On Wed, 16 Jul 2003, Henriette Kress wrote:
| I am perhaps confused or misled by the passages in my gardening
| book that say that
|
| anise
|
|Feathery leaf, much like chervil
|
| cilanthro
|
|VILE smell, and coriander seed when it's done
|
| fennel
|
|Dilly leaf, possibly bulbous stem at ground level
|
| licorice
|
|Not in the same family at all.

Finally, I have heard some people tell me that "Italian" parsley
does not taste like 'regular' parsley, but has a different taste
altogether. Is it similar to cilanthro (which to me has a tangy,
metallic sort of flavor) or something else altogether?

On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 02:16:32 -0700, Matthew Montchalin
wrote:



Finally, I have heard some people tell me that "Italian" parsley
does not taste like 'regular' parsley, but has a different taste
altogether. Is it similar to cilanthro (which to me has a tangy,
metallic sort of flavor) or something else altogether?

I don't think so. I grow cilantro, flat-leaf (Italian
parsley) and curly (regular) parsley.

I think the Italian parsley tastes pretty much like the
'regular' parsley, but milder, less strong - you could say
'a more delicate taste'.

I certainly don't think it (Italian parsley) tastes anything
at all like cilantro. No way.

But tastes are tricky, you know, and I'm convinced that what
*I* taste may not be the same as what *you* taste. Very
individual things, tastes.

Pat

On Thu, 17 Jul 2003, Pat Meadows wrote:
|Finally, I have heard some people tell me that "Italian" parsley
|does not taste like 'regular' parsley, but has a different taste
|altogether. Is it similar to cilanthro (which to me has a tangy,
|metallic sort of flavor) or something else altogether?
|
|I don't think so. I grow cilantro, flat-leaf (Italian
|parsley) and curly (regular) parsley.
|
|I think the Italian parsley tastes pretty much like the
|'regular' parsley, but milder, less strong - you could say
|'a more delicate taste'.
|
|I certainly don't think it (Italian parsley) tastes anything
|at all like cilantro. No way.
|
|But tastes are tricky, you know, and I'm convinced that what
|*I* taste may not be the same as what *you* taste. Very
|individual things, tastes.

And while we are on the subject, if cilanthro and parsley are
two different species, has anyone done any genetic engineering
yet to cross the two? Bypassing Darwin and Mendel, it must
be possible to create a hybrid between these two species... ?

On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 04:26:41 -0700, Matthew Montchalin
wrote:



And while we are on the subject, if cilanthro and parsley are
two different species, has anyone done any genetic engineering
yet to cross the two? Bypassing Darwin and Mendel, it must
be possible to create a hybrid between these two species... ?


Cilantro and parsley are not only different *species* they
are in different genuses.

Parsley is _Petroselinum crispum_ .

Cilantro is _Coriandrum sativum_ .

So they are not very closely related. They are in the same
family: the _Apiaceae_ .

I can't offhand think of any particular reason why anyone
would WANT a parsley/cilantro cross.

BTW, you can't bypass Darwin and Mendel...they didn't come
up with wild surmises, but worked out and elucidated some of
the laws of natu how things actually work in the real
world.

I suppose you could make a GMO cross: gentically-engineered
cross - gene splicing. But again: why would you WANT to?

Pat

Just because the species are in two different genera that doesn't
necessarily mean the two genera are not closely related. There is such a
thing as intergeneric hybrids. Intergeneric hybrids have been reported in
the Apiaceae (Umbelliferae) and in the closely allied Araliaceae.

Don't know if it would be possible to cross the two species by cross
pollination and get hybrid progeny. Fertility might possibly be restored by
doubling the chromosomes?

In this modern era of nuclear manipulation and gene splicing, almost
anything is possible. The question is whether going to all the effort and
experimentation to do so would be worth all the expense and time needed.


Pat Meadows wrote in message
...
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 04:26:41 -0700, Matthew Montchalin
wrote:



And while we are on the subject, if cilanthro and parsley are
two different species, has anyone done any genetic engineering
yet to cross the two? Bypassing Darwin and Mendel, it must
be possible to create a hybrid between these two species... ?


Cilantro and parsley are not only different *species* they
are in different genuses.

Parsley is _Petroselinum crispum_ .

Cilantro is _Coriandrum sativum_ .

