Exceptional Seeds

Forum thread: Exceptional Seeds

************************************

Check out this thread... Some things currently in bloom. Yeah, they aren't orchids... but if you scroll down you'll see some nice propagation going on.

Succulents are relatively easy to grow from seed. In other words... you don't need to flask them. Which means... what? How different would the succulent hobby be if succulent seeds did require flasking? How different would the orchid hobby be if orchid seeds did not require flasking?

I've mentioned in a couple threads that I've successfully germinated some reed-stem Epidendrum seeds without flasking them. I basically used the same technique that I use for succulent seeds, Begonia seeds, Gesneriad seeds and so on.

I'm guessing that, unlike the seeds of most orchids, the seeds of some reed-stem Epi species contain enough nutrients to germinate on their own. It's just a guess though because the only way to be certain that absolutely no facilitative fungus was involved would be to flask the sterilized seeds without any nutrients. Which I'm probably not going to do...

Instead, I've been going around sticking Epi secundum pollen in different flowers...

- Barkeria cyclotella x Bardendrum Terusan: 1 pod nearly ripe (25 Jan)
- Brassavola digbyana x nodosa: 1 pod developing (5 Apr) and 1 pod around half mature (23 Feb)
- Cattleya nobilior: 1 pod developing (5 Apr)
- Cattleya Big White Floof: 2 pods developing (5 Apr)
- Epc. Cerina 'Nadia': 2 pods around half mature (3 Mar)
- Prosthechea cochleata: 3 pods nearly mature (27 Dec)

For some of these it's a bit surprising that pods have even started to develop. And, interestingly enough, this is pretty much the same list of orchids that I've attempted to pollinate with pollen from Epi secundum. Even though it's a pretty small sample group it seems like many, or even most, orchids in the Cattleya alliance are receptive to Epi secundum pollen.

Here are the registered intergeneric crosses with Epi secundum as the pollen parent....

- Epicatanthe Morningstar Sunshine = Cattlianthe Panache Domaine x Epidendrum secundum
- Epicatanthe Party Blossom = Cattlianthe Hawaiian Party x Epidendrum secundum
- Epicatanthe Saturn's Rings = Cattlianthe Golden Wax x Epidendrum secundum
- Epicattleya Purple Passion = Cattleya intermedia x Epidendrum secundum

That's the entire list! And they were all made by the same nursery... Rex Foster Orchids.

I'm guessing that crosses with Epi secundum as the pollen parent aren't very spectacular. But, some reed-stem intergeneric crosses aren't too shabby... Reed-stem Epidendrum Hybrids. Personally, I'd be pretty happy if I could easily grow Epicattleya Orange Blaze from seed!

Epc Orange Blaze is 75% reed-stem. What are the chances that it can easily grow from seed? Coincidentally, there's one currently on eBay... Epidendrum "Orange Blaze", Orchidée, Orchid... in France.

Here's a clue regarding whether 50% or higher reed-stem Epi crosses might be able to easily germinate from seed...

One of the oldest artificial epidendrum hybrids is Epidendrum O'brienianum, a cross between E. radicans and a member of the E. secundum complex (Epidendrum evectum). The E. secundum influence predominates in that the column is straight and the lip is uppermost with a small fleshy callus. Epidendrum O'brienianum is a common garden plant in subtropical areas; spontaneous seedlings occur in varying colors. This hybrid sometimes "escapes" from the garden and may appear to be native in areas as far apart as Mexico and Africa. Unlabled plants in gardens and greenhouses are likely to be hybrids, and they may have almost any combination of reed-stem species in their background. These epidendrums are usually tetraploids, so that the Epidendrum parent predominates in crosses with Cattleya or Laelia. Epicattleyas of this type could easily pass for pure reed-stems in dim light, but they always have at least the tip of the column free from the lip. - Robert L. Dressler, Will the Real Epidendrum ibaguense Please Stand Up?

If the crosses themselves are strongly influenced by the reed-stem parent... then you'd figure that the same would be true of their seeds. This would mean that there's a decent chance that the seeds of 50% reed-stem crosses can be easily germinated. If it is relatively easy to germinate 50% reed-stem seeds... then, in theory, many people would be happy to hybridize accordingly... and, by the law of truly large numbers, we'd expect to see at least a few 50% reed-stem crosses that we'd be happy to purchase or trade for. Over time there would be an increase in the supply of seeds from desirable crosses. These seeds would be relatively easy to germinate... so as their supply increased... there would be a logical and corresponding increase in total happiness.

