Let's Make that Rose Amino Acids?

Sylvain Chamberland schamber at sciborg.uwaterloo.ca
Mon Sep 21 22:45:49 EST 1992

In article <19j24iINNsff at usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> br105 at cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Jeffrey A. Del Col) writes:
>I just re-read my original posting on identifying roses by genetic
>markers and realized that might be too daunting a task.  What I REALLY
>had in mind was a much cruder method similar to something I did with
>fruit flies back in high school in the 1960's. I used irradiated and 
>control group flies to see whether I could differentiate among them 
>on the basis of fluorescent amino acid bands that showed up on
>paper chromatography strips under UV light.  Would such an approach
>make sense, or would all species of roses have the same amino acid
>(or whatever) content?

Are you sure it was not rather about pigments of the fruit fly

In an undergrad lab in which I was teaching assistant last winter, we used
chromatography then UV light to differentiate eye mutants (and a couple of
other mutations, like ebony, yellow) on the basis of pigment precursors...
(which were visible under UV light).

Anyway, try to differentiate cultivars or whatever by the basis of amino
acids would not be practical in my humble opinion. It could be done only
in cases where there is a substantial variation in the amounts of amino
acids, and anyway, I don't think biochemical differences between such
species reside generally in amino acids. (of course I could be wrong.)

What could maybe be done, is differentiation on the basis of pigments of
petals... between white, pink and red rose, I guess that would be fairly
easy, though I don't know much about plant biochemistry.

But then, what about different species which are about the same color?
(well, I don't know anything about roses, so don't laugh at me!  :)  )

So in my mind, there is no doubt the molecular genetics approach would be
far more effective. The amount of pigment precursors is never static,
while DNA is fairly stable...  (well, being in molecular biology, what did
you expect?  ;-)   )

But I don't know if anything has been done on the subject in roses...
And it's quite an undertaking....

Well, there are "new" tools in the field which results in an important
simplification of the task...

>This may soound like a ridiculous project, but some rose
>"species", R. hugonis comes to mind, may well be hybrids, and I thought
>it would be interesting to come up with some way to determine this
>without going the classic Mendelian route of repeated outcrossings,
>if such a thing is even possible with roses.

I don't think it's so ridiculous. 

For example I know someone who is trying to find a way to identify two nearly
identical species of insect. The only approach seems to be molecular
genetics. Physically, the two species are identical. It's the behavior
that changes...

> >J. Del Col >-- 
>Jeff Del Col      *    "Got a gypsy woman givin' me advice,      
>A-B College       *     Got a whole lotta tricks keepin' here on ice."    
>Philippi, WV      *          ---Got My Mojo Workin'--  P. Foster
>                  *         

Sylvain Chamberland           INTERNET: schamber at sciborg.uwaterloo.ca   
Dept. of Biology          -----------------------------------------------------
University of Waterloo    |  "Biochimiste un jour, biochimiste toujours!"
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada |                               - anonyme

More information about the Plantbio mailing list