I recall from a horticulture book that I would have
read around 1978 (how time flies!) that they used the
term "clon" to mean a tree or other plant that's propagated
by asexual reproduction. I think their examples were fruit
trees and the like. The book, if I recall correctly, was a
little out of date even then -- it might have been published
I've searched the web for "clon" but I can't find the term
at all (except in Spanish). I'm pretty sure I'm not imagining it.
Does anyone else remember "clon"? Print references would be
Thanks for your help,
I said not always and not usually. I didn't say never. When new sports were
found in our greenhouses, we'd do tissue culture clones to assure the
differentiation was still evident in the cloned plant. If cuttings were taken
of said sport, there are significant chances the plant can revert in
characteristic. When cloned by tissue culture you are assured to have the sport
perform as the original sport on the plant you took the culture of.
So, both are correct, but in the industry when something is asexually cloned it
generally means it was reproduced by tissue culture to insure the anomaly.
Cuttings are ALWAYS genetically identical to the parent plant. The only way
they would be different is if sexual reproduction is involved. Cuttings are not
When new sports were
Then it is controlled partially by either age of the plant, or conditions it is
in, not pure genetics.
When cloned by tissue culture you are assured to have the
No, with cuttings you are assured to have it perform the same as the plant it
came from. With tissue culture, you are assured to have it behave as a young
clone (not a mature clone) of the plant it was taken from.
I don't know what you mean by anomaly, I assume you mean genetic conditions.
SOme conditions can't be preserved through tissue culture, because they are
caused by the conditions the plant is in. Any genetic conditions are preserved
through both cuttings and tissue culture of meristems.
Your greenhouses must have been in bizarro land. The situation is exactly
opposite as you describe. A rooted cutting is a clone. Plants raised from
cuttings may show some form of "reversion" but the genetic material that
the reversion came from the mother plant.
On the other hand, tissue culture can produce genetic changes that result in
plants that are genetically different than their parents, hence NOT clones.
This depends how you define "clone". If you hold that the horticultural meaning
is that a clone is the descendant of a single plant by vegetative reproduction,
then a rooted cutting would be a clone.
If you hold that the horticultural meaning is that a clone is the descendant of
a single plant by vegetative reproduction which has the identical genetic
makeup and attributes as the parent, then specific tissue from the parent may
be required. i.e. African Violet chimeras can't be cloned true to form
through rooting leaf cuttings. Either suckers are induced, or specific tissue
from the parent is used in the propagation of genetically true offspring.
A clone is genetically identical to the mother plant. The method of propagation
does not factor into the definition.
In general, a rooted cutting is a clone. However, as you noted, there are
of rooted cuttings that are not genetically identical.
Chimeras have more than one genotype (genetic makeup), and challenge
what we generally consider to be a horticultural clone. A descendant
of a chimera may contain the identical genetic makeup of the parent
plant, but depending on how the "clone" was propagated, its attributes
may be unstable. I think that was Victoria's point with regard to sports,
and why the industry uses tissue culture to ensure the anomaly is passed
Many cultivars that have been propagated clonally for years may eventually
lose their vigor when they become infected with viruses due to unsanitary
propagation techniques or infestation of pathogens by insects.
Variegates and other chimeras can occur when the clonally propagated
material are exposed to mutagens in the environment or are deliberately made
to mutate with the use of chemicals.
On 11 May 2004 12:42:18 GMT, firstname.lastname@example.org (theoneflasehaddock)
You are not "cloning" when you do that. You are propagating by cutting. There
is a scientific difference and the process is entirely different. Cloning takes
whatever sport of whatever plant you are using and reproduces it's exact
properties, while a cutting can revert.
probably the largest use of clonal cuttings in the world is in the Tea
industry in Sri Lanka and India.
Hundreds of thousands of tea shoot cuttings are taken from selected
mother bushes and planted in nurseries for rooting. after rooting they
are transferred in to small ploythene nursery bags and nurtured for
about one year till they have develped into 12 inch plants. These
plants are then planted out in the field at about 15000 plants per
hectare. A ten hectare planting will therefore need about 150,000
plants and Sri Lanka plants about 5000 hectares each year.
The original word was "clon." I don't know when it was proposed. I
know this because I just happened to pick up a volume of the journal
"Science" from the 1920's or so when I was looking for something in
the library, and I was flipping through it and I came across a small
paragraph entitled "on the use of the word 'clon' in horticulture.
The author was writing to suggest adding an "e" to the word because in
english the long "o" sound is indicated by adding an "e" at the end of
the word. Search the journal "Science" around the 1920's and you
should come across the article.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.