# Reverse crosses



## IdahoOrchid (Jan 11, 2007)

Do reverse crosses get the same name as the original cross?

urbanianum x hirsutissimum is Sandy's Hopper.

Is the reverse the same name?


----------



## gore42 (Jan 11, 2007)

Yes 

- Matt


----------



## littlefrog (Jan 11, 2007)

Interesting example... I think I know that Sandy.

As already stated, yes. And furthermore (and mind boggling from a geneticist's point of view), Sandy's Hopper x Sandy's Hopper = Sandy's Hopper.


----------



## NYEric (Jan 12, 2007)

OK here's a question; since Phrag. Hanne Popow is besseae x schlimii, [say a x b] couldn't Hanne Popow x Hanne Popow [a x b by a x b] produce [aa or bb] besseae or schlimii? :rollhappy:


----------



## littlefrog (Jan 12, 2007)

Technically, yes. Practically... Well, let us say there are 20,000 genes in your typical phrag (Could be 50,000...). In order to get your grandparent species back, you would need to segregate all 20,000 back together. Probability is not my strong point (somebody else do the math), but I suspect that is mind bogglingly small chance, on the order of once in all the atoms in the universe.

Now, it isn't quite that bad, many of those 20,000 genes would segregate in sets (large or small), so that increases your probability a great deal, to perhaps 'no chance in hell' level. Of course we have recombination to think of, so that decreases the probability again... Regardless, it isn't really a very likely scenario.

Now, if we wanted to incorporate a trait from besseae into schlimii, say its red color, we could make the cross, and then back cross to schlimii the best Hanne Popow (the red one that looks most like schlimii). If we did that for several generations, we might get a red flowered plant with all the characteristics of schlimii.


----------



## NYEric (Jan 12, 2007)

OK; but, why would the hybrid have the same name if you can get the original parent back. Oh and by the way, I've been to Hell, Young Republicans of N.Y. party!!!!


----------



## littlefrog (Jan 12, 2007)

I live about 20 miles from Hell, actually.

Sib crosses of hybrids really should be considered new hybrids, but they aren't. Don't ask me why. But, it is probably for the best. We have too many names already. It is just an artifact of the system. I do think it is important that if a plant is listed as say "Phrag Hanne Popow" that it should be clearly noted if it is really Hanne Popow x sib, or besseae x schlimii. This is important information. Of course most people wouldn't bother.


----------



## Bob Wellenstein (Jan 12, 2007)

A little history lesson, actually maybe a bit of a fractured fairy tale as it is from memory.

The Sanders family ran the registry from inception. At first it wasn't too hard, not a hell of a lot of hybrids, and it was manageable on a card systen similar to what some of us are old enough to remember existed in libraries. In the late fifties they announced a decision that they would not allow a new hybrid to be named unless there was a significant infusion of new genetic material as they were being overwhelmed with new hybrids - ie if Maudiae were crossed with what we Goultenianum, it would still be called Maudiae - in fact basically everything we call Maudiae type today would be named Maudiae. To shorten the story, a group of influential Hawaiian hybridizers mounted a vigorous campaign in opposition, the Sanders family said fine, someone else do it then, then for a while it looked like an orchid society meeting when volunteers are called for, finally the AOS tentatively showed a bit of interest, and the RHS stepped in to avoid that happening. So, try to think back before computers before passing judgment, we are lucky to have what we have.

The odds of such resegregation are as Rob says astronomical, even if the genes did not cross over and transmitted as whole chromosomes the odds for a typical Paph primary would be 2^26, with all else that goes on its in reality several orders of magnitude higher.

With regards to capsule versus pollen parent, in addition to the oft mentioned plastid inheritance of non nuclear genes, the methylation of any given gene can vary depending on whether it is female (capsule) or male (pollen). This is probably the greatest reason there are differences in which way a cross is made aside from yellow/green/white color, and this is where the art of the cross comes in from observation of hundreds and hundreds of progeny, those with a good eye start to learn patterns. This is called gene imprinting for googlers.


----------



## NYEric (Jan 12, 2007)

Bob Wellenstein said:


> The Sanders family ran the registry from inception. At first it wasn't too hard, not a hell of a lot of hybrids, and it was manageable on a card systen similar to what some of us are old enough to remember existed in libraries.
> 
> This is probably the greatest reason there are differences in which way a cross is made aside from yellow/green/white color, and this is where the art of the cross comes in from observation of hundreds and hundreds of progeny, those with a good eye start to learn patterns. This is called gene imprinting for googlers.


First of all, are you calling us 'old'!?
Second, suppose the plant looks just like one of the separate parents? oke:


----------



## littlefrog (Jan 12, 2007)

Doesn't matter what the plant looks like, it matters what it is.

This has led to lots of problems. For example, I think most Paph. primulinums (at least the yellow ones) are actually not pure primulinum. Very few modern villosum, insigne, or druryii are actually pure species. Most had a dose of something else added in long ago (intentionally or not), and weren't labelled as such.


----------



## NYEric (Jan 12, 2007)

littlefrog said:


> Doesn't matter what the plant looks like, it matters what it is.
> 
> Very few modern villosum, insigne, or druryii are actually pure species. Most had a dose of something else added in long ago (intentionally or not), and weren't labelled as such.


Then how do you know what it is!?!


----------



## IdahoOrchid (Jan 12, 2007)

NYEric said:


> Then how do you know what it is!?!


Yeah!!!???


----------



## Sandy O (Jan 17, 2007)

Yes, Rob, Sandy's Hopper is named after my toucan, Hopper. Sorry to be so late in responding---I've been lurking but I've had a thoroughly hectic winter, coming back from Guatemala with bronchitis. I just got back from the Paph Guild last night---had a wonderful time. I gave an updated powerpoint presentation on the long-tailed phrags---identification confusion. 
I've enjoyed lurking on SlipperTalk and I hope to post a few comments here and there. ---Sandy


----------



## Heather (Jan 17, 2007)

Welcome Sandy! 
Glad you are enjoying the site.


----------



## NYEric (Jan 17, 2007)

Welcome from NYC!


----------

