Siberia x Tiny Tim
 

= Kimberly (Kimberley)

In other words:

rugose x rugose = PL

Someone please explain genetics of this. :?
Thanks!

Jennifer

Yup. That be the cross that led to Kimberly (Kimberley) according to the history books (SSE).

Siberia (rugose) x Tiny Tim (rugose) = Kimberly (PL)

Can't wrap my head around the genetics.

Ta.
J

Or, maybe it could mean that both those particular RL rugose parents have RL foliage Ff, where Ff + Ff results in a quarter of the plants being ff = PL. (A quarter each of FF, Ff, fF, ff being the combinations possible, but wherever F occurs it dominates thus giving three quarters RL plants).

If this scenario is true, it will be very interesting in the dwarf crosses that have one parent as PL (eg. Green Giant and Stump of the World). :D

Any germination on Sleepy yet J?

PP

[quote=kctomato]

The problem with that is the parents would never be stable.

Inbreeding plants maintain their genes in homozygous (FF or ff) arrangements. Otherwise they are not stable.[/quote]

Ya know, for some reason I was thinking that self-pollination in a plant with Ff or fF distribution could be stable if its pollen was only F and its stigma only f, or vice versa... just using my reasoning rather than having read up on it, haha

PP :arrow:

PS. I was using "F" "f" arbitrarily for foliage type, not knowing the correct one to use :roll: