Raises more philosophical and information theory questions than botanical or taxonomic issues. But this is normal doesnt one expect the same from any living organism even if clones or genetically identical-? The issue is as old as Plato and Aristotle and the medieval scholastics.
There is an essence of a thing without which it wouldnt be what it is. The rest is variability.
So the botanical description of this asphodelos a Greek weed and sacred plant clearly must be very carefully modified if it was derived from only one specimen but if wide enough parameters are given then it would be adequate. For instance number of leaves shape of leaves this must be the most constant as well as colour of leaves the arrangement of whorls and their number and density. Less constant size of leaves and of whole plant.
I’ll stop there as one could go on nearly forever.
Actually these are of course not clones anyway as these were not propagated from a single plant or a single seed but from a batch of seeds which may mean anything.
Uniformity or identity would be more suprising as plants and animals not even crystals arent churned out in an assembly line as there are print runs never mind reprints or new editions so that the same book woulld not be the same as another copy.
Best seen in art books where the illustrations might be totally altered just merely because of say more or less ink or different ink or paper quality say.
Each plant even if genetically identical which they arent would interact with its environment different soil more light less water even varying air or wind say.
Identical twins are only superficially identical one got 3 instead of 4 microgram of folic acid at a critical stage.
Would it not be incredibly surprising if two trees would match one another branch for branch twig for twig leaf for leaf.
That’s even presocratic Heraclitus you cant step into the same river twice. He could’ve said that you cannot find two identical blades of grass on the planet nevermind in a meadow.
Raises more philosophical and information theory questions than botanical or taxonomic issues. But this is normal doesnt one expect the same from any living organism even if clones or genetically identical-? The issue is as old as Plato and Aristotle and the medieval scholastics.
There is an essence of a thing without which it wouldnt be what it is. The rest is variability.
So the botanical description of this asphodelos a Greek weed and sacred plant clearly must be very carefully modified if it was derived from only one specimen but if wide enough parameters are given then it would be adequate. For instance number of leaves shape of leaves this must be the most constant as well as colour of leaves the arrangement of whorls and their number and density. Less constant size of leaves and of whole plant.
I’ll stop there as one could go on nearly forever.
Actually these are of course not clones anyway as these were not propagated from a single plant or a single seed but from a batch of seeds which may mean anything.
Uniformity or identity would be more suprising as plants and animals not even crystals arent churned out in an assembly line as there are print runs never mind reprints or new editions so that the same book woulld not be the same as another copy.
Best seen in art books where the illustrations might be totally altered just merely because of say more or less ink or different ink or paper quality say.
Each plant even if genetically identical which they arent would interact with its environment different soil more light less water even varying air or wind say.
Identical twins are only superficially identical one got 3 instead of 4 microgram of folic acid at a critical stage.
Would it not be incredibly surprising if two trees would match one another branch for branch twig for twig leaf for leaf.
That’s even presocratic Heraclitus you cant step into the same river twice. He could’ve said that you cannot find two identical blades of grass on the planet nevermind in a meadow.