Author Topic: Breeding with wild tomato species  (Read 22305 times)

William S.

  • Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,273
  • Karma: 60
    • Botanist, gardener, and science teacher.
    • View Profile
  • Koppen zone: Dfb Googled
  • Hardiness Zone: USDA zone 6A
Re: Breeding with wild tomato species
« Reply #270 on: 2021-12-06, 07:02:11 AM »
Maybe, perhaps I am wrong. Their could be pathways in both directions and there are a lot of factors. The pollinators Bombus species in my 2021 patch seemed to be being true to species. They seemed to prefer SI arcanum, then SI habrochaites, then the more small dull flowers of domestics and promiscuous project elites. I'm not sure, cannot remember if the tiny closed flowers of the galapagense were even attracting pollinators. Though they all set seed. What I hoped would happen was habrochaites pollen flowing into those elites gene pools to produce new F1s which in 2022 might back flow into the habrochaites. But what my pollinator observations suggested was rather that cross species pollinations might be rare. Individual pollinators seemed to be working one species at a time skipping over other species.

R18 which has more habrochaites like flowers might interact differently with pollinators and habrochaites which I intend to investigate in 2022. Though I also have a great deal of seed to sift through looking for F1s. Based on Josephs searching that sifting should be literal as well as figurative. There were multiple different pollination behaviors if you will on individual elite promiscuous project plants some of which seem obligate out crossing like and some of which seem to indicate selfing. It's possible that the promiscuous tomato project is currently a mixed system. If so is it going to become fully selfing or fully out crossing? It is also kind of hard to know if I am right on that.

I had something like 6 R18 G2 plants in 2021. They had remarkable fidelity in terms of large colorful exserted flowers. The sort the video indicates co-occur with SI. Their behavior seemed more indicative of SI
Western Montana garden, glacial lake Missoula sediment lacustrian parent material and shallow 7" silty clay loam mollisoil topsoil sometimes with added sand in places. Zone 6A with 100 to 130 frost free days

William S.

  • Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,273
  • Karma: 60
    • Botanist, gardener, and science teacher.
    • View Profile
  • Koppen zone: Dfb Googled
  • Hardiness Zone: USDA zone 6A
Re: Breeding with wild tomato species
« Reply #271 on: 2021-12-11, 10:40:21 AM »
Thinking about the implications of that video for Joseph's self-incompatibility project in tomatoes. My guess is that 2021 elites in my garden from the promiscuous project were a mix of selfing and obligate outcrossing individuals. If I could leave that population to its own devices it would probably depend on a few variables including population size, latitude, gene flow, season length, etc. But ultimately the population would choose one system or another on its own. In a larger context if everyone growing promiscuous project tomatoes can be thought of as a metapopulation it also would depend a little on gene flow between populations. As long as their is gene flow between populations as long as some populations became entirely obligate outcrossing those would probably only flow one way. I think part of the reason that in habrochaites range the populations on the north and south ends are selfing is because of disruption of gene flow. So, if gene flow continues more and more promiscuous tomato populations should pick up obligate outcrossing.

Had a lot of red tomatoes in my bicolor only promiscuous tomato grow out of 2021. Not sure what percentage but even if not obligate outcrossing a lot of outcrossing occurred. Flower structure wise they are not even the most exserted tomato population in my gardens so if it is purely outcrossing based on flower structure even modest improvements towards outcrossing flower structure must increase outcrossing rates. Which suggests that high end flower structure improvements like those seen in R18 should have really high outcrossing rates. In 2022 my plan for R18 is currently as a backup for putative new hybrids which may or may not prove to exist for crossing with LA2329. In theory R18 should cross nicely with LA2329 in both directions. Which would bring LA2329 material closer to useability. However, if I end up with lots of LA2329 hybrids from my 2021 crossing block that may not even be necessary as the hybrids should act as a bridge. In 2020 I planted the backcross line next to the LA2329 growout, in 2021 I planted some promiscuous project elites around the LA2329 growout. I saw nothing I recognized as hybridization in LA2329. My 2021 LA2329 seed shows no signs of seed size changes. My guess would be that in terms of turning LA2329 into a back cross it hasn't happened yet but I would be happy to be surprised.

Since I seem to do well with deliberate crosses indoors I should consider starting a plant of LA2329 in January to see if I can get it blooming and use it as a pollen donor before I need to outplant everything for the summer. Hindsight is 2020 but I wish I had started a few more things in August when I started the MMS x BH F1. would love to be making crosses now. Is a good plan for 2022 though to plant a wider variety of seeds in August for winter grow out.

I didn't plant LA1410 galapagense in August maybe September or October but the one plant that survived is slowly getting bigger. Hopefully it will bloom soon and a winter cross with that can ensue. That would be fun! It is kind of the opposite of habrochaites. Tiny pale inserted flowers.
« Last Edit: 2021-12-11, 11:49:05 AM by William S. »
Western Montana garden, glacial lake Missoula sediment lacustrian parent material and shallow 7" silty clay loam mollisoil topsoil sometimes with added sand in places. Zone 6A with 100 to 130 frost free days

Garrett Schantz

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 499
  • Karma: 20
    • View Profile
    • Email
  • Koppen zone: Dfa
  • Hardiness Zone: USDA zone 6
Re: Breeding with wild tomato species
« Reply #272 on: 2021-12-19, 12:02:45 AM »
Mentioned on another post that I went on vacation for 9 days - some seeds germinated during this time and became leggy due to lack of light.

Anyways, the typical Peruvianums are on the left, the "Off Peruvianum" seedling is on the right. Germination on the "Off Peruvianum is rather horrible. Maybe the others will eventually come up - I still have more seeds for it as well.


My seedlings are over a month old.


Time to post photos!


First image has the single sprout / seedling of "Off Peruvianum".

Second image has some other Peruvianums from one of Joseph's mixes from the Experimental Farm Network - next to Off Peruvianum

Third image has Exserted Orange along with Off Peruvianum.

Off Peru has larger leaves - appears to be growing faster compared to the others. It also had a later start than the others - the others were also leggy due to me being away for awhile.

Leaf type / size is interesting. Vigor is very nice.




Garrett Schantz

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 499
  • Karma: 20
    • View Profile
    • Email
  • Koppen zone: Dfa
  • Hardiness Zone: USDA zone 6
Re: Breeding with wild tomato species
« Reply #273 on: 2022-01-11, 10:27:23 PM »
Made a video about my "Off Peruvianum" and a few other things.

Description of things in the video description.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XcL0yWfeJg


Even if this isn't a hybrid, it is a lot more vigorous / faster growing than the others.