Cultivar vs. Clone?

[josterha]

Hi All,

I was wondering about something about plant tags. Sometimes you have a tag that ID's the Genus and Grex, and sometimes it ID's the Genus, Grex AND a cultivar name. I understand that sometimes a particularly great individual plant will be named, awarded, and maybe cloned - that's where the cultivar name in the single quotes comes from. However, if the cultivar is not there, then what? For instance, I have a Doritaenopsis Queen Beer. There is no 'Cultivar Name' given. Does that mean that I have a clone? Otherwise, how could the grower know that the offspring plant that I bought would really look like a Queen Beer. I recently learned that crosses of two parent plants can have radically different appearing offspring. I'm just a little confused. Can anyone help?

THanks!

John

[King_of_orchid_growing:)]

The reason why the growers know that what you have is Doritaenopsis Queen Beer is because it was cloned.

Or...

It was a keiki or offshoot from Doritaenopsis Queen Beer.

Either one of these would be certain to give you Dtps Queen Beer.

If offspring were produced via sexual reproduction between two Dtps Queen Beer individuals, they would not be Dtps Queen Beer.

The only way to produce Dtps Queen Beer via sexual reproduction is by crossing the parents of Dtps Queen Beer. That's why hybrid genealogy is important to a breeder of hybrids.

[kavanaru]

Originally Posted by King_of_orchid_growing:)

If offspring were produced via sexual reproduction between two Dtps Queen Beer individuals, they would not be Dtps Queen Beer.

The only way to produce Dtps Queen Beer via sexual reproduction is by crossing the parents of Dtps Queen Beer. That's why hybrid genealogy is important to a breeder of hybrids.

I need to disagree here... Queen Beer is a grex and not a clonal name...

if you cross:
Dtps Queen Beer x Dtps Queen Beer
or
Dtps pulcherrima x Phalaenopsis Meteor

you will always have Dtps Queen Beer!!!

Clonal names are used to give more individualized ID to a single plant. This can be done after receiving an award or just like because the grower wants to identify a single plant within his/her collection for any particular reason..

if you plant has a clonal name on the label, it wil most probably be a clon (this can be a mericlon, a division, or a keiki)... this is specially true for Cattleyas and Phalaenopsis (these are very easy to mericlone and produce lots of keikis), but very rare for Paphiopedilum or Phragmipedium (very difficult to mericlone!)

[Andrew]

Dtps Queen Beer is a hybrid (grex) name. What you can gather from your label is that the plant is Dor. pulcherrima x P. Meteor ie you know its parents. You are correct that 2 parents can have radically different offspring and in the case of your plant, any Dor. pulcherrima x P. Meteor are called Queen Beer no matter what they look like. FWIW Dtps Queen Beer x Dtps Queen Beer = Dtps Queen Beer so the potential for variation for any hybrid can potentially run the full gamut from one parent to the other. Unless the grower has flowered it before or has mericloned/divided an unnamed cultivar (it does happen), they won't be able to tell you exactly what it looks like.

Cultivar refers to a select plant from the grex. Within orchids, cultivars can only be reproduced assexually so if you buy a Dtps Queen Beer "Josterha" (for example) you know it should look exactly the same as any other Dtps Queen Beer "Josterha" you come across.

If you're coming into the orchid world from any other area of horticulture it's worth noting that orchid nomenclauture is based on a system of heredity rather than the physical characteristic based system that is used in almost every other type plant. ie Rosa "Iceberg" is a registered cultivar. With orchids, the parentage of the cultivar is registered not the cultivar, which gives a kind of 3 tiered naming system where the parentage, not the plant is important. Most other plant groups that had this type of naming have abondoned it but for some reason orchid growers have hung on to it.

As for clone, just to cause some confusion, it is used as a shortened term for mericlone/meristematic clone(ie a plant propagated in vitro by micropropagating the meristem tissue) which is what a lot of orchid people associate it with but the term clone can also technically be applied more broadly to any asexually reproduced plant (or other organism) regardless of the method of asexual propagation.

Hope that hasn't confused you more.

[slipperfreak]

I agree with Andrew and Kavanaru.

But for the sake of clarity, I'd like to add this. The term "clone" can refer to an actual clone (i.e. a mericlone), and it is also a term used interchangeably with "cultivar". So for example, although slipper orchids are almost never mericloned, you will very often hear slipper cultivars referred to as "clones". It's like a slang term.

