Clones: how do you know if it's a good one?

[Ray]

One thing I have not seen mentioned (or I just missed it...) is culture.

How you grow a plant will have a significant effect on how it grows and blooms, so if you purchase a clone, and when it blooms, it's not identical to the awarded one, that may very well be on you, not a mutation in the cloning process.

First-generation clones - those derived from plants' meristematic tissue - are usually quite reliable in their "trueness" to the mother plant. The number of mutations increases as that tissue is re-, re-, replicated more and more.

What I don't know, and have never seen data to support one way or another, is if the rate of mutation increases, or if the sheer number becomes so great that more are seen.

[Guido]

Wow, a clone is a clone.

Clone:a) A cell, cell product, or organism that is genetically identical to the unit or individual from which it was derived.
b) A population of identical units, cells, or individuals that derive from the same ancestral line.
Bad cultivation will produce a different size, shape of flower and plant.
A clone without an award is nothing, otherwise its breeder would have taken it to a judging. An awarded plant to a breeder equals prestige and money. As an example look at the history of Orchidglade in this field.
Until today an Orchidglade awarded orchid commands a lot of money and they are magnificent.
If you are not able to see the plant cloned you may end up with surprises 2 - 3 years later when it blooms. Remember that a flower can be made to appear bigger with a close-up pic. The colors can be enhanced with photoshop and you will not be aware of it until a year or more later when it blooms. I have been collecting coins, stamps and orchids for several years and my experience has been that most dealers behave badly. It is always buyer beware. Do not let the bad experiences push you out of the hobby but turn them into knowledge. Good luck and enjoy your orchids.

---------- Post added at 03:40 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:04 AM ----------

That is a very interesting question.
I propose that as the number of re-cloning increase there will be some increase in the number of variables for a mutation from the original. All living things are constantly replacing dead cells and in that process lie the errors in the DNA. I just finished reading a paper from Taiwan university in which they assert that the older the matrix the higher the probability for a mutation in cloning. I could not find any work done to disprove or assert this logical conclusion or how many re-cloning away from the matrix will result in a visual mutation. I like you. You put my brain cells to work.