4 ms·

TIL Pando is not just an especially large quaking aspen, but rather a triploid mutant that can reproduce only asexually.

by fritzo 2y ago

dvh 2y ago
I once spoke with fish biologist about goldfish (or was it carasius? I don't remember), they reproduce via gynogenesis, it's like pathogenesis but they need some trigger like other fish spawning, and I said surely there must be some hidden pond in some misty mountains in China where there are still male goldfish. I asked him if he believe such hidden pond could exist somewhere and he said no and mumbled something about triploids. Scientists are not romantic.
- vanderZwan 2y ago
  They're romantic until romanticism gets in the way of dispassionate interpretations of what the data tells them to be the most likely truth. Would you rather have them make stuff up and undermine the very purpose of their job?
  - PittleyDunkin 2y ago
    I think there's a middle ground we call "the capacity for imagination", which can be both romantic and need not conflict with empirical analysis.
    - vanderZwan 2y ago
      The thing is, this story sounds like miscommunication/misremembering all-around because male goldfish do exist, and their "reproduction" section on wikipedia does not mention asexual reproduction at all[0]. Also, the wiki page on gynogenesis suggests that it specifically is a form of reproduction that still requires a male and a female, but that the male does not contribute any DNA to the offspring[1]. So male fish are required either way, although they are typically from an "adjacent" species. Searching the general internet just returns articles claiming goldfish can reproduce asexually, followed by another paragraph claiming they can't (proving to me that it's all AI generated bullshit). Not even going to link examples. Then, finally, Google Scholar points to two articles with the following titles: Genetic responses in sexual diploid and asexual triploid goldfish (Carassius auratus) introduced into a high-altitude environment and Genetic homeostasis and developmental stability in natural populations of bisexual (Carassius auratus) and unisexual (C. gibelio) goldfishes[2][3]. Reading those finally clarifies that goldfish (carassius auratus) are the diploid species that reproduces sexually, and the Prussian carp (carassius gibelio) being the adjacent triploid species that reproduces via gynogenesis, including by using sperm from goldfish. So if the question was interpreted as "could there still be male Prussian carp somewhere in the wild?" I'm guessing the answer was "no" because being a triploid that reproduces via gynogenesis seems to be a fundamental part what defines their classification as a separate species. Any hypothetical "diploid Prussian carp" would probably be labeled as different species altogether. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldfish#Reproduction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldfish#Reproduction [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynogenesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynogenesis [2] https://www.techrxiv.org/doi/full/10.22541/au.166859689.91177037 https://www.techrxiv.org/doi/full/10.22541/au.166859689.9117... [3] https://link.springer.com/article/10.3103/S0095452709050077 https://link.springer.com/article/10.3103/S0095452709050077 [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prussian_carp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prussian_carp
- thaumasiotes 2y ago
  > they reproduce via gynogenesis, it's like pathogenesis That's an interesting choice of word construction. parthenogenesis -> virgin birth. gynecogenesis -> woman birth. [gynogenesis is an impossible form, and pathogenesis would refer to "disease birth"] I can see how "virgin birth" is distinctive compared to ordinary birth. How is "woman birth" supposed to be different? Are people not normally born from... women?
  - dvh 2y ago
    pathogenesis was spellcheck error (I meant parthenogenesis) and gynogenesis is real https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynogenesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynogenesis
  - deaddodo 2y ago
    > How is "woman birth" supposed to be different? Are people not normally born from... women? It's referring to the to, not the from. But in either case, yes; however, males are usually involved. In this case, it's woman exclusive. They simply use sperm to stimulate the urge to procreate/kick off the process. Thus, the need for other species to be spawning nearby.
thaumasiotes 2y ago
Well, the article says this: > Pando is triploid, meaning that its cells contain three copies of each chromosome, rather than two. As a result, Pando cannot reproduce sexually and mix its DNA with that of other trees but this seems to misunderstand the nature of plants. In an animal, this kind of ploidy variability wouldn't just make the organism sterile, it would kill it. Plants are more tolerant, and many species are known which have done what this article claims is impossible. For example, redwoods are hexaploid, which doesn't interfere with their reproduction. Wikipedia: > Polyploidy has come to be understood as quite common in plants—with estimates ranging from 47% to 100% of flowering plants and extant ferns having derived from ancient polyploidy. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sequoioideae https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sequoioideae ) It just isn't an obstacle. I don't know what the article author was thinking.
- Suppafly 2y ago
  >It just isn't an obstacle. I don't know what the article author was thinking. Probably googling a term, learning how it applies to mammals and assuming that's true for plants as well.
- ljsprague 2y ago
  >redwoods are hexaploid, which doesn't interfere with their reproduction Six is divisible by two though.
  - thaumasiotes 2y ago
    What's the relevance? If you assume that a viable zygote would need to be triploid, which is already unclear, you'd expect 50% of fertilizations to meet that requirement. (Since gametes should be half-monoploid and half-diploid.) A 50% nonviability rate is high, but it's far too low to prevent reproduction. For example, the spontaneous miscarriage rate in humans is over 20%.
    - ljsprague 2y ago
      Because in meiosis you need to pair homologous chromosomes.