So they are not very closely related. They are in the same
family: the _Apiaceae_ .

I can't offhand think of any particular reason why anyone
would WANT a parsley/cilantro cross.

BTW, you can't bypass Darwin and Mendel...they didn't come
up with wild surmises, but worked out and elucidated some of
the laws of natu how things actually work in the real
world.

I suppose you could make a GMO cross: gentically-engineered
cross - gene splicing. But again: why would you WANT to?

Pat

On Fri, 18 Jul 2003, Pat Meadows wrote:
|Cilantro and parsley are not only different *species* they
|are in different genuses.
|
|Parsley is _Petroselinum crispum_ .
|
|Cilantro is _Coriandrum sativum_ .
|
|So they are not very closely related. They are in the same
|family: the _Apiaceae_ .

Aha! Thanks, you guys are great!

|I can't offhand think of any particular reason why anyone
|would WANT a parsley/cilantro cross.

It would be nice if there were a parsley with a slightly different
flavor.

|BTW, you can't bypass Darwin and Mendel...they didn't come
|up with wild surmises, but worked out and elucidated some of
|the laws of natu how things actually work in the real
|world.
|
|I suppose you could make a GMO cross: gentically-engineered
|cross - gene splicing. But again: why would you WANT to?

There are lots of reasons why a person might want to create
new plants never seen before. Curiosity sometimes is its own
reason for doing things, but I suppose there are more practical
reasons for doing things. For instance, a higher concentration
of oils in the leaves (or even the roots or bulbs) is a good
reason for creating a hybrid. Different colors of leaves or
flowers is also a good reason for creating a hybrid, especially
if you anticipate marketing the product to small scale home
gardeners that like to mix as many of their plants into the
same plot as possible.

On Fri, 18 Jul 2003, Cereoid-UR12- wrote:
|Just because the species are in two different genera that doesn't
|necessarily mean the two genera are not closely related. There is
|such a thing as intergeneric hybrids. Intergeneric hybrids have been
|reported in the Apiaceae (Umbelliferae) and in the closely allied
|Araliaceae.

Have these reports been published relatively recently? In the last
five years or so?

|Don't know if it would be possible to cross the two species by cross
|pollination and get hybrid progeny. Fertility might possibly be
|restored by doubling the chromosomes?

There is nothing wrong with creating new plants that are healthier,
hardier, and more beneficial than was the case with either of the
parents before them.

|In this modern era of nuclear manipulation and gene splicing, almost
|anything is possible. The question is whether going to all the effort
|and experimentation to do so would be worth all the expense and time
|needed.

Yes, I understand that time and expense figures into the effort of
creating a viable hybrid.

Pat Meadows said:


I can't offhand think of any particular reason why anyone
would WANT a parsley/cilantro cross.

In the hopes of getting a cilantro-flavored plant that will produce leaves
for an entire season without bolting. (Not exactly a fortune-making
enterprise, to be sure.)

--
Pat in Plymouth MI

Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(attributed to Don Marti)

On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 06:19:47 -0500, (Pat
Kiewicz) wrote:

Pat Meadows said:


I can't offhand think of any particular reason why anyone
would WANT a parsley/cilantro cross.

In the hopes of getting a cilantro-flavored plant that will produce leaves
for an entire season without bolting. (Not exactly a fortune-making
enterprise, to be sure.)

This would be good. I hadn't though of that. I bet it
could make someone's fortune....Having either one as a hardy
perennial would also be good.

You know what, though: I bought Slow-Bolt cilantro seeds
from Pinetree and I had quite a few cuttings from them -
they lasted for weeks and weeks and weeks.

Pat

On Fri, 18 Jul 2003, Cereoid-UR12- wrote:
|Just because the species are in two different genera that doesn't
|necessarily mean the two genera are not closely related. There is
|such a thing as intergeneric hybrids. Intergeneric hybrids have been
|reported in the Apiaceae (Umbelliferae) and in the closely allied
|Araliaceae.

How many millions of years must have passed in order for the various
genera in the family of Apiacea to have descended from a single genus?

I suppose it would be asking too much for a poster I could slap up
on the wall, detailing the branches, but then again... How does
a person generally go about judging how genetically distant any
two genera are, let alone species?

Matthew Montchalin wrote:

I suppose it would be asking too much for a poster I could slap up
on the wall, detailing the branches, but then again... How does
a person generally go about judging how genetically distant any
two genera are, let alone species?