With more and more people happily growing orchids from seed we would also expect to see faster climatic convergence. Some seedlings are always going to be better suited to any given conditions. So more seedlings grown would mean faster adaptation. As a result, there would be more and more orchids growing outdoors year around in colder and/or drier areas. Basically...

more seedlings -> more difference -> more progress

Stronger Bees And Smarter Raccoons

Reply to reply: What Are You Carrying?

*******************************************

The problem, as I see it, is that the ability to hold and carry multiple objects isn't limited to humans. - Quokkastan

But I've never argued that humans are the only animals with linvoid1.  I've argued that humans are the most linvoid1.

And humans aren't even necessarily the best at it. - Quokkastan

What animals are more linvoid1 than humans?

You've side-stepped the issue by saying that the mental faculties required to see value in multiple items, in holding on to them, and in combining them in creative ways, also counts.  But that essentially is human intelligence.  An enormous part of it in any case.
So what you're ultimately arguing is that human intelligence created human intelligence. - Quokkastan

I'm arguing that our exceptional intelligence is the result of linvoid3... which is the result of linvoid1.
Take a look at this photo...





The large white flower is from a Cattleya orchid that is growing on my tree.  A honey bee visited the flower and died as a result.  The Cattleya didn't intentionally kill the bee.  There aren't any carnivorous orchids.  The bee entered the flower and got stuck to the orchid's built in "glue".  The bee wasn't able to free itself and died.  If the bee had been able to free itself... then it would have continued deeper into the flower where it would have been rewarded with some nectar... or been tricked?  Some orchids are notoriously deceptive.  In any case, the bee would have turned around and, just as it was about to exit, the flower would have deposited its pollen onto the bee's gluey back.  When the bee entered into the next orchid flower... the pollen on its back would have gotten stuck exactly where the bee had gotten stuck to.

The bee essentially died during sex.  Well... it died while it was attempting to facilitate orchid sex.  The same thing could have been said for me if I had fallen out of the tree while attempting to pollinate the Cattleya.

Neither the orchid nor the bee are native to California or to the US.  The orchid is a hybrid but its ancestors are all native to the Americas.  The bee isn't even native to the Americas.

Maybe you find this story fascinating but you're wondering what it has to do with the evolution of human intelligence.  Well... the bee died because it wasn't strong enough to extricate itself from the flower's sticky part.  This is an example of selection pressure.  In this case... we're not talking about linvoid2 (selecting for intelligence)... we're talking about selecting for strength.  The bee was killed because it was too weak.  It wasn't strong enough to survive the orchid's "gauntlet".

Right now California doesn't have very many people who grow Cattleya orchids outdoors.  This means that the pressure that Cattleyas exert on California bees is vanishingly small.  It's imperceptible.  But we can imagine that... if more and more people in California started growing Cattleyas... the selection pressure would grow more and more perceptible.  More and more bees would be killed by Cattleyas.  If everybody in California had Cattleyas blooming on their trees... would this kill all the bees in California?  Probably... not.

It's a given that no two bees are equally strong.  Why is it a given?  Because "difference" is the very point of sexual reproduction.  "Difference" allows species to hedge their bets.   "Difference" helps species adjust to constantly changing conditions/circumstances.  More and more people growing Cattleyas is an example of changing conditions.  As more and more weaker bees are killed off... more and more exceptionally strong bees would survive to pass on their genetic material... and the population of bees in California would shift accordingly.

It might help to read this passage...

Sex responds instead to a different mandate, which I will call the mandate of genetic diversity.  Evolution requires imperfect reproduction. In simple organisms with extremely large populations, such as bacteria, genetic mutation supplies the necessary imperfection. In species with more limited populations, including most multicellular organisms, mutation does not occur rapidly enough to permit evolution to operate at high enough speeds to allow species to adapt effectively to changing environmental conditions (in particular, to quickly evolving viruses, bacteria, and other parasites). Here sex - the production of offspring through the mixing of genetic material - comes to the rescue. Populations of creatures that reproduce sexually will be far more genetically diverse than populations of similar size that reproduce without such genetic mixing.  When environmental conditions change, it is more likely that some portion of the sexually reproducing population will already carry the genes necessary to deal with that change. In other words, sex allows us to evolve to meet changing conditions more quickly. 

If genetic diversity is adaptive, we ought to observe the mandate of genetic diversity operating in our choice of mates. And we do. Despite sex, we could reproduce more perfectly, and thereby respond more effectively to the mandate of reproduction, by mating with our closest genetic kin - in other words, through incest. The mandate of genetic diversity, however, predicts the evolution of inhibitions to incest; and, indeed, we all carry such inhibitions, both genetic and learned. The mandate of genetic diversity also predicts that our mating choices will be somewhat random; and, indeed, we often fall in love with unexpected, sometimes even objectively unsuitable, partners. As Pascal observed: "Le coeur a ses raisons, que la raison ne connait point." ("The heart has its reasons, of which reason knows not.")  - Theodore P. Seto, Reframing Evil in Evolutionary and Game Theoretic Terms

If, in the future, California has exceptionally strong bees, then the cause would be the exceptional selection pressure that millions of Cattleyas put on the bees.  Are humans exceptionally strong?  Nope.  But we are exceptionally intelligent.  The cause of our exceptional intelligence was linvoid3 (exceptionally large amounts of linvoid2 (selection pressure on intelligence)).

