
offerings.

Yes, because people who actually bother to name cultivars are likely to be
working with a subset of plants that have something they're trying to
improve upon. But chance seedlings play a part, too.... go back
in the parentage and you'll find a lot of "unnamed seedling x cox's orange
pippin" sorts of entries.

I
say, leave it up to the experts to do the experimenting, when there are so
many
good apples of known parentage out there. Encouraging a kid to put his
energies
into a losing venture is not a good introduction to gardening.

And I'd argue, as an old educator, that learning that everything doesn't work
the way you think it might is a much more important lesson (in gardening,
in life, in science) than success at growing a "kit tree".

Doesn't take that much effort to grow a seedling tree to bearing size, if
they can make it through the winter in a planter (a relatively hostile
environment.) Back to the OP's question... insulate that planter, cuddle it
up against the house, and make sure it doesn't dry out or have standing water
in it this winter. Then enjoy what you get with your kids.

Me? I'm a retired botanist. My grandfather, who originally got me interested
in gardening, used to take me on day trips for such things as hunting for
the stump of the first 'Delicious' apple tree, or over to look at the
crab apple test orchard a friend ran. Learning to look and examine and
ask questions and perservere are good life lessons you can learn from a
little amateur plant breeding, imo.

Kay

Couldn't you just surreptitiously swap the seeds for known, 'quality'
cultivar seeds?

Doesn't quite work that way -- apples have some interesting genetic
instabilities that make even grafting known cultivars less than a sure bet.
And seed of any open pollinated, sexually reproduced seed (as opposed to
apomictically produced seeds, as dandelions often do) is going to produce
offspring different from their parents. (Just like human kids, while they
resemble their parents, aren't exact duplicates. And one sibling is not
identical to another.)

It's only with some fairly intensive breeding techniques (e.g. linebreeding,
back-crosses) that we've been able to produce the uniform fields of
plants currently in favor with mechanized agriculture.

John Chapman certainly wasn't toting around bags of grafted apple trees when
he decided to spread apple seeds around on his journeys. Some of the
seedlings that came up produced very nice apples. Some didn't. It's the
same result I'd expect of the OP's little experiment... they may get
some nicely flavored apples from the seedlings, and then again, they
might get spitters. But whatever they get, it'll be interesting for the
kids if the parents help them interpret what they're seeing and
experiencing.

someone earlier claimed that the OP would get "crab apples" from the
seedlings... this is pretty unlikely, as most of the eating apples are
diploids, and most of the crabapples are polyploid (have several sets
of chromosomes, rather than simple pairs.)

At any rate, I think kids (and grownups, too, from the sounds of things
here!) should try things like growing seeds of an open-pollinated, sexually
reproducing crop, just to see some of the hidden genetic variation
uncovered... it's really pretty amazing. I also wish I could get more
people involved in such activities as comparison tastings of fruits --
or as my husband said after I got him to try about 50 cultivars of apple
in a day, "Gee, I wish I'd known before now that there were more apples
than Delicious and Jonathan." (He has now found he also likes tomatoes,
pears, sweet corn and I'm working on getting him off iceberg lettuce. g)

Save some seed of something or other... tomatoes, dwarf marigolds,
impatiens, lettuce... grow 'em out and see what you get. It's fun.

Kay

Not to be irreverent or irrelevant, but

If John Chapman could read this thread he would turn over in his grave. He
considered grafting to be "absolute wickedness" according to some accounts.
BTW his grave is located in Fort Wayne IN somewhere near his memorial which
is located in the park and is accessible from the rear of the parking lot of
the Ft. Wayne Memorial Coliseum. It is on a mound surrounded by an iron
fence. The stele at the gravesite reads,

"In fond memory of
John Chapman, endearingly known as "Johnny Appleseed
These grave-site improvements were provided by
The Men's Garden Clubs of America
and
The Johnny Appleseed National Memorial Foundation, Inc.
September 25, 1965"

There is some dispute as to the actual burial site but most historians
believe it is at least within 50 feet of the corrrect location based on
accounts recorded from eyewitnesses at his burial in the old Archer Cemetery
in March 1845.

A few people in Ohio and Indiana believe they still have a Johnny Appleseed
Tree on their property and tourists can buy Johnny AppleSeed Tree. But
the last known surviving Johnny Appleseed tree is located on a farm near
Nova, Ohio, some 50 miles west of Akron. The fruit is said to resemble the
Albemarle Pippen and they will sell you cuttings.

Olin

hob wrote:

"Farm1" please@askifyouwannaknow wrote in message
...
"sherwindu" wrote in message
Kay Lancaster wrote:
On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 00:38:12 -0600, sherwindu
wrote:
Why put all this effort into an apple tree that will produce
lousy tasting
apples.

You're sure about that? cv Delicious was a chance seedling (and
they're

Naturally, only the successful chance seedlings were passed down
through the
years.

I think that many chance seedlings produce fruit that is not only
edible but quite good.

Each year we visit a lot of chance seedling trees and eat and harvest
the fruit. If we can beat the birds to them, most are good to very
good

Good is a relative term. How do they compare with a known heritage
or well engineered apple like a Honeycrisp?

and those that aren't are fine for cooking. These trees grow
along a very quiet country road and we are sure have grown from apple
cores thrown from passing cars. There must be at least 100 of these
trees and we watch and check with interest each year.

Are you saying that natural selection through the history of the apple has
led to a fruit that is desired by birds/animals, and a more desirable apple
for the propagation vector to eat spreads the seed better than apples that
are bitter and tasteless?

There are a lot of vegetables and fruit that pigs eat but I wouldn't find them
tasty.
You can't compare a bird's taste buds to a human. Sometimes, they will eat an
apple just to get the moisture out of it.

Johnny Appleseed spread a lot of seeds in his lifetime, but most of them
produced
apples that were not very tasty, and were used instead for cider or mash to feed
the animals.
In those days, for most pioneers it was a question of survival, not enhancing
their palette.

Sherwin D.



Who woulda thunk...

Kay Lancaster wrote:

On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 01:07:55 -0600, sherwindu wrote:
You missed the point. The resultant apple will have the genetic makeup of some

recessed genes, and will not resemble the original apple, no matter what. You

Please, please... pick up a good basic genetics book and do some reading.
"Recessed genes"? You think they're on holiday break?

I think you are the one that needs the textbooks. Read on ...

Better yet, a
good basic plant breeding text sounds like it needs to be on your list.

I am not pretending to be a biologist or a plant geneticist. However, I do know a
solid layman's idea of how apple trees propagate. The term recessive gene is not
my invention but is part of the laws of Mendelian inheritance created by Gregor
Mendel.
If you have a problem with that, take it up with him.



There are some really interesting issues in apple genetics, including
ploidy levels, polygenic inheritance and a tendency to "bud sport".



In
fact, it's fairly common

It's so common that I have never seen one in my 20 years of growing apples,
visiting numerous orchards, or just talking to fellow apple growers.


to find an oddball branch on a grafted tree,

What you call oddball I have only observed in very small variations in size, color,
and taste of the apple. I am not familiar with any radically different apples
appearing
suddenly on just one branch.


clearly tissue grown from the graft, but with different fruit characters
from most of the rest of the tree. Chimerism and mosaicism

U. of Minnesota describes mosaicism as: 'Mosaic variegated aneuploidy (MVA) is a rare
recessive condition'.
Evidently they think that it's ok to use the term recessive.

have played
an important part in the development of a lot of tree fruit cultivars.

Genetic diversity isn't something to be scorned...

We are not talking here about genetic engineering! This is simply about the natural
genetic effects of planting an apple seed. This kid planting an apple seed is not
going to take it to his laboratory to do high tech genetic engineering!

Sherwin D.



Kay

Kay Lancaster wrote:

On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 01:04:03 -0600, sherwindu wrote:
Naturally, only the successful chance seedlings were passed down through the
years.
The thousands, or perhaps millions of them that were just awful are not
around anymore.

