Hey all,
I need a bit of advice and/or a bit of help understanding something.
So I have the ability to get seedlings from one of the remaining chestnut stands in Michigan. It's currently believed that the parent trees are infected with the hypovirulent strain of the blight. I've read that, basically, hypovirulence isn't passed down, but the new generation of trees would be OK if they were exposed and infected with that same hypovirulent strain. As I see it, the trees themselves don't have any actual resistance, and thus those traits won't/can't be passed down.
My line of thought for these seedlings is that IF they are grown in the same location near the parent trees, they will likely be exposed to the hypovirulent strain, and will thus be OK to plant elsewhere in the state. If, however, they were nowhere near the parents, they won't get infected and will eventually be host to the "original" chestnut blight. Is this correct? or can the virus be in the nut once it falls, leading to the infection of the "good" blight strain even if the seedlings are not in the area of the parent trees?
I am going to be contacting the conservation district that sells them and ask what their process is. I know we aren't 100% sure that the only reason these trees survived is hypovirulence, but it is the best current guess. I'd be fine with a tree that isn't resistant, as long as it would have the hypovirulent strain. I'm planting a few white oaks, since I only have 1 or 2 on my entire property (tons of Reds, though) and it'd be easy to throw in a few chestnuts.
Thanks for any and all help!
I need a bit of advice and/or a bit of help understanding something.
So I have the ability to get seedlings from one of the remaining chestnut stands in Michigan. It's currently believed that the parent trees are infected with the hypovirulent strain of the blight. I've read that, basically, hypovirulence isn't passed down, but the new generation of trees would be OK if they were exposed and infected with that same hypovirulent strain. As I see it, the trees themselves don't have any actual resistance, and thus those traits won't/can't be passed down.
My line of thought for these seedlings is that IF they are grown in the same location near the parent trees, they will likely be exposed to the hypovirulent strain, and will thus be OK to plant elsewhere in the state. If, however, they were nowhere near the parents, they won't get infected and will eventually be host to the "original" chestnut blight. Is this correct? or can the virus be in the nut once it falls, leading to the infection of the "good" blight strain even if the seedlings are not in the area of the parent trees?
I am going to be contacting the conservation district that sells them and ask what their process is. I know we aren't 100% sure that the only reason these trees survived is hypovirulence, but it is the best current guess. I'd be fine with a tree that isn't resistant, as long as it would have the hypovirulent strain. I'm planting a few white oaks, since I only have 1 or 2 on my entire property (tons of Reds, though) and it'd be easy to throw in a few chestnuts.
Thanks for any and all help!