Second, a cultivar, in simple terms, is an individual plant. So your Dtps Queen Beer is a cultivar (of the grex Dtps Queen Beer) - it just doesn't have a cultivar name to distinguish it from other cultivars. Anyone can give any plant a cultivar name if it doesn't already have one. They are used for breeding purposes (so you know exactly which parents are involved in a cross, not just the hybrids or species involved, i.e. line-breeding), and they are also used for awarding. Cultivars can only be reproduced, as Andrew said, asexually. This means either by cloning, or by division (the latter is what's done most commonly in slippers).

I hope my response wasn't too redundant.

[Ray]

Adding to Joes excellent clarification and discussion of the improper use of the word "clone", technically, in order to clone something, you must culture the meristematic tissue. A division or keiki - while still genetically the same as the parent - is not a clone.

(Now, where is that "picky bastard" emoticon?)

[Andrew]

Ray,
The term clone is a biological term to refer to any organism that is reproduced by asexual reproduction. The term can legitimately be applied to any asexually reproduced plant both in cultivation and in the wild including keiki's and divisions. It's a descriptor of the genetic combination of the asexually reproduced plant group, akin to how cultivar is used for cultivated plants, with the individual clone being referred to as a ramet.

The term mericlone, which is usually shortened to clone, specifically refers to a clone that has been produced by micropropagation of the meristem. It's still legitimate to call keiki's, divisions, etc clones. They just can't be called mericlones.

While people refer to cultivars as clones and vice versa the two terms are not strictly interchangeable. Cultivar can't be used for wild clonal populations and in non-orchid areas of horticulture where cultivars can be sexually reproduced (such as in annuals) the use of the word clone would be inappropriate.

:Really picky pain in the backside pedent who places too much emphasis on semantics: (just in case the admin ever make that emoticon)

[kavanaru]

Originally Posted by Andrew

Ray,
The term clone is a biological term to refer to any organism that is reproduced by asexual reproduction. The term can legitimately be applied to any asexually reproduced plant both in cultivation and in the wild including keiki's and divisions. It's a descriptor of the genetic combination of the asexually reproduced plant group, akin to how cultivar is used for cultivated plants, with the individual clone being referred to as a ramet.

The term mericlone, which is usually shortened to clone, specifically refers to a clone that has been produced by micropropagation of the meristem. It's still legitimate to call keiki's, divisions, etc clones. They just can't be called mericlones.

While people refer to cultivars as clones and vice versa the two terms are not strictly interchangeable. Cultivar can't be used for wild clonal populations and in non-orchid areas of horticulture where cultivars can be sexually reproduced (such as in annuals) the use of the word clone would be inappropriate.

:Really picky pain in the backside pedent who places too much emphasis on semantics: (just in case the admin ever make that emoticon)

Thanks Andrew, while reading Ray's post I was going to provide teh same explanation. But you have been quicker than me and did in a fantastic way

I can only add that in-vitro clining does not necessarily need to be with meristematic tissues. You can use other tissues for in-vitro cloning. However, using meristematic tissues is the easiest method, and therefore widely used commercially in horticulture. Furthermore, meristematic cloning, when done correctly, can also be used to ensure virus free plants, and the rate of growth of meristem tissues is faster than the rate of tissue invasion of viruses (Note: Doing this is also not very easy as you need to use only the very very very apical cells of the meristem, and probably will need to do it a couple of times to achieve the desired result)

[Andrew]

Originally Posted by kavanaru

Furthermore, meristematic cloning, when done correctly, can also be used to ensure virus free plants, and the rate of growth of meristem tissues is faster than the rate of tissue invasion of viruses (Note: Doing this is also not very easy as you need to use only the very very very apical cells of the meristem, and probably will need to do it a couple of times to achieve the desired result)

From what I understand, the success of this method depends on the virus. A lot of success has been had when removing CyMV from Cyms. I've read that OSRV can be much harder eradicate though.

[kavanaru]

Originally Posted by Andrew

From what I understand, the success of this method depends on the virus. A lot of success has been had when removing CyMV from Cyms. I've read that OSRV can be much harder eradicate though.

Indeed, some viruses are easier to eradicate than others. It depends on their specific rate of infection of new cells. My personal experience was eradicating viruses from Rice, Sugarcane and Tobacco plants. You do not always have success (some strains more than for others) and it is important to work very precisely and clean to avoid contamination of the meristem... That's why I noted that "when done correctly"... it is hard work, but sometimes really needed... I can understand that large commercial cloning do not put much attention on this, and if they have a plant infected, when they clone it, they "keep" the virus in the new plants...