Another very very strange orchid

[JambaJungle]

Originally Posted by Michaeljrdn13

Just my two cents, arent all Hybrids technically genetic mutations?

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Actually a mutation is a trait which occurs as the result of breeding. Breeding can be within a species or hybrids. Mutations can be beneficial, harmful, or carry no effect. Mutation is the process that allows a species to evolve. Hybrids can and do occur naturally in the wild. The question at hand is what are the benefits of genetically modifying the process in a laboratory.
Peloric flowers really do no harm. As they are most likely mules....they would not be able to reproduce in nature, and the trait would die out. When mass cloned in a lab environment for the flower trade, peloric lips become much more prevalent. Without this mutation, we would not have all the "splash" petal Cats out on the market. At some point the mutation crosses a line from attractive improvement to freak show oddity.

[estación seca]

A mutation is a change in the underlying DNA structure of an organism, from the structure it originally had, to something else. It is not a normal part of reproduction, nor hybridization. Mutations are caused by chemicals or radiation that damages DNA, or by DNA reproduction or repair mechanisms malfunctioning. Most mutations disrupt normal function of enzymes, structural proteins or cell regulatory pathways, so most mutations are harmful or lethal. A few mutations happen in segments of DNA for which we know no purpose, or the altered function of mutated important sections of DNA does not affect survival. These mutations are neither harmful nor helpful.

Very few mutations improve function. These confer a survival advantage for the individual.

Normal organisms inherit one of each chromosome pair from each parent. The DNA sequences of each parent are slightly different.

In hybrids, the corresponding chromosomes are even more different. But each chromosome corresponds closely to the other if the hybrid is viable. The progeny have DNA sequences that are not in both parents. The DNA inherited from each parent is normal DNA, not mutated.

Genetic engineering uses biological enzymes to snip DNA and insert DNA segments from other organisms. It resembles both mutation and hybridizing. Inserted DNA is chosen to make the progeny have new characteristics considered desirable. But the DNA sequences come from other organisms, the number of nucleic base pairs changed is very much larger than would happen with spontaneous mutations, and spontaneous mutations are random, not chosen.

[bil]

Well, there are even more mutations than that. In the formation of sperm and egg, (Meiosis) there is a process called genetic recombination, where there is a formal scrambling of genes which guarantees that every life form produced by sexual reproduction contains an assortment of new mutations, PLUS the mutations that its parents inherited from their parents, and so on.
There are also other faults like gene duplication, where the copying process stammers, as it were, and then there are ERVs which are viruses which infected your distant ancestors, but which were disabled, -these viruses were capable of infecting their germ cells and so they were inheritable, even tho they were deactivated.
When there is a copying mutation in an ERV, that can give it a brand new function. For example, the implantation of the foetus is controlled by a gene that was an ERV.

[gngrhill]

All the discussion aside, I still think the blooms that started this thread, whatever they are called, are still very attractive. I like them.

[No-Pro-mwa]

Originally Posted by JambaJungle

So pollution of our planet, landfills, trash, global warming, decimation of our natural resources, are all acceptable since we are part of nature?

While your first statement I liked, I do believe you were the first one that mentioned global warming^^ not me. So thank you for making my point to stay on topic.

---------- Post added at 01:27 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:25 PM ----------

Originally Posted by gngrhill

All the discussion aside, I still think the blooms that started this thread, whatever they are called, are still very attractive. I like them.

I do too. I have one I like very much. Some I don't like as, much but some are lovely. A long time ago before I killed it, I had one I didn't like.

[isurus79]

Originally Posted by JambaJungle

Come on people.....this is no different than a two headed snake or a 5 leg donkey. These are genetic mutations......and what makes it worse, they are caused by man's intervention with nature. People are protesting genetically enhanced plants for food consumption........this is actually a step worse! This is the result of an attempted enhancement gone wrong.

How do you know this is an attempted enhancement gone wrong? Peloria is known to occur in nature.

Originally Posted by JambaJungle

So pollution of our planet, landfills, trash, global warming, decimation of our natural resources, are all acceptable since we are part of nature?

Completely irrelevant to this discussion.

Originally Posted by JambaJungle

Try to stay on topic.......no one is discussing global warming. The discussion is about peloric mutations being part of a natural evolution or interference by man to cause mutations. I'm sure you can find another web site if you want to debate global warming.

You were the first to stray from the topic. Take your own advice.

Originally Posted by JambaJungle

Actually a mutation is a trait which occurs as the result of breeding. Breeding can be within a species or hybrids. Mutations can be beneficial, harmful, or carry no effect. Mutation is the process that allows a species to evolve. Hybrids can and do occur naturally in the wild. The question at hand is what are the benefits of genetically modifying the process in a laboratory.
Peloric flowers really do no harm. As they are most likely mules....they would not be able to reproduce in nature, and the trait would die out. When mass cloned in a lab environment for the flower trade, peloric lips become much more prevalent. Without this mutation, we would not have all the "splash" petal Cats out on the market. At some point the mutation crosses a line from attractive improvement to freak show oddity.

1. Please post evidence that most peloric flowers are likely mules.
2. Please post evidence that peloric lips (I think you meant peloric flowers) become more prevalent with mass clones.

[JambaJungle]

Originally Posted by isurus79

How do you know this is an attempted enhancement gone wrong? Peloria is known to occur in nature.
Two headed snakes occur in nature as well. Nature makes mistakes as well.....if the mistake improves the species ability to compete and survive, it is carried forward, if not, it dies out. Is this flower an improvement??? For some yes, for others no.

Completely irrelevant to this discussion.
Not at all irrelevant the the discussion. The previous comment stated since man is part of nature, anything man does is to be accepted as part of the natural process.

You were the first to stray from the topic. Take your own advice.
I was right on the topic. I was not discussing whether global warming exists like the other comment, I simply used it as an example of something mankind does, and if it is part of a natural process.


1. Please post evidence that most peloric flowers are likely mules.
No evidence, i said "likely" mules. Don't know if they are as a fact.
2. Please post evidence that peloric lips (I think you meant peloric flowers) become more prevalent with mass clones.

In a pleoric flower, the petals are trying to become lips. That is what creates the effect. The evidence they are more prevalent in mass clones are all the people on here posting photos of examples they are finding at Home Depot or Target.

[Ray]

Originally Posted by JambaJungle

In a pleoric flower, the petals are trying to become lips. That is what creates the effect. The evidence they are more prevalent in mass clones are all the people on here posting photos of examples they are finding at Home Depot or Target.

Correct, but incomplete. Petals "trying to be" lips - or, borrowing your phrasing - lips trying to be petals, is what constitutes peloria.

You have provided examples, not evidence.

[isurus79]

Originally Posted by JambaJungle

In a pleoric flower, the petals are trying to become lips. That is what creates the effect. The evidence they are more prevalent in mass clones are all the people on here posting photos of examples they are finding at Home Depot or Target.

You are going to have to show some evidence that they are more prevalent in the cloning process or clarify your statement. Are they more common because of the mass quantity of plants being pumped out using this process or does peloria occur more frequently than seed grown plants. To me, prevalent means that percentage of peloric plants increases over seed grown plants. Please show evidence, otherwise you're just making things up.

[JambaJungle]

You are correct, I am speaking on nothing more than my opinion and the fact that all plants in question in this discussion were found at mass merchants. I never said i was quoting a long term scientific study. Simply drawing conclusions from obvious observations.