Sorry but you are mistaken. The "Dandelion" is not an asexually clonally
propagated species. It reproduces from seeds. Seeds are propagated sexually
by definition.
It is apomictic but does show some variation in its offspring. Why should
you assume its offspring are genetically identical?
An asexually propagated species is one propagated from offsets, division or
tissue culture.
"George Hammond" <ghammond at mediaone.net> wrote in message
news:3A3B153B.76E10241 at mediaone.net...
> Cereoid wrote:
> >
> > Cloned plants would genetically identical. One can theoretically raise
an
> > INFINITE number of genetically identical plants. Mind boggling, isn't
it? It
> > is being done all the time.
>>> GH: no kidding... thanks for the info.
>> >
> > The rest depends on how they were raised. Genetically identical plants
grown
> > under different conditions may outwardly look different.
> >
>> GH: I understand it depends on what part the plant started from in the
> case of fragmentation etc.
> However, in the case of some well organized "spore" bearing
> asexual plants, they should all look pretty much the same... like
> Dandelions for instance. (A Dandelion is an asexual plant if
> I'm not mistaken).
> Now, it's pretty noticeable on your lawn that some Dandelions get
> a lot larger than others at maturity. If we assume that they are all
> genetically IDENTICAL (or arranged it so), then this would tell us
> something about the effect of the "average environment" on Dandelion
> growth, would it not? I mean, we could compute a mean and a
> standard deviation for the height and weight of an ensemble
> of "genetically identical" Dandelions... isn't this so? This would
> tell us how much the "environmental variance" was.
>> > The old nature verses nurture argument?
> >
>> GH: Yes sir.... big time. The thesis here, is that there is such a
> thing as a "universal environmental growth curve deficit" for, in
> effect,
> every living thing on the planet. Of course, you have to "eliminate
> the genetic component" first, to measure it. Seems to me, from what
> I've heard.... agriculturists must ALREADY KNOW the answer
> to this question, at least for specific asexual crops... and
> probably know it to 2-decimal places. I'd like to find out
> what it is.
>> You have no idea how important this is. Scientists now suspect
> that this "universal growth curve deficit" in humans (see:
>>http://people.ne.mediaone.net/ghammond/growth5.JPG>> is actually the scientific explanation of "God", because of it's
> impact on the brain.
> Identical Twin studies are used extensively in Psychology as
> you know. But now it is suspected that this "growth curve deficit"
> actually exists in every living thing... and the first thing to look
> at would be Plants... where, interestingly, the genetic component
> can apparently be ENTIRELY ELIMINATED, unlike the case for the
> higher animals because of sexual reproduction.
> Any further info on asexual crop measurements... such as
> the "standard deviation in crop yield per acre" for identical
> plants, would be of the keenest interest.
>>> --
> BE SURE TO VISIT MY WEBSITE, BELOW:
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> George Hammond, M.S. Physics
> Email: ghammond at mediaone.net> Website: http://people.ne.mediaone.net/ghammond/index.html> -----------------------------------------------------------
