mwfolsom at hydra.unm.edu
Sun Aug 23 15:42:12 EST 1992
In article <Aug.184.108.40.206.1992.10089 at genbank.bio.net> kristoff at genbank.bio.net (David Kristofferson) writes:
(((Tony's stuff deleted ---)))
> I just sent out a call for discussion on bionet.maize.
>Perhaps we should begin by determining whether bionet.maize
>discussions should just start out on the existing bionet.plants or, if
>the discussion demonstrates a lot of interest, perhaps have
>bionet.maize be a subset, i.e., bionet.plants.maize, since we did
>mention previously that significant subsets of plant biology would be
>spun off into hierarchies.
> I will be away until 1 Sept. so I'll let you guys duke it out
>on this one here and will read the outcome when I get back.
> Dave Kristofferson
> GenBank Manager
> kristoff at genbank.bio.net
Re: the "duke it out" - I assume Dave meant that metaphorically. ;-)
Anyway, to the buisness at hand.
As an unabashed spliter I say go for it! I like the idea of putting it
under the bionet.plants hiearchy so bionet.plants.maize looks good to
Now, why do I think that we should create a new group instead of
carrying the "traffic" on bionet.plants?
1) Having a group that exists specifically for corn is different
than carrying traffic on bionet.plants. While I believe that
creating bionet.plants.maize might get more people * on the system *
I doubt saying that we are talking about corn, among other things,
in an electronic discussion group will. This group could have
a huge draw - agronomists, botanists, geneticists, e.t.c. Their
presence could improve the usefulness of the whole bionet hiearchy
and could lead to further growth - i.e. groups on soybean, wheat,
e.t.c. - again bringing more people into the system.
2) It seems to me that the arabadopsis group is fairly active. I
see no reason why bionet.plants.maize should not be at least as
active as the arabadopsis group. In fact, by all rights, it should
be more active. There are many more people working on corn than
there are working on arabadopsis.
3) Creating a group on maize could have other benefits. It could
serve as a common ground for those interested in a range of
topics, from it molecular biology to its evolution. It would
be real neat if everybody from anthropologists to classical plant
breaders and hard core gene jockies would participate in such a group.
A few topics that might be included (totally off-the-cuff) -
the early history and "civilization" of maize
early plant ancestors
man's intervention in the "evolution" of maize
spread of maize around the world and its social implication
improvement in maize
development of new cultivars via plant breeding and techniques
stabilization of heterosis in hybrids via movement of apomixis
reproductive biology of maize
techniques of embryo sac and sperm cell isolation - their
relevance to cultivar development
pathology, physiology, ecology, e.t.c -
All for now .........
P.S. - all spelling mistakes are mine, mine, mine! The VP can't have
one of 'em!
More information about the Bioforum