In the example of the Cattleyas and the bees... the bees changed because their circumstances/conditions changed (more and more Cattleyas were grown in California).  But with our early ancestors... linvoid3 wasn't the result of changing conditions... it was the result of our ancestors themselves changing.  They became more and more bipedal.

With all of this in mind... let's take another look at your argument...

You've side-stepped the issue by saying that the mental faculties required to see value in multiple items, in holding on to them, and in combining them in creative ways, also counts.  But that essentially is human intelligence.  An enormous part of it in any case.
So what you're ultimately arguing is that human intelligence created human intelligence. - Quokkastan

We both agree that our ancestors became more and more bipedal.  We also both agree that this helped them to become more linvoid1.  Becoming bipedal freed up their hands and arms to simultaneously carry different resources (linvoid1).  You're under the impression that I'm arguing that our ancestors became more intelligent because they were more intelligent.  But, as you pointed out, this would be a circular reasoning.

What I'm actually arguing is that linvoid1 caused linvoid3.  Walking upright forced our ancestors to confront complex carrying choices.  How many different things would they have wanted to carry with them when they migrated?  Here are some pretty basic things...

- children
- food
- tools
- weapons

Being able to simultaneously carry more than one thing made this problem very complex.  It wasn't a relatively simple problem of children OR food OR tools OR weapons... it was a complex problem of children AND/OR food AND/OR tools AND/OR weapons.

The complexity of this problem resulted in linvoid3.   Whenever anybody went anywhere... they were confronted with a complex math problem.  Individuals that were exceptionally good at solving these complex math problems were more likely to survive and shift the population in the direction of more intelligence.

The complex math problem is, more specifically, a complex economic problem.  The problem is how to allocate resources in order to maximize benefit.

All organisms are confronted with the problem of how to allocate resources... even plants.  The Cattleya on my tree has to decide how to allocate its limited resources between growing and blooming (reproducing).  Insects can allocate more resources than plants can.  This means that insects are confronted with more complex economic problems than plants.  Mammals can allocate more resources than insects can... which means that mammals are confronted with more complex economic problems than insects.  Out of all the mammals... humans can allocate the most resources... which means that humans are confronted with the most complex economic problems.

The more complex the economic problems.... the more intelligence required to solve them.  Humans are the most intelligent animals... which reflects the fact that humans solve the most complex economic problems.  Our ability to solve the most complex problems reflects the fact that we can allocate the most resources.  And what, exactly, allows us to allocate the most resources?  Linvoid1.

In theory we could select for raccoons that are more and more bipedal.  Doing so would make them more linvoid1... which would result in linvoid3 and voila!  Raccoons would be just as intelligent as we are.  The first thing you saw when Seldon resurrected you would be a raccoon checking your vitals.

Orchid Olympics

Reply to reply: Cool Growers x Warm Growers

***********************************************

Unfortunately for me I can only grow temperate orchids outside year round. - chibae

Pretty much the saddest story ever... :( :( :( And there are no diminishing returns. Each time I hear this story it's just as sad as the last time I heard it.

I just looked at a map of the US. I guess North Carolina (NC) is a bit below the "mid-Atlantic coast"? Just in case you didn't know... NC is home to the Northernmost occurring epiphytic orchid in North America.... Epidendrum conopseum (EC). But, what are the chances that EC is the most cold tolerant epiphytic orchid in the world? Why should we suspect that EC is more cold tolerant than the Southernmost occurring epiphytic orchid in South America? Why should we suspect that EC is more cold tolerant than the Northernmost occurring epiphytic orchid in Asia? Why should we suspect that EC is more cold tolerant than the Southernmost occurring epiphytic orchid in... Down Under? National pride? "Our soccer team is better than your soccer team... and our epiphytic orchid is more cold tolerant than your epiphytic orchid!"

In another forum a fellow in Tampa was wondering what type of tree he should plant. While digging around for an answer I ran across these two things...

