From tmatekairehungwe from yahoo.com Mon Nov 12 04:02:23 2007 From: tmatekairehungwe from yahoo.com (Tafara Matekaire) Date: Mon Nov 12 16:24:07 2007 Subject: [Plant-biology] plant leaf nucleus antibody Message-ID: <702451.17584.qm@web61011.mail.yahoo.com> Anyone guys out there who is aware of a reliable plant antibody that is entirely exclusive to the nucleus or cytoplasm of leaf tissue or where i can get one. Thanks in advance for your assistance Tafara Matekaire University of Cape Town Dept Of Molecular and Cell Biology Private Bag X3 Rondebosch,7701 Cape Town South Africa Comparte video en la ventana de tus mensajes (y tambi?n tus fotos de Flickr). Usa el nuevo Yahoo! Messenger versi?n Beta. http://e1.beta.messenger.yahoo.com/ From vairamanathan from gmail.com Tue Nov 13 01:25:17 2007 From: vairamanathan from gmail.com (Ramanathan Vairamani) Date: Tue Nov 13 12:49:48 2007 Subject: [Plant-biology] okra tissue culture regeneration Message-ID: <80b5b0e60711122225ya01c5fr4bfc06a1ce270508@mail.gmail.com> Hi, I am trying to establish tissue culture regeneration of okra (Abelmoschus esculentus). Can anybody help with initial clues for callus induction, embryogenesis and plant regeneration? Any help is greatly appreciated. Regards Ram From nohow from noway.com Fri Nov 16 18:11:28 2007 From: nohow from noway.com (Wendell) Date: Fri Nov 16 22:17:38 2007 Subject: [Plant-biology] Unknown plant Message-ID: Hello all, This plant was found growing along the road in Costa Rica. We can't seem to find out what it is. Can anyone help? http://www.sunxsol.com/ftp_uploads/unknown_plant.JPG Sorry for the large file but wanted to have a detailed picture. Thanks, Wendell From f.de.beul from gmail.com Sat Nov 17 11:55:13 2007 From: f.de.beul from gmail.com (fedrik de beul) Date: Sat Nov 17 13:16:44 2007 Subject: [Plant-biology] terracottem - toxic or not? Message-ID: <88e959100711170855j6b965e2ctf6c15c24955fd6c8@mail.gmail.com> Hello, I am journalist studying the question of the use of polymers in soil conditioners such as Terracottem. The company (see www.terracottem.com) says it is non-toxic, but is that really so? How sure can we be? Other question : this soil conditioner is highly expensive, supposedly so because of the price of non-toxic polymers : can that be be true, or is that fake excuse for selling their product at as high a price as possible (a pity, since it could be a solution for erosion and drought problems in arid regions - which, as we know, are most often poor). Don't know if I came to the right person with this question, but would be most thankful if there would be a reply or piece of advice.... F (brussels, Belgium) From dh321 from excite.com Sun Nov 18 17:48:24 2007 From: dh321 from excite.com (dh321@excite.com) Date: Sun Nov 18 18:33:17 2007 Subject: [Plant-biology] Re: terracottem - toxic or not? References: Message-ID: <8e08c551-e774-445a-bf9d-49e0b0d43d37@b36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com> The potential toxicity of hydrogels is not something that a botanist would have the expertise to answer. The company Download page has a Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) which lists some toxicity tests on fish and bacteria. The chief hazard would seem to be possible inhalation of dust during handling. That can be avoided with proper equipment. Any toxicity would be much more likely to affect the factory workers or workers who apply the material to the soil than consumers of crops produced in hydrogel amended soil. The bigger question is whether the material is effective and cost- effective. The company webpage on History shows three photos of a field supposedly improved by hydrogels. However, there are no photos of a control field that received no hydrogels. Thus, there is no way a scientist can judge the effect of the hydrogels. There are also no numerical data indicating the percent increase in biomass with hydrogel compared to no hydrogel. >From a scientist's perspective the company website is very vague. It says the product significantly improves plant growth and soil water content but provides no numbers, i.e. is it 1% or 10%? Does the yield increase pay for the cost of the hydrogel? It strikes me as odd that if the product is so effective for subsistence agriculture in arid areas, why is the website only marketing it to for mainly aesthetic uses such as sports turf, landscaping, horticulture and home and garden. The site has a section for press clippings, although none are listed there. Where are peer-reviewed scientific articles evaluating the product? Potassium hydrogels also act as a potassium fertilizer so the control treatment must also supply the same amount of potassium. Was this done? This product also contains substantial amount of "NPK fertilizers and trace elements." Are the effects mainly due to the fertilizer or the water absorbent properties? The claim that this is a proprietary mixture of polymers begs the question of how many combinations were field tested before coming up with the ideal mixture and how much more effective is the mixture compared to existing single hydrogels? I know of a research study that evaluated a hydrogel used in container growing media. The study found that for about the same cost, organic matter could provide the same amount of increased water holding capacity as the hydrogel. There are other low tech methods of conserving soil moisture such as mulching, adding organic matter to soil and fallowing fields between crops. Is hydrogel more cost-effective than these techniques? Google scholar can be used to locate scientific articles on hydrogel effects on soils. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=hydrogel+soil&btnG=Search David R. Hershey, Ph.D. http://www.angelfire.com/ab6/hershey/bio.htm On Nov 17, 11:55 am, "fedrik de beul" wrote: > Hello, > > I am journalist studying the question of the use of polymers in soil > conditioners such as Terracottem. > > The company (seewww.terracottem.com) says it is non-toxic, but is that > really so? How sure can we be? > > Other question : this soil conditioner is highly expensive, supposedly so > because of the price of non-toxic polymers : can that be be true, or is that > fake excuse for selling their product at as high a price as possible (a > pity, since it could be a solution for erosion and drought problems in arid > regions - which, as we know, are most often poor). > > Don't know if I came to the right person with this question, but would be > most thankful if there would be a reply or piece of advice.... > > F (brussels, Belgium) From ms from crc.dk Mon Nov 19 03:35:12 2007 From: ms from crc.dk (Morten Storgaard) Date: Mon Nov 19 14:23:13 2007 Subject: [Plant-biology] Unknown plant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <002201c82a87$1a127d30$621014ac@C216A01> The plant is a Kalanch?e tubifolium (or tubiflora). Regards Morten Storgaard -----Original Message----- From: Wendell [mailto:nohow@noway.com] Sent: 17. november 2007 00:11 To: plantbio@net.bio.net Subject: [Plant-biology] Unknown plant Hello all, This plant was found growing along the road in Costa Rica. We can't seem to find out what it is. Can anyone help? http://www.sunxsol.com/ftp_uploads/unknown_plant.JPG Sorry for the large file but wanted to have a detailed picture. Thanks, Wendell From sfkrasny from ncsu.edu Wed Nov 28 10:53:49 2007 From: sfkrasny from ncsu.edu (sfkrasny@ncsu.edu) Date: Wed Nov 28 14:28:42 2007 Subject: [Plant-biology] nos promoter in agro Message-ID: <4531.65.190.223.140.1196265229.squirrel@webmail.ncsu.edu> Recently the construct was made were binary vector has spec resistance for selection of E. coli containing this plasmid. Does anybody know if the nos promoter that is driving nptII (on T-DNA) is active in Agrobacterium? In our previous similar constructs nptII was driven by 35S not by nos promoter and Agro could be selected with kanamycin as well (100 mg/ml). I have read some references that nos promoter would be active but Agro could grow with kanamycin at lower concentration. Any comments or literature reference? Thanks From popco from toast.net Thu Nov 29 14:01:11 2007 From: popco from toast.net (McPop) Date: Thu Nov 29 15:44:02 2007 Subject: [Plant-biology] Please help me with my UFFO's Message-ID: <233uk3pt0b7tlij38atipfvrtrflju18rp@4ax.com> Please help me with my UFFO's Unidentified Fungal and Fauna Objects I was digging in the litter on a wooded (Oak, Madrone, Pine, Doug-fir) hillside in southern Oregon and came across a puzzling item. It is a 3cm tan spherical organic aggregate make up of plant fragments (80%) enclosed in a fine grain tan matrix. I saturated it with water to get the fauna moving around. It is densely packed with .5mm black teardrop-shaped structures (UFFungal?O) imbedded 1/3 to 2/3 into the surface. They disintegrate easily into a liquid with probing. With care, it is possible to detach one from the surface and turn it over. The base has a round opening with "roots" oriented towards the center. Among the living organisms found throughout are a few widely spaced white fungal filaments throughout and an occasional group of very fine black filaments attached to the surface in a net pattern. Also found on the surface are small groups of projecting fine white dendritic fungal filaments. An occasional springtail makes an appearance. The next two UFFaunaO's are both transparent. The smallest, 2-3mm, is worm-like and tapered at both ends with no visible features seen with a low power (40X) binocular microscope. It's contents are a slightly murky, yellow to tan towards the posterior and a couple of white masses in the center of the body. Strong highlights show a hint of segmentation. The largest, 5mm x .5mm, has two thin black structures in the anterior portion. The forward one is a V shape; the back one is a square U shape which slightly overlaps the V shape. The apexes point to the front. Two white gut-like pieces run down the back ending in two short (.1mm) projections on the posterior top. A number of irregular shaped masses in the body cavity are white with two yellow ones. With a strong side light, 6 or 7 segments become visible as well as very tiny, barely discernable paired feet. Removing the water causes the creature to attach itself very firmly by the mouth and wave its body around vertically. Both easily glide through the nooks and crannies in a worm-like fashion. Also found were numerous opaque, white, 10-segmented, eyed, grub-like creature with paired feet. The head has a amber "skullcap" and the tail has two amber projections on top. I am guessing the aggregate was made by a beetle. Correct? What are the teardrop structures? What are the transparent worms? What are the grubs? I have a number of books on invertebrates, zoology, soil ecology, etc., but none of them show this group of organisms. Can you recommend a book on soil/litter fauna? Thanks, Mac