|
|
Post by gilbert on Dec 21, 2016 21:30:27 GMT -5
Those flowers look like Buffalo Bur; a pretty, but spiny, toxic, and stinging weed that infests my field near Denver.
|
|
|
|
Post by nathanp on Dec 21, 2016 22:19:58 GMT -5
Those flowers look like Buffalo Bur; a pretty, but spiny, toxic, and stinging weed that infests my field near Denver. Buffalo Bur is in the Solanum family. It is considered edible to the Colorado Potato Beetle, so I pull them and discard the plants every chance I get. |
|
|
|
Post by keen101 (Biolumo / Andrew B.) on Jan 4, 2017 14:39:41 GMT -5
Joseph, another random question:
Have you tried looking at the wild tomato flowers to see if they exhibit different UV markers like you did in squash? Or are the varieties that are becoming increasingly attractive to pollinators the result of just more open flowers and more pollen production?
|
|
|
|
Post by walt on Jan 4, 2017 15:27:39 GMT -5
I like to keep some buffalo bur plants around my garden. Not in it. I never see tomato hornworms on my tomatoes, but often on the buffalo burr. I never thought about them being a host for Colorado potato beetle. Usually heat gets my potatoes before CPBs get them.
|
|
|
|
Post by raymondo on Jan 4, 2017 16:07:29 GMT -5
There is an old commercial variety here in Australia which is reputed to have been deveoped from a cross between S. peruvianium and the common tomato. It was developed in the 1960s I think. It's one of the Burnley series of tomatoes, Burnley Bounty I believe. Burnley Ag Research Station was where this series of tomatoes was developed by breeder Helgi Nirk. It is still available from seed companies here. Let me know if you'd like some seeds Joseph Lofthouse. If it is as they claim then it may well provide a bridge between the two species. |
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Lofthouse on Jan 4, 2017 21:27:29 GMT -5
So far I haven't found UV markers on any tomato flowers. I look for them from time to time.
|
|
|
|
Post by steev on Jan 5, 2017 2:43:17 GMT -5
I was wondering whether buffalo burr might be a useful trap crop. It's often useful to keep pests out of the garden, rather than trying to eradicate them.
|
|
|
|
Post by walt on Jan 6, 2017 13:00:31 GMT -5
That's why the buffalo burr are around my garden rather than in it. I don't kill tomato hornworms because their adult stage, the Hawkmoth, pollinates my adeniums. It appears to be the only local insect that does. If you don't know adeniums, here a link to pictures. I know nothing about the dealer whose page is in the link. But it has nice pictures. adeniumlove.wordpress.com/species/ |
|
|
|
Post by keen101 (Biolumo / Andrew B.) on Jan 28, 2017 10:39:46 GMT -5
Joseph, everytime i come back and look at that photo you posted above i go: WOW! I'm extremely excited not only how big those flowers are, but the contrast in the dark stripes to attract pollinators! I have taken the liberty to make a color enhanced version to highlight that contrast a bit more. I imagine this is closer to what the bees actually see, and i can totally see why they would want to visit a flower like that. If you can manage to move these flower traits over to commercial or modern tomatoes i think you will have a winner (in regards to attracting pollinators).  |
|
|
|
Post by keen101 (Biolumo / Andrew B.) on Jan 28, 2017 12:31:57 GMT -5
Joseph the pictures and Solanum habrochaites seeds you sent me have me super excited just like keen101 (Biolumo / Andrew B.). It keeps occurring to me that we may have this all backwards. Instead of moving a few Neandertomato traits over to domestics. Why don't we try moving a very few domestic traits to Neandertomato? , that is a very good point. Actually from Joseph's earlier comment from the other thread when i mentioned introgression lines he said he was not interested in introgression lines and is now interested in whole wild genomes even favoring the "genetic drag". So i suspect Joseph's goals have changed again since first starting this project. I think that is actually a really cool idea. Sure there might be a few genes like small green fruit and a few chemicals that taste funky that actually are genetic drag, but more and more i'm starting to think that the highly inbred modern tomato genomes might have more genetic drag than the wild ones such as highly susceptible to disease and highly dependent on commercial fertilizers, etc. I think Joseph's emphasis on as many wild genomes as possible, but with a few (larger fruited domestic genes) is the way to go too. Very exciting! Can't wait to see what this project turns into in only a few years! It's also exciting because the wild genomes seem to have more frost tolerance built-in because of where they are from (the high mountains of peru in many cases). |
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Lofthouse on Jan 28, 2017 20:00:39 GMT -5
keen101 (Biolumo / Andrew B.) and William: Thanks for the observations. I am excited about the idea of moving only a few domestic genes into the wild tomato species. I'd really have to try to get fruits that are as distasteful as modern tomatoes... I have 8 newly germinated seedlings growing in my bedroom that are 75% Solanum habrochaites, collected from 10,500 feet elevation. I'll dedicate them to the project of moving a few domestic genes into wild tomatoes. It'll take a few generations to select large fruited tomatoes out of them. It's about 112 days before I'll be wanting to start my spring tomatoes, so perhaps I'll get another generation grown before spring. I have lots of plants that are 50% Solanum habrochaites. I'll give thought in my efforts to avoid diluting the S. habrochaites genes. These plants are currently flowering, and I'm attempting manual pollenations between them on most days. All of my tomato projects are veering dramatically towards promiscuity, so caveat emptor! I'm currently planning my garden, and giving a lot of attention to isolation of tomato varieties!!! I also think a lot about widening the genetic base of my wild tomatoes... So far, exactly one plant has contributed all of the S. habrochaites pollen to these projects. (It's going into it's third year.) That's a huge bottleneck that I need to resolve!
|
|
|
|
Post by keen101 (Biolumo / Andrew B.) on Jan 28, 2017 23:10:45 GMT -5
I also think a lot about widening the genetic base of my wild tomatoes... So far, exactly one plant has contributed all of the S. habrochaites pollen to these projects. (It's going into it's third year.) That's a huge bottleneck that I need to resolve! , i'm glad you brought that point up. I had already thought about that a few times. If you are able to use more variety of parents (rather than just one or two accessions) that should help a lot. Don't get me wrong, it fantastic that you are using wild tomatoes already or at all. You are way ahead of me and way ahead of most people with your wild tomato crosses. But you are right, relying on only one or two from the wild side is also a bottleneck. Especially since a lot of my readings have said that often in these wild varieties like S. habrochaites and S. peruvianum, etc. that they have lots of variation within these species (some more than others). That's not even including some of these older ones that they recently split into new species. I just got seeds for some of these wild types from Alan Kapuler (peace seeds). If anything i tinker with is able to contribute to this project perhaps that will help a little bit in using a different strain and widening the wild genome base. here is an example of why broadening the wild base you are breeding with is a good idea. But you already know this. This example is for disease resistance, but other traits can be likened to it. Such as frost tolerance or heat stress, or maybe even flavor compounds. Perhaps even in ability to cross easily to modern tomatoes or not. I know Joseph you have already run into frost tolerance differences, differences in self-incompatibility, and differences in exerted stigmas. www.readcube.com/articles/10.7717/peerj.2910 |
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Lofthouse on Jan 29, 2017 1:18:27 GMT -5
It is amazing to me when I look at the collection records for the wild tomatoes how few tomatoes were actually collected. For example, sometimes an accession was collected from a single plant. Other times fruits were only collected from 7 plants out of 100. If I were collecting wild germplasm, I would attempt to collect a fruit from every plant in the vicinity. When I see an accession that is derived from 20 plants in a field of 100, I feel much better about inviting it into my garden than when seeds were collected from only one isolated plant. As luck would have it, LA1777, which I have been using, is descended from a single plant. My long-term goal, includes a mish-mash of wild species growing together, and intermingling. I have already made hybrids among three accessions of Solanum habrochaites. I may have made a hybrid between Solanum corneliomulleri and S. peruvianum. I'll be able to tell next summer based on how the plants grow. And I'll watch for hybrids between S. peruvianum and S. habrochaites. The digger bees were all over those plants. By the way keen101 (Biolumo / Andrew B.): Nice photo enhancement. |
|
|
|
Post by philagardener on Jan 29, 2017 8:06:21 GMT -5
It is amazing to me when I look at the collection records for the wild tomatoes how few tomatoes were actually collected. For example, sometimes an accession was collected from a single plant. Other times fruits were only collected from 7 plants out of 100. If I were collecting wild germplasm, I would attempt to collect a fruit from every plant in the vicinity. When I see an accession that is derived from 20 plants in a field of 100, I feel much better about inviting it into my garden than when seeds were collected from only one isolated plant. In many older cases, a characteristic of a specific plant (color, fruit size, often described tersely in the record) is what caught the collector's eye, hence the single plant collection. At the time, much of the focus was on finding new traits, and there was less worry that natural populations would disappear. More recent collections often have focused on capturing genetic diversity by sampling widely what is left. It is too bad that wasn't started earlier because many of these natural populations now are gone. |
|
|
|
Post by walt on Jan 31, 2017 12:29:18 GMT -5
When collecting wild seeds for a gene bank, it is easy to collect more seeds than the gene bank will ever get grants to maintain.
When I was collecting willowleaf sunflower,(Helianthus salicifolius) for my own sunflower breeding, and for the USDA, it was suggested I collect up to 5 plants per stop, and at least 5 miles between stops. I could collect as many seeds per location as I wanted, from as many plants as I wanted.
And about 5 years after I did the collecting, the USDA shut down its perennial sunflower collection. And where I had worked, it was decided to drop willow leaf sunflower from their breeding program. So they also dumped what I'd collected.
Plant collecters generally know they will not get all the desirable genes available in the wild. People working at the gene banks know the small populations they grow out will lead to inbreeding depression. And they know that much of the public resents paying for even the efforts they are making.
And especially in the next 4 years, even more of the collections are in danger. But whoever is in charge, the government is always trying to shut something down to make more money for their pet projects.
|
|