So are the thousands of older cultivars that didn't withstand shipping or
long storage, or weren't "pretty enough" in someone's eyes, or just didn't
get recognized by a commercial nursery. And they were good apples, some
much better than the half dozen or so cultivars you get in most US grocery
stores today.

First of all, I grow a goodly number of these heritage apples, so you obviously
missed my point.



Exactly how did you grow this Kay pear? Was it a sport of some well
known pear, a seedling of some known pear, or a complete chance seedling?

A cross between an ornamental pear of unknown parentage and the Bosc in my
grandparents' backyard. Grandpa helped me make it (I was all of 4 or 5
at the time), and then we grew out the seeds. And it wasn't a bad
pear at all. Finally succumbed to fireblight many years later.

And I've gotten some
very good no-name apples out of local roadsides, probably planted by birds.

Or, they came from a known variety tree that lost it's identity somewhere
along
it's lifetime.

Doubt that... old roads, old fencelines, and most of them don't look
anything like currently favored cultivars.

Speaking of modern genetically produced apples, have you
tasted
some of the newer ones like Cameo, Honeycrisp, Rubinette, etc., etc.

Sure. Have you tasted some of the "wild" apples being currently imported
for germplasm use? Some really good stuff there.

Not sure which ones you are suggesting. Where can I find out more about them?



If you
look
in the Fruit, Nut, and Berry Inventory book of available varieties, you will
find
the chance seedlings there, but only a small percentage of the total
offerings.

Yes, because people who actually bother to name cultivars are likely to be
working with a subset of plants that have something they're trying to
improve upon. But chance seedlings play a part, too.... go back
in the parentage and you'll find a lot of "unnamed seedling x cox's orange
pippin" sorts of entries.

No arguement there. However, I just want to point out that the number of
successes of chance seedlings is not that great. The Cox's Orange Pippen
(which I grew until it died last year) has been bred into many other varieties,
of which I still have it as part of my Freyberg apple.



I
say, leave it up to the experts to do the experimenting, when there are so
many
good apples of known parentage out there. Encouraging a kid to put his
energies
into a losing venture is not a good introduction to gardening.

And I'd argue, as an old educator, that learning that everything doesn't work
the way you think it might is a much more important lesson (in gardening,
in life, in science) than success at growing a "kit tree".

OK. What is more rewarding? Sticking a seed into the ground, or grafting a tree?
I think the seed planting sounds more like a 'kit'.



Doesn't take that much effort to grow a seedling tree to bearing size, if
they can make it through the winter in a planter (a relatively hostile
environment.)

That's the point. What attachment can you have to something that can be
grown with about the same effort as a carrot.

Back to the OP's question... insulate that planter, cuddle it
up against the house, and make sure it doesn't dry out or have standing water
in it this winter.

In the real cold climates, I would bury the pot for added protection.

Sherwin D.

Then enjoy what you get with your kids.

Me? I'm a retired botanist. My grandfather, who originally got me interested
in gardening, used to take me on day trips for such things as hunting for
the stump of the first 'Delicious' apple tree, or over to look at the
crab apple test orchard a friend ran. Learning to look and examine and
ask questions and perservere are good life lessons you can learn from a
little amateur plant breeding, imo.

Kay

John Chapman certainly wasn't toting around bags of grafted apple trees when
he decided to spread apple seeds around on his journeys. Some of the
seedlings that came up produced very nice apples.

I would change that to very few. Since there was no scientific tracking of
his
trees, we can only surmise the results.

Some didn't. It's the
same result I'd expect of the OP's little experiment... they may get
some nicely flavored apples from the seedlings,

Doubt it very much.

and then again, they
might get spitters. But whatever they get, it'll be interesting for the
kids if the parents help them interpret what they're seeing and
experiencing.

I would not put a kid into a statistically losing project when there are
much better related things, like grafting.


At any rate, I think kids (and grownups, too, from the sounds of things
here!) should try things like growing seeds of an open-pollinated, sexually
reproducing crop, just to see some of the hidden genetic variation
uncovered... it's really pretty amazing.