One attends a university, specializes in botany, and starts to study the
branch one is interested in.

Henriette

--
Henriette Kress, AHG Helsinki, Finland
Henriette's herbal homepage: http://www.ibiblio.org/herbmed

Sorry Henrietta but a degree in botany is not required for one to hybridize
plants. There are scores of amateur and professional plant hybridizers in
the world who don't have degrees.

You may be shocked to know that Luther Burbank never had a degree in botany
or horticulture but he was able to make many outstanding plant hybrids that
are still being grown to this day.

After reading over his memoirs, it quickly became clear to me that Burbank
could have done much more if had a clearer understanding of botany but he
was still able to make a fortune anyway.

To become better aquatinted with the phylogeny of the genera of Apiaceae
(Umbelliferae) (and the allied Apiaceae), one should read over the taxonomic
and cytological articles written on the family, find out exactly on what is
the basis for the genera, find out what intergeneric crosses have already
been made and just go ahead and do experimental crosses to see what happens.
You may want to look in the Agricola database for some leads.

The recent creation of the snap pea was the result of someone who went ahead
and made what originally seemed to be frivolous crosses between traditional
seed peas and oriental pod peas. A whole new type of commercially viable pea
was created instead. You never know what you might get unless you try.


Henriette Kress wrote in message
newsan.2003.07.19.12.17.22.623739@hetta...
Matthew Montchalin wrote:

I suppose it would be asking too much for a poster I could slap up
on the wall, detailing the branches, but then again... How does
a person generally go about judging how genetically distant any
two genera are, let alone species?

One attends a university, specializes in botany, and starts to study the
branch one is interested in.

Henriette

--
Henriette Kress, AHG Helsinki, Finland
Henriette's herbal homepage: http://www.ibiblio.org/herbmed

Cereoid-UR12- wrote:

I suppose it would be asking too much for a poster I could slap up
on the wall, detailing the branches, but then again... How does
a person generally go about judging how genetically distant any
two genera are, let alone species?

Sorry Henrietta but a degree in botany is not required for one to hybridize
plants. There are scores of amateur and professional plant hybridizers in
the world who don't have degrees.

He didn't want to hybridize anything. He wanted a picture of all the
genera in botany, showing just how they are related to each other, and how
close they are genetically.
Dunno how old he is, but that's a tall order for somebody who doesn't know
if cilantro and parsley belong to the Apiaceae.

Anyway, such a pretty picture would certainly be possible if botanists
could only agree on genera ... and it's possible that such beasts are
available online, but by what I can see, Matthew didn't even try a google
search.

And I'm an old enough fart that my reaction to a question that requires
years and years of research is to tell'em to do it themselves. Ditto for
questions that can be answered with a simple web search, which I have no
idea if this one is... but neither does Matthew, eh?

Whatever. The question is certainly off-topic on rec.gardens.edible...
follow-up set.

Henriette

--
Henriette Kress, AHG Helsinki, Finland
Henriette's herbal homepage: http://www.ibiblio.org/herbmed

In article ,
Matthew Montchalin writes
Intergeneric hybrids have been
|reported in the Apiaceae (Umbelliferae) and in the closely allied
|Araliaceae.

Have these reports been published relatively recently? In the last
five years or so?

x Fatshedera (Araliaceae: Fatsia x Hedera) was described in 1923.

[Citation ex IPNI: Guillaumin, Journ. Soc. Nat. Hort. France, Ser. IV.
xxiv. 524 (1923)]
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley

In article pan.2003.07.19.18.07.17.770348@hetta, Henriette Kress
writes

Anyway, such a pretty picture would certainly be possible if botanists
could only agree on genera ... and it's possible that such beasts are
available online, but by what I can see, Matthew didn't even try a google
search.


Judging by the results of a quick google, any such picture would be
inaccurate. The classification of Apiaceae, Araliaceae and allies is
being reworked in the light of DNA sequence data. (Apparently one
subfamily has been moved from Apiaceae to Araliaceae.) Diagrams of parts
of the cladogram should be available in the literature, but whether
they've all been put together is another matter. And generic limits are
apparently in need of revision.

Apiaceae has a pollen record back to the Eocene, and Araliaceae into the
Upper Cretaceous.
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley