Oncidium twinkle

[nirsha]

Is this an oncidium twinkle cinnamon?

[SouthPark]

It could be an Oncidium Twinkle 'Cinnamon'.

If you take close-up photos of your flowers, and compare with other close-ups from other sources ----- and if the flowers at least look like Oncidium Twinkle 'Cinnamon' flowers in general, then you can just say that it is likely to be Oncidium Twinkle 'Cinnamon' ------ this just means not with 100% certainty.

A DNA test for this plant -- compared with a confirmed Oncidium Twinkle 'Cinnamon' would allow for a proper identification.

[Roberta]

A DNA test might or might not establish the cross (two parents), even that isn't all that likely, especially for the more complex hybrids but no test that is available could establish the exact cultivar (the part in quotes, that describe a particular plant or its clones or divisions) . Also, especially with the Oncidium group (where lots of hybrids look similar) you can go as far as "looks like" or "possibly is" or even "probably is" ... without a tag you can never be completely certain. Unless you are breeding orchids and need to have a documented pedigree, "looks like" is probably sufficient for your purposes. It is beautiful, just enjoy it! The care would be the same for any of the hybrids that are similar.

[SouthPark]

Originally Posted by Roberta

but no test that is available could establish the exact cultivar (the part in quotes, that describe a particular plant or its clones or divisions)

Roberta ------ so there is no such thing as a DNA test that scans the DNA of a confirmed cultivar, and then compares the scan with the sequence for a under-test (comparison) plant?

If we haven't got that sort of capability, then ..... so much for our 'advanced' technology haha.

[Roberta]

Originally Posted by SouthPark

Roberta ------ so there is no such thing as a DNA test that scans the DNA of a confirmed cultivar, and then compares the scan with the sequence for a under-test (comparison) plant?

---------- Post added at 10:55 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:52 AM ----------

d

$$ (or currency of choice), not an academic excercise.

Generally, not much sequencing has been done with hybrids. (Like, expensive, what is the payoff?) Possibly some hybrids that someone wants to patent. But even then, establishing a particular cultivar would be difficult. Sequencing on species is done to try to understand relationships (which is why we have so much fluidity on names in the species world) Even on those, not likely to be a complete genome, but rather a targeted look at particular sites. But to establish one hybrid vs another? Nobody is going to pay for that unless there's a good economic reason for doing so. When hybridizers do their thing,they keep notebooks. Pods carry labels. And so on down the line. So that tag that comes in the plant is really important if it has the parentage - when a cross is registered, only the grex of each parent is recorded - not the particular cultivars of the parents that may be on the tag. But if the tag is lost, instant NOID.

And just to muddy the water some more, there are many hybrids "in the trade" that are not registered. Sometimes hybridizers don't want to put their "recipe" on record. Sometimes they just want to mass produce plants for sale (it costs to register a hybrid) Some will get names stuck on their labels that turn out not to be registered (trade names) Again, NOID.

[estación seca]

I would be very happy growing that plant without a name.

[estación seca]

Somehow it duplicated. There used to be a way to delete posts, but I can't find it.

[SouthPark]

True Roberta. Although - if cost and effort etc wasn't a factor (eg. even massively expensive equipment and incredible cost of testing), then the question I'd like to ask somebody out there is --- would some particular lab in the world today have the capability of doing a DNA comparison match between a confirmed cultivar and a under-test plant?

That would be my question to anybody that can answer that one.

Naturally - if prohibitively expensive (and things like that) ------ then this will be a good reason for the no-id verdict, with current technology.

[ArronOB]

Originally Posted by SouthPark

True Roberta. Although - if cost and effort etc wasn't a factor (eg. even massively expensive equipment and incredible cost of testing), then the question I'd like to ask somebody out there is --- would some particular lab in the world today have the capability of doing a DNA comparison match between a confirmed cultivar and a under-test plant?

That would be my question to anybody that can answer that one.

Naturally - if prohibitively expensive (and things like that) ------ then this will be a good reason for the no-id verdict, with current technology.

The answer is that there are many impediments to establishing a cultivar’s genetic identity that do not exist with pure species.

As a rather contrived example : Most orchid cultivars are complex. If a test establishes that a certain hybrid is ,say, 30% Cattleya Labiata, does that mean that it’s ancestry featured one crossing with a parent of that species, or 3 crossings with different hybrids which themselves were 50% C. labiata, or something in between. And remember that these various crossings with a parent with C. labiata may have occurred at any time in the long and complex history of a cultivar and all of its antecedents.

In other words, there are many ways to achieve a 30% mix of C. labiata and all of them will be different cultivars.

So from that necessarily reductionist example we can see that the only time the genetic test would be definitive would be if we could absolutely guarantee that both subjects had only two parents and no more, and each of those parents must have been a pure species. If we knew that, it’s unlikely we would need the test anyway.

[estación seca]

It would be cheaper to seek out somebody with the plant you want and buy a piece.