Problem here is that this will be a standard tree, which will take the kid
at least 7 years to taste their first apple.

Save some seed of something or other... tomatoes, dwarf marigolds,
impatiens, lettuce... grow 'em out and see what you get. It's fun.

For those plants, I agree.

Sherwin D.



Kay

.

Olin wrote:

Not to be irreverent or irrelevant, but

If John Chapman could read this thread he would turn over in his grave. He
considered grafting to be "absolute wickedness" according to some accounts.


As I mentioned in another posting, John Chapman's contribution was to provide

a source of fruit to remote farmers and settlers, who would otherwise not
have
any access to apples. These apples were ok for making cider or feeding the
animals. The cider was necessary to provide a nutritious drink in the Winter

months, when there was no substitute.

Chapman was certainly an eccentric, possibly driven by religious fervor, but
as
I have explained, he did contribute to the promoting of fruit growing in this
country.

If you worry about John Chapman turning in his grave, give a few thoughts to
Sir
Issac Newton, who's theories were a great contribution, but were found to be
not
applicable to all facets of our universe.

By the way, in doing some surfing about Chapman, I came across this
interesting
site about growing apples from seeds:

http://www.pollinator.com/appleseeds_faq.htm

Sherwin D.

On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 01:29:30 -0600, sherwindu wrote:


Kay Lancaster wrote:

On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 01:07:55 -0600, sherwindu wrote:
You missed the point. The resultant apple will have the genetic makeup of some

recessed genes, and will not resemble the original apple, no matter what. You

Please, please... pick up a good basic genetics book and do some reading.
"Recessed genes"? You think they're on holiday break?

I think you are the one that needs the textbooks. Read on ...

Better yet, a
good basic plant breeding text sounds like it needs to be on your list.

I am not pretending to be a biologist or a plant geneticist. However, I do know a
solid layman's idea of how apple trees propagate. The term recessive gene is not
my invention but is part of the laws of Mendelian inheritance created by Gregor
Mendel.
If you have a problem with that, take it up with him.


I have no problem with the notion of recessive genes, but you wrote
"recessed genes" and also seemed to have no real grasp of some of the
other issues of apple genetics.

Furthermore, recessive genes probably aren't at the heart of variation in
apples.



There are some really interesting issues in apple genetics, including
ploidy levels, polygenic inheritance and a tendency to "bud sport".



In
fact, it's fairly common

It's so common that I have never seen one in my 20 years of growing apples,
visiting numerous orchards, or just talking to fellow apple growers.


to find an oddball branch on a grafted tree,

What you call oddball I have only observed in very small variations in size, color,
and taste of the apple. I am not familiar with any radically different apples
appearing
suddenly on just one branch.

It's pretty common. If it weren't so late in the season here, I could
probably find several branch sports on apples within a mile or so of my
house.



clearly tissue grown from the graft, but with different fruit characters
from most of the rest of the tree. Chimerism and mosaicism

U. of Minnesota describes mosaicism as: 'Mosaic variegated aneuploidy (MVA) is a rare
recessive condition'.

Mosaic variegated aneupoloidy is different from mosaicism. An organism
exhibiting mosaicism has patches of cells with a different genome than other
patches of cells. Mosaic Variegated Aneuplody Syndrome is a rare genetic
disorder of humans, causing mitotic non-disjunction of cells, leading
to groups of aneuploid cells (cells with the wrong numbers of chromosomes.)
If this is the page you looked at:
http://www.cancer.umn.edu/research/p...c/c3dec04.html
it ain't about apples.

We are not talking here about genetic engineering! This is simply about the natural
genetic effects of planting an apple seed. This kid planting an apple seed is not
going to take it to his laboratory to do high tech genetic engineering!

Who said he or she was? Find another strawman. I'm done.

