Naga's aint nagas
Posted 17 August 2010 - 06:05 AM
If you want to know where i got this from please PM me.
After growing all of the naga's for years have noticed certain traits they each Have and Have said/mentioned numerous times in various Places that they are all different and the Best Grower/Producer is the Bih and Pushed that for Years instead of the Bhut. There is also a Lot of information out there with people saying this and that and even so called Studies with a lot of scientific stuff that basically goes nowhere but says the Bhut is the Hottest and let's call it that.. Full Stop and everything else is a Bhut but a Different Name
Even a Lot of seed companies will just sell the Bhut as why Bother with the rest, they are all the Same anyway Right ?
few years ago a dude contacted Marcel and myself from Sydney University asking questions about naga's due to the fact he was going to do his Thesis on Them and would let know when Finished his studies and let me know the results....
Thanks Mark for this.. put conclusions plus bit of discussion as it 72 pages long and full of stuff LOL but can have a look at if ever over as interesting read plus feel honored to be mentioned as part of the study as well know that what said over the years in relation to the Naga's isn't Bullshit or making stuff up to try sell stuff.
A Genetic Comparison of “Bhut Jolokia” and “Bih Jolokia” the hottest chillies on Earth.
Literature Review and Research Paper
Faculty of Agriculture
The University of Sydney
23th October 2009
Upon the commencement of this project the main investigative aims were to explore the likely inheritance of the “Bhut Jolokia” variety, however, contact was made with a commercial grower aiming to grow for a niche highly pungent Capsicum market. The grower (Marcel DeWitt was particularly concerned with the unreliability of his “Bhut Jolokia” crop but satisfied with his Bih Jolokia which he had previously accepted to be the same variety. The main emphasis of this paper thus became concerned with the comparison of the genetic similarity of the “Bhut Jolokia” and the “Bih Jolokia” as a means of explaining significant differences in crop yield between the two varieties (DeWitt 2009; Smith 2009). All three molecular genetic methods utilised in the experiment explicitly detail differences in genetic structure at a variety of levels across six of the twelve Capsicum chromosomes. The two varieties are thus shown to be genetically different; moreover the ”Bih Jolokia” is shown to be more closely related to the highly pungent C.chinense and C.frutescens varieties with the “Bhut Jolokia” being more genetically comparable to the less intensely pungent C.annuum varieties.
These results are significant in terms of the varieties grown, but such findings are highly unexpected and lead to the conclusion that incorrect and improperly identified seed may have been acquired and used for “Bhut Jolokia”. The results conflict with regard to the findings published on the “Bhut Jolokia” documented by Bosland et al in 2007. The sequence data identified five major nucleotide differences at two separate markers which can be indicative of varieties that are genetically closely related (Rodriguez et al. 1999). There was however only one key pair of nucleotide substitutions between “Bhut Jolokia”, C.annuum v. annuum (Wild Type) and C.annuum v. longum “Cerise Sweet” (Figure 5) which are morphologically dissimilar varieties.
To clarify the importance of the sequences in question so as to