home
meeting index
2001 FRSA Rule Proposal Review

May 8, 2001

AOSA Rules Committee
Doug Ashton, Chair
Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Laboratory Services Bldg. No. 22
Central Experimental Farm
Ottawa, ON, K1A 0C6, CANADA

Dear Mr. Ashton,

Annually, members attending the April business meeting of the Front Range Seed Analyst (FRSA) review the annual AOSA Proposed Rules as published in the February issue of The Seed Technologist Newsletter.

Membership in FRSA is represented by Seed Analysts with AOSA and SCST laboratory affiliations, giving a good cross-section of knowledge and experience to comment on the Proposed Rules.  Review comments are the consensus of presiding members at the April FRSA business meeting and may not represent the views of all FRSA members.

Rules Proposals supported by FRSA, as the Proposals were published are: 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, and 30.

Following are comments regarding the remaining Proposals.

Rule Change Proposal #4: What happens to the common name ‘soapwort’?  Is it dropped and only the common name ‘rock saponaria’ recognized?  FRSA members, present at review, indicated they are in favor of retaining ‘soapwort’ as a common name for Saponaria ocymoides.

Rule Change Proposal #7: FRSA members, present at review, support the proposal, however, feel that the full name of “AOSA Contribution No. 25: Uniform Classification of Weed and Crop Seeds, 1999” in place of “AOSA Handbook 25:Uniform Classification of Weed and Crop Seeds, 1999” should be the proper nomenclature.

Rule Change Proposal #10: There is an editorial error in that the common name ‘fennel’ is listed instead of the common name ‘common thyme’ in Table 1 for the proposed new rule.  Also, there is a question about the procedure for determining the mean weight per gram per 100 seeds.  The supporting evidence demonstrates these mean weights display less than 4 significant numbers (a requirement of Appendix 4, Determination of Weight of Working Samples for Kinds not Listed in Table 1).  Members, present at review, question whether these mean weights are adequate for determining purity working weight in grams for this species.  If the author can verify the weights provided in the data for the proposal to be accurate with
4 significant numbers, FRSA would support the rule with the editorial error corrected.

Rule Change Proposal #20A and #20B: FRSA members, present at review, support Rule Change Proposal 20A in-lieu-or 20B, however, support is given for 20B should the majority of AOSA members favor replacing Grabe (1970) in the rules.

Rule Change Proposal #23: Discussed at great length, members, present at review, decided no support could be given to this proposal as currently written.  There was a study of this proposal at the July 2000 FRSA Seed Analysts Forum.  FRSA members evaluated seedlings of species in the Balsam Family.  Comments and recommendations from these evaluations indicated confusion regarding root development.  Participants in the July 2000 workshop had great difficulty distinguishing the primary root from other roots.  A seedling with no primary root development but with a least two (2) secondary roots could be either a normal seedling or an abnormal seedling based on the seedling’s root growth as indicated by drawings 2B(+) and 3C(-).  Analysts accepted the 2B(+) drawing but questioned the 3C(-) drawing, feeling the three (3) roots present in 3C(-) could (1.) indicate a primary root present, and (2.) the three (3) roots were well enough developed for evaluating the seedling as normal.  Members, present at review, still support a redraw of drawing 3C(-), showing the roots being shorter.  If amended, FRSA would support adding the Balsam Family to the Seedling Evaluation Handbook because many species of the Balsam Family are plug grown nursery stocks.

Rule Change Proposal #27: Members, present at review, have a concern that the data for determining minimum weight for purity analysis were weighed to 3 significant numbers instead of 4 significant numbers as required by Appendix 4 (Determination of Weight of Working Samples for Kinds not Listed in Table 1).  If the author can verify the weights provided in the data for the proposal to be accurate with
4 significant numbers, FRSA would support the proposal.

Rule Change Proposal #28: Members, present at review, have a concern that the data for determining minimum weight for purity analysis were weighed to 2 significant numbers instead of 4 significant numbers or to 4 decimal places as required by Appendix 4 (Determination of Weight of Working Samples for Kinds not Listed in Table 1).  If the author can verify the weights provided in the data for the proposal to be accurate with 4 significant numbers or to 4 decimal places, FRSA would support the proposal.

Rule Change Proposal #29: Numerous questions arose regarding this proposal.  In Table 1, there is a listing for Linum perenne L. subsp. lewisii (Pursh) Hult., which some members, present at review, questioned as the same species as the rule proposal, Linum lewisii.  The Analyst responsible for the present listing in Table 1 was present at the review and indicated the data provided at the time the minimum seed weights were calculated was seed considered to be collected from native stands in the Intermountain Region.  Additionally, the question arose about the identity of the ‘Appar’ flax variety, presently available commercially as Linum lewisii.  A decision was made to contact the author and get more background information.  Annette Miller (NSSL) contacted Dr. S.G. Kitchen asking for information regarding the relationship of
Linum perenne L.  subsp. lewisii to Linum lewisii.  Research by Dr. Kitchen supports the argument of two separate species of Linum perenne L. (European Blue Flax) and Linum lewisii (North American Flax) through studies of flower morphology and reproduction characteristics.  Dr. Kitchen indicated that the variety ‘Appar’ was originally collected in the Black Hill of South Dakota and eventually released as a cultivar of native (North American) Lewis Flax (Linum lewisii).  Subsequent collections by Dr. Kitchen in the same region of South Dakota indicate the species collected are North American type and not ‘Appar’ type (which displays characteristics of Linum perenne L., European Blue Flax).   Dr. Kitchen concludes the original  ‘Appar’ collection was from an escaped population of introduced flax.  There is presently an effort to educate the seed trade of the misclassification of ‘Appar’ as Linum lewisii, when ‘Appar’ is actually a variety of Linum perenne L..  Dr. Kitchen notes that the subsp. designation of “lewisii” should be dropped from Linum perenne L. in Table 1, with a recommendation of a listing of Linum perenne L. for ‘Appar’ and related introductions and Linum lewisii for North American originating species in both Tables 1 and 3 (addition of Linum lewisii is Rule Change Proposal #29)

Another question arises to the validity of Linum perenne L. subsp. lewisii.  GRIN does not recognize Linum perenne L. subsp. lewisii and there is no listing of the species as a synonym for another species.  If this taxon is not valid, should the listing in Table 1 be removed?  (There seems to be a question as to the species collected in calculating the minimum weight for purity testing presently listed in Table 1.)   Additionally, GRIN lists variety ‘Appar’ as Linum lewisii.  Dr. Wiersema was contacted regarding the ‘Appar’ classification.  Dr. Wiersema has forwarded the question of changing ‘Appar’ variety from
Linum lewisii to Linum perenne L. on GRIN to the curators at NC-7 (Ames, Iowa) for determination of name change.
A final question regarding the use of KNO3 in the germination procedure.  Dr. Kitchen did not use KNO3 in the germination trials, indicating prior experience demonstrated KNO3 use to be a relatively ineffective treatment on many species collected from the Intermountain West.  Barbara Atkin of STA Laboratories (Longmont, Colorado) uses KNO3 and dark (foil wrapped) germination conditions, seeing uniform germination results in 14 days without the use of a pre-chill.
To summarize FRSA’s viewpoint on this Rule Change Proposal is that after review of additional data provided by Dr. Kitchen, FRSA supports Rule Change Proposal #29.  FRSA suggests that perhaps Dr. Kitchen can follow up on seeing that Linum perenne L. subsp. lewisii is revised to eliminate the subsp. lewisii portion of the name based on Dr. Kitchen’s research.   And, see that ‘Appar’ flax is added as a common name to the Linum perenne L. listing in Table 1, Table 3, and Handbook 25.  The weight for ‘Appar’ flax given by Dr. Kitchen (650/gram) is equivalent to the current purity weight listed for
Linum perenne L. subsp. lewisii in Table 1.  Also, Dr. Kitchen might study the use of KNO3 in the germination procedure for Linum lewisii.

FRSA thanks the Rules Committee for the opportunity to express opinions regarding the 2001 AOSA Rule Change Proposals.


Sincerely,

Mike Bricker
Secretary
Front Range Seed Analysts

cc: Billie Lundberg, FRSA President
top