Kay

Kay Lancaster wrote:

On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 01:29:30 -0600, sherwindu wrote:


Kay Lancaster wrote:

On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 01:07:55 -0600, sherwindu wrote:
You missed the point. The resultant apple will have the genetic makeup of some

recessed genes, and will not resemble the original apple, no matter what. You

Please, please... pick up a good basic genetics book and do some reading.
"Recessed genes"? You think they're on holiday break?

I think you are the one that needs the textbooks. Read on ...

Better yet, a
good basic plant breeding text sounds like it needs to be on your list.

I am not pretending to be a biologist or a plant geneticist. However, I do know a
solid layman's idea of how apple trees propagate. The term recessive gene is not
my invention but is part of the laws of Mendelian inheritance created by Gregor
Mendel.
If you have a problem with that, take it up with him.

I have no problem with the notion of recessive genes, but you wrote
"recessed genes" and also seemed to have no real grasp of some of the
other issues of apple genetics.

Here we go with the old semantics attack. If you can't win an argument on substance,
attack someone on their use of language. You can hypothesize all you want about my
abilities, but I question yours, as well. I don't need to have to have a degree in
biology to know
that there are certain traits carried over in various generations of apples, as well as
other
living matter. Exactly what other issues of apple genetics are you referring to? Your
theories
about how easily apples can mutate into something desirable is way removed from reality.
I suggest you stick with your plums, where you may have some stronger arguments.

I think that in this case, one can learn more about apple growing by experiencing it first
hand, rather
than burying oneself in a lot of textbooks, especially those on genetics. However, I do
read
books, surf the net, and review articles to keep up with the latest information on apple
growing. I am not a research scientist or a genetic engineer trying to develop new
varieties
of apples.



Furthermore, recessive genes probably aren't at the heart of variation in
apples.

They certainly are when you try to reproduce an apple by planting it's seed.





There are some really interesting issues in apple genetics, including
ploidy levels, polygenic inheritance and a tendency to "bud sport".



In
fact, it's fairly common

It's so common that I have never seen one in my 20 years of growing apples,
visiting numerous orchards, or just talking to fellow apple growers.


to find an oddball branch on a grafted tree,

What you call oddball I have only observed in very small variations in size, color,
and taste of the apple. I am not familiar with any radically different apples
appearing
suddenly on just one branch.

It's pretty common. If it weren't so late in the season here, I could
probably find several branch sports on apples within a mile or so of my
house.

I don't believe you.





clearly tissue grown from the graft, but with different fruit characters
from most of the rest of the tree. Chimerism and mosaicism

U. of Minnesota describes mosaicism as: 'Mosaic variegated aneuploidy (MVA) is a rare
recessive condition'.

Mosaic variegated aneupoloidy is different from mosaicism. An organism
exhibiting mosaicism has patches of cells with a different genome than other
patches of cells. Mosaic Variegated Aneuplody Syndrome is a rare genetic
disorder of humans, causing mitotic non-disjunction of cells, leading
to groups of aneuploid cells (cells with the wrong numbers of chromosomes.)
If this is the page you looked at:
http://www.cancer.umn.edu/research/p...c/c3dec04.html
it ain't about apples.

No, I didn't look at that page.



We are not talking here about genetic engineering! This is simply about the natural
genetic effects of planting an apple seed. This kid planting an apple seed is not
going to take it to his laboratory to do high tech genetic engineering!

Who said he or she was?

You are the one that went off on a tangent of genetic engineering, not me. I simply
stated
that you cannot expect an apple planted from seed to have the basic characteristics of
the parent apple it came from. Do you still want to dispute that!

In talking with a fellow apple grower today, he told me that he had heard from several
sources
that the odds of getting a decent apple from a planted seed was about 1 in 10,000. Now if

you are talking Prunus ( peaches, plums, apricots ), this is not the case, as those plants
are
better genetically capable of passing on their traits through their seeds.

Find another strawman. I'm done.

I certainly hope so. I'm getting tired of trying to put certain ideas people have about
growing
apples into the proper perspective. If you are an academic or genetic expert, you
shouldn't push
your credentials in people's faces, especially when you mislead them about the real world.

Sherwin D.



Kay