[MassChestnutOrchards] FW: matacf minutes aug. 2009

[Mike or Penny Novack]

>
>  For example, two of my Lincoln lines are replicated at Hawley. Why 
>shouldn't some of our F2 nuts from these Chelmsford and Topsfield lines 
>come from crosses in both places involving these lines? The alternative 
>would be for Lincoln to wait two years for Hawley to catch up. I really 
>don't see the point.
>
>  
>
Perhaps more to the point, Kendra, why would you necessarily expect the 
same test outcomes under different environmental conditions? By genetics 
the pure Chinese trees at Hawley (elev ~1800', exposed to wind) should 
be more resistant to blight than the F1 controls and the BC3 trees but 
will probably test as highly susceptible. That's because they are 
already stressed to the survival point (I have taken the 2009 status 
measurements but not yet entered all the data -- but I can tell you that 
NONE of the surviving Chinese trees up there are achieving "treehood", 
at most being just smallish bushes and some of them appear to be going 
down to blight. Doesn't mean much if you genes say "seal up the 
infection site quicker" if your growth has already been slowed to a 
crawl by the harsh weather.

The point is that not all of our trees can survive (do more than barely 
survive) at the Hawley site even without the blight. Our selection of 
individuals done at Hawley for relatively highest resistance and other 
desirable traits is including the trait "able to survive in the harsher 
climate parts of the chestnut's range". We can't do that selection 
except at a hash conditions site like Hawley.

Michael