It is interesting to know that for a period of 46 years this orchid has evidently escaped collectors in North Carolina. In a conversation with Professor Oakes Ames last winter he expressed the opinion that the reason for this was perhaps due to the "Big Freeze" of 1888-89 which may have destroyed these plants this far north and thus temporarily moved the limits of its northern range farther south. It is also possible that the position of the orchid high up in the trees may have made it easily overlooked. - Donovan Correll, Epidendrum conopseum in North Carolina

In December 1989, a severe cold front passed through Florida; temperatures reached -5C, killing all the orchids. At other central Florida sites, mortality of Encyclia tampensis was high (>80%). - Ronald J. Larson, Population Dynamics of Encyclia tampensis in Florida

There's a line that marks the Northernmost distribution of EC. This line really isn't static! It's very dynamic. In exceptionally cold years... this line is moved South by many many miles. And maybe in exceptionally warm years... the line is moved North by many many miles. Where was this line 1000 years ago? Where is it 100,000 years ago? Wouldn't it be amazing to see an animation of this line over the past million years? Has EC even been around for that long?

It's a race to Canada! As far as tropical epiphytes are concerned... Pleopeltis polypodioides (PP) is in first place. I think it grows no problem outdoors year around in the mid-Atlantic coast? In second place is Tillandsia usneoides (TU). And in third place is EC.

PP cheats because it got a head start. TU also cheats because birds help carry it. So it's only fair that we (ie you!) help EC cheat. Just go around sowing a gazillion EC seeds in its favorite trees. If enough other people do the same thing then eventually I'll have no problem believing that EC is the most cold tolerant orchid in the world. I'll be swoll with national pride. Well... unless the other countries start doing the same thing.

I guess we'll need to start the orchid Olympics (OO)? Medals for most cold tolerant orchid? And most drought tolerant orchid? And orchid that's most attractive to hummingbirds? Poor Africa will never place in that last event! Well... they do have Disas... but there aren't any terrestrial orchids allowed in the OO!

Lots of accusations of doping? Testing for miracle grow? DNA testing for genetic purity?

Genetic purity is overrated?

As interspecific gene flow is frequent and the new lineages were able to backcross, species cohesion is difficult to accept in orchids. Wherever lays the definition of species boundaries, it is no doubt questionable in orchids making it difficult to establish natural entities. - Yesenia Vega, Isabel Marques , Sílvia Castro, João Loureiro, Outcomes of Extensive Hybridization and Introgression in Epidendrum (Orchidaceae): Can We Rely on Species Boundaries?

What allows EC to make any real progress in the race to Canada? It's the fabulous outliers. Progress depends on difference. More difference means more progress.

Deng Xiaoping was fond of saying that it didn't matter whether the cat was black or white... what mattered was whether it caught mice. Lots of people will probably freak out if I suggest that we (ie you!) deliberately introduce hybrid ECs to the wilds of the mid-Atlantic coast. But nature doesn't care whether an orchid is a species or a hybrid. If nature cares about anything it's survival of the fittest.

Yes, change is the basic law of nature. But the changes wrought by the passage of time affects individuals and institutions in different ways. According to Darwin’s Origin of Species, it is not the most intellectual of the species that survives; it is not the strongest that survives; but the species that survives is the one that is able best to adapt and adjust to the changing environment in which it finds itself. Applying this theoretical concept to us as individuals, we can state that the civilization that is able to survive is the one that is able to adapt to the changing physical, social, political, moral, and spiritual environment in which it finds itself. - Leon C. Megginson

Plants don't have a crystal ball. They can't predict exactly how their environment is going to change. Plants can't predict global warming or cooling or drying or wetting. Orchids aren't an exception to this rule. What makes orchids exceptional is that they are really good at hedging their bets. Orchids are really good at producing lots of seeds. A single seed pod can contain a million seeds. Each seed is a different bet... so a million seeds is a lot of different bets. It's a given that all these different bets can't be equally good. Just like ideas can't all be equally good...

Individual decision making is closely connected to creativity not because all choices are excellent, but because they constitute a broad field out of which the best responses can emerge. If we wished to establish a connection to Darwinian ideas, we could say that the wide spectrum of decisions is similar to the field of the spontaneous variations of living things from which the pressure of natural selection preserves only the most apt. Without such experimental structures and behaviours, responses remain stagnant and life sinks under the weight of institutionalised routine. Freedom multiplies actions and ideas, some of which turn out to be brilliant and others fundamentally flawed. The important fact, however, is that few if any of them could have occurred under conditions of enforced conformity. To leave people alone with their projects is to permit - even to encourage - the exercise of private imaginations. - John Lachs

It's a bad idea to facilitate the hybridization of EC? Because EC's hybrids will be less adaptable to change? Or because they will be more adaptable to change?

Yeah, your story is truly sad. But there's no reason that it can't have a happy ending! There's no reason that there can't be a wide variety of epiphytic orchids that are happy to grow outdoors year around in the mid-Atlantic coast.