TIL Pando is not just an especially large quaking aspen, but rather a triploid mutant that can reproduce only asexually.

by fritzo 2y ago

TIL Pando is not just an especially large quaking aspen, but rather a triploid mutant that can reproduce only asexually.

dvh 2y ago

I once spoke with fish biologist about goldfish (or was it carasius? I don't remember), they reproduce via gynogenesis, it's like pathogenesis but they need some trigger like other fish spawning, and I said surely there must be some hidden pond in some misty mountains in China where there are still male goldfish. I asked him if he believe such hidden pond could exist somewhere and he said no and mumbled something about triploids. Scientists are not romantic.

vanderZwan 2y ago
They're romantic until romanticism gets in the way of dispassionate interpretations of what the data tells them to be the most likely truth. Would you rather have them make stuff up and undermine the very purpose of their job?
- PittleyDunkin 2y ago
  I think there's a middle ground we call "the capacity for imagination", which can be both romantic and need not conflict with empirical analysis.
  - vanderZwan 2y ago
    The thing is, this story sounds like miscommunication/misremembering all-around because male goldfish do exist, and their "reproduction" section on wikipedia does not mention asexual reproduction at all[0]. Also, the wiki page on gynogenesis suggests that it specifically is a form of reproduction that still requires a male and a female, but that the male does not contribute any DNA to the offspring[1]. So male fish are required either way, although they are typically from an "adjacent" species. Searching the general internet just returns articles claiming goldfish can reproduce asexually, followed by another paragraph claiming they can't (proving to me that it's all AI generated bullshit). Not even going to link examples. Then, finally, Google Scholar points to two articles with the following titles: Genetic responses in sexual diploid and asexual triploid goldfish (Carassius auratus) introduced into a high-altitude environment and Genetic homeostasis and developmental stability in natural populations of bisexual (Carassius auratus) and unisexual (C. gibelio) goldfishes[2][3]. Reading those finally clarifies that goldfish (carassius auratus) are the diploid species that reproduces sexually, and the Prussian carp (carassius gibelio) being the adjacent triploid species that reproduces via gynogenesis, including by using sperm from goldfish. So if the question was interpreted as "could there still be male Prussian carp somewhere in the wild?" I'm guessing the answer was "no" because being a triploid that reproduces via gynogenesis seems to be a fundamental part what defines their classification as a separate species. Any hypothetical "diploid Prussian carp" would probably be labeled as different species altogether. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldfish#Reproduction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldfish#Reproduction [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynogenesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynogenesis [2] https://www.techrxiv.org/doi/full/10.22541/au.166859689.91177037 https://www.techrxiv.org/doi/full/10.22541/au.166859689.9117... [3] https://link.springer.com/article/10.3103/S0095452709050077 https://link.springer.com/article/10.3103/S0095452709050077 [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prussian_carp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prussian_carp
thaumasiotes 2y ago
> they reproduce via gynogenesis, it's like pathogenesis That's an interesting choice of word construction. parthenogenesis -> virgin birth. gynecogenesis -> woman birth. [gynogenesis is an impossible form, and pathogenesis would refer to "disease birth"] I can see how "virgin birth" is distinctive compared to ordinary birth. How is "woman birth" supposed to be different? Are people not normally born from... women?
- dvh 2y ago
  pathogenesis was spellcheck error (I meant parthenogenesis) and gynogenesis is real https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynogenesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynogenesis
- deaddodo 2y ago
  > How is "woman birth" supposed to be different? Are people not normally born from... women? It's referring to the to, not the from. But in either case, yes; however, males are usually involved. In this case, it's woman exclusive. They simply use sperm to stimulate the urge to procreate/kick off the process. Thus, the need for other species to be spawning nearby.

thaumasiotes 2y ago

Well, the article says this: > Pando is triploid, meaning that its cells contain three copies of each chromosome, rather than two. As a result, Pando cannot reproduce sexually and mix its DNA with that of other trees but this seems to misunderstand the nature of plants. In an animal, this kind of ploidy variability wouldn't just make the organism sterile, it would kill it. Plants are more tolerant, and many species are known which have done what this article claims is impossible. For example, redwoods are hexaploid, which doesn't interfere with their reproduction. Wikipedia: > Polyploidy has come to be understood as quite common in plants—with estimates ranging from 47% to 100% of flowering plants and extant ferns having derived from ancient polyploidy. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sequoioideae https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sequoioideae ) It just isn't an obstacle. I don't know what the article author was thinking.

Suppafly 2y ago
>It just isn't an obstacle. I don't know what the article author was thinking. Probably googling a term, learning how it applies to mammals and assuming that's true for plants as well.
ljsprague 2y ago
>redwoods are hexaploid, which doesn't interfere with their reproduction Six is divisible by two though.
- thaumasiotes 2y ago
  What's the relevance? If you assume that a viable zygote would need to be triploid, which is already unclear, you'd expect 50% of fertilizations to meet that requirement. (Since gametes should be half-monoploid and half-diploid.) A 50% nonviability rate is high, but it's far too low to prevent reproduction. For example, the spontaneous miscarriage rate in humans is over 20%.
  - ljsprague 2y ago
    Because in meiosis you need to pair homologous chromosomes.