Are all clones within a cultivar the same age?

Arlithrien

Shohin
Messages
395
Reaction score
502
Location
Tampa, FL
USDA Zone
9b
Since cultivars are basically clones of a single tree, whether they are propagated through cuttings or grafts or air layers etc, does that mean they are the same age as the original mother plant? And using maples as an example, does this mean that one day all clones of a cultivar will die somewhat simultaneously due to old age, as many trees tend to do?
 

sorce

Nonsense Rascal
Messages
32,912
Reaction score
45,595
Location
Berwyn, Il
USDA Zone
6.2
I don't think trees die of old age.

Let's argue that!

Sorce
 

Mike Hennigan

Chumono
Messages
955
Reaction score
1,580
Location
Ithaca, NY
USDA Zone
5b
No they’re not the same age, cuttings and scions are taken from young growth from a plant typically. Even though the mother of a cultivar may be 80 years old or something or it’s just dead, the plant material that is propagated is not that old.

Though it’s an interesting question that I have thought about before. Makes me wonder if the older a cultivar gets will it’s successive clones become more susceptible to mutations or something? Since it’s the same DNA replicating itself over and over.

You could view the concept as a clonal organism almost. The “oldest trees” on earth are clonal organisms. Using that term loosely since the original tree to sprout from seed is now dead and gone but it’s clones still live on.
 

Brian Van Fleet

Pretty Fly for a Bonsai Guy
Messages
13,996
Reaction score
46,166
Location
B’ham, AL
USDA Zone
8A
No. If I propagate a cutting in May 2020 of a shoot that grew from a branch beginning in 2018, how is it any older than two years?
 

milehigh_7

Mister 500,000
Messages
4,922
Reaction score
6,120
Location
Somewhere South of Phoenix
USDA Zone
Hot
Since cultivars are basically clones of a single tree, whether they are propagated through cuttings or grafts or air layers etc, does that mean they are the same age as the original mother plant? And using maples as an example, does this mean that one day all clones of a cultivar will die somewhat simultaneously due to old age, as many trees tend to do?

You ask two questions so your answer is yes and no. The second question first, they won't all die at the same time as the cells that generate during a "cloning" are new cells but new cells of the same organism. Just like portions of our trees may die at different times, so the clones will die at different times.

Now to the first question... by way of answering I will draw your attention to "King Clone" a creosote bush ring estimated to be 11,700 years old. While I know wikipedia is a sucky source, it will get you started if you really want to read up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Clone
 

Leo in N E Illinois

The Professor
Messages
11,341
Reaction score
23,293
Location
on the IL-WI border, a mile from ''da Lake''
USDA Zone
5b
Since cultivars are basically clones of a single tree, whether they are propagated through cuttings or grafts or air layers etc, does that mean they are the same age as the original mother plant? And using maples as an example, does this mean that one day all clones of a cultivar will die somewhat simultaneously due to old age, as many trees tend to do?

Yes & NO

As in tissue culture lines, the cell line that all subsequent propagules from the original cultivar will indeed be the same age. So I respectfully disagree with those that give a simple flat no. Yes, the genetic cell line, all being from a single source, are indeed the same age. All Pinus banksiana 'Chippewa' are a cell line that is the same age.

I raise orchids, a number of my orchids are individual clones from a single seed, some from seed that germinated over 100 years ago. Like an iris, or lawn grass, the orchid grows, divides into multiple meristematic growing points, spreads, the older tissue dies but the front leads are still genetically identical to the original. If you plant a golf green (where it is mowed often enough that once plants it is mowed too low to ever set seed) it is genetically identical 50 years later, even though no part of the grass plants are older than 2 or 3 years. New grows, old fades away. So like 'Pando' the giant 10,000 year old or older Quaking Aspen, yes, the tissue is indeed that old, even though none of the wood is older than a couple hundred years.

