North American Fruit Explorers mailing list at ibiblio

[Melissa Kacalanos <mijwiz@yahoo.com>]

I haven't read all the emails on this interesting topic, but I'm chiming in 
anyway. Forgive me if my remarks are redundant.

This seems to be about grafted trees vs seedlings, or is it actually about 
grafted trees vs own-root trees? If someone wants to plant a known good 
cultivar, without the hypothetical evils of grafting, there should be ways of 
getting scionwood to grow on its own roots. Planting with the graft below the 
soil might do it, or it might be possible to get cuttings to root, or 
propagate with tissue culture. Would that make everyone happy? Then I'd 
challenge people to a blind taste test of the same cultivar of fruit, grown 
in the same location, on either its own or grafted roots.


I don't see any particular reason to believe that seedling trees would 
necessarily be any better than grafted ones just because the roots and top 
share the same genes. When discussing cultivated varieties, there isn't 
necessary any natural harmonious metabolic balance there to preserve. 
Cultivars have generally been selected for their tendency to have an 
unbalanced metabolism, allocating a lot more resources to fruit production 
than any reasonable wild plant would. And they're grown in environments quite 
different from the ones their ancestors came from. I have a peony plant, on 
its own roots, with flowers that are much too heavy for the stems to support, 
so they flop over unless I stake them. There's nothing balanced about that. 
There are plenty more examples of non-grafted cultivated plants, and animals, 
that nonetheless have absurdly mismatched characteristics.

I strongly encourage everyone who has the space to grow seedling trees, 
however. If you luck out and get something good, send me scionwood.

Melissa