By the same token, sprout a maple or elm, root cuttings or make grafts. The tissue line obviously is as old as the original seedling, but the plant in front of you, if rooted from a cutting, or a 1st or 2nd year graft, will be functionally a new plant. So BVF is correct, a cutting from a Juniperus 'Kiushu' is for all intents and purposes a young cutting. Even though the tissue lineage is near 100 years old.

So for practical purposes - BVF is correct, a 2 year old cutting of 'Kiushu' is a 2 year old plant. Horticulture wise, this is a blanket truth.

Note - the exception is with regard to flowering. Malus, are well documented to need anywhere from 5 years to 25 years for the genetic clock to mature to the point of first flowering. Cuttings and grafted plants of old enough to have begun flowering, apples and crab apples (Malus sp), will flower immediately as soon as energy allows. So in that respect, age of the tissue culture lineage does show.

Now to your second question. DO TREES DIE OF OLD AGE - the answer is an emphatic NO. At least not in the same sense as mammals. The tables one sees in Forestry Management or Landscape Management books are based on utility, not on OLD AGE in the sense of vertebrate mammals. For forestry, the age of a stand of tree is economic, Senility or Old Age for forestry is when 50% of a stand (usually defined in acres or hectares) when 50% of the stand has trunks that show some heartwood rot. That is defined as the "death" of the timber acreage. It is an economic measure. You maximize board feet of harvest by harvesting before you have 50 % of your trees with heart rot. Yet we all know of oak trees, in which an individual tree will have survived 500 years beyond the point at which heart rot began. I've got a red oak in my driveway that has been hollow for at least 200 years. Its still growing nicely. Every now and then it drops a branch, I never park a car under it, yet it is beautiful.

In Landscaping Manuals - old age is when a tree has aged past its ornamental purposes. Mimosa is listed as short lived, maybe only 30 or 40 years, yet they can, and do live for more than 100 years. But after the first 20 years, they tend to suffer various rots, broken branches, and become profuse producers of root suckers, such that they become very messy, ugly trees. They will need to be removed because they simply are too ugly for a planned ornamental landscape. That tree is described as ''dead'' in that it needs to go. Similar apple trees in orchards and back yards are often removed on a schedule to maintain productivity. THe tree would happily persist a century longer, but due to pruning techniques, or older wood simply does not produce as much fruit as younger trees, so they get removed. Cherry trees are harvested mechanically, by vibrating the trunk. This vibration causes scarring in the cambium of the trunk. By the time the cherry tree is 25 years old, the trunk is so scarred from mechanical harvesting the cambium is no longer intact enough to support a good harvest. The tree gets replaced with a younger tree.

Trees have no fixed life span. THe aspen that has spread clonally is over 10,000 years. There are creosote bushes that are estimated to be clonaly over 1200 years old. IF you protect a tree from disease, and accidents of environment (lightning and fires) there is no finite limit as to how long a tree may live.

Does this help?
 

parhamr

Omono
Messages
1,767
Reaction score
6,216
Location
Portland, OR
USDA Zone
8
I’m no biologist. This is what I’ve read.

Plants divide cells only in special meristem tissue. That produces new cells, and new growths. This division does not behave like animal cell growth.

That’s why plants do not have limits to size or age. That’s why new tissue is new and not as old as the tissue from which it divided.
 

0soyoung

Imperial Masterpiece
Messages
7,500
Reaction score
12,874
Location
Anacortes, WA (AHS heat zone 1)
USDA Zone
8b
Flowering/fruiting is a maturity thing in many species. After so many years (x) of growing, a genetic switch is thrown in every living cell of the tree. Then, when the required seasonal triggers occur, apical meristems (vegetative buds) morph into flower buds.
 

Forsoothe!

Imperial Masterpiece
Messages
6,878
Reaction score
9,251
Location
Michigan
USDA Zone
6b
Cells have some finite lifespan, whether plant of animal. Death occurs in mammals when we get old and the body stops producing more healthy cells than are dying. If our body produces faulty cells or cancers, we die sooner rather than later. As long as trees keep reproducing new healthy cells and no outside forces attack they might live forever. Broken branches in storms can leave open wounds for bugs or deadly pathogens to enter, etc., and it's unlikely to never be exposed to wind damage or fire, bugs, fungi, or a man with an axe, so the process is eventually interrupted.
 

Wires_Guy_wires

Imperial Masterpiece
Messages
6,460
Reaction score
10,731
Location
Netherlands
I have worked with 'old' cell lines; 14-18 years old material that has been kept in the lab.
Genetically there were a few changes compared to the original frozen culture.
The phenotype changed too.

In general, I'd say plant cells can divide infinite times. But they do evolve along the way, and they don't always end up being exact clones. Some cultures change with as little as six transfers. Others take over 80 transfers in 10 years, to show significant differences. Others could very well be unchanged no matter what.
 

PABonsai

Chumono
Messages
710
Reaction score
776
Location
York, PA
USDA Zone
6b
I would say no because the only thing in new growth as old as the mother is the DNA code. The physical DNA itself is replicated DNA, not original DNA. if cell A replicates and creates cell B, it's the same "recipe" but a new "batch". I think an analogy is a recipe since cells are "made" from other materials. If you had a 100 year old cookie recipe and you made cookies yesterday those wouldn't be 100 year old cookies, though they'd be copies.
 
Last edited:

PABonsai

Chumono
Messages
710
Reaction score
776
Location
York, PA
USDA Zone
6b
Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz! Misuse of analogy. 15 yards and loss of down
Analogy: a comparison of two otherwise unlike things based on resemblance of a particular aspect
 

Forsoothe!

Imperial Masterpiece
Messages
6,878
Reaction score
9,251
Location
Michigan
USDA Zone
6b
Not an analogy: Cookies made from the same generic, not identical genetic materials, are not genetically the same, they are generically the same.

The last paragraph of post #13 rules.
 

rockm

Spuds Moyogi
Messages
14,293
Reaction score
22,507
Location
Fairfax Va.
USDA Zone
7
I think of trees as something like coral reefs--the outer portion of a tree is the only living part of it. At any given time, that outer section is far far younger than the dead interior wood. This is similar to the coral polyps are the on the outer tips of calcium carbonate skeletons that make up the reef are only a few years old. The interior skeleton may be literally ten thousand years old, while the living section is three.

so a cutting from such an old tree is not as old as the oldest part of it. It is as young as the youngest part of it, the outer growing twigs, which may be only two or three years old, even though they share the same DNA as the interior wood.

Do a search on the "Florence Court Yew" It is the mother tree of literally ALL the "Irish Yews" sold in nurseries today.
 

Forsoothe!

Imperial Masterpiece
Messages
6,878
Reaction score
9,251
Location
Michigan
USDA Zone
6b
No, we agree that the exact number of years is not the limiting factor in the best of conditions favoring no serious damage or disease.
However, Trees are some height based upon vascular efficiency (not my bailiwick) and some other genetic factors(also not my bailiwick). When they reach that size limit and can't grow higher they must have the ability to grow sideways, and the space to do so with favorable enough conditions to support the buds that are expanded into leaves, twigs, branches, and do that ad infinitum. New growth must succeed. Often, usually, almost always, those conditions do not exist forever. Even where the space is available, some calamity of weather or disease, fungi, fire, flood, volcanoes, or other bad luck catches-up with the tree. When we see very old trees, we can see how out of character they are growing, like the great oaks that have branches so long they eventually touch the ground. That alone makes them susceptible to disease/organisms living in soil that devour wood. Very tall trees like the Redwoods are natural targets of lightning strikes. Etc. Trees that sucker are probably the closest to immortal in that they may expand sideways to the point that some original DNA still exists and escapes calamity, time, after time, after times. But we're back to the last paragraph of post #13 and what we call that when it occurs outside the lab: evolution. That is probably why most trees, and other plant life of this current era, are relatively young, geologically. We live in just another era, just one of many eras that have now passed. We are in the middle of an evolutionary scale that we can never (I hope) define.
 
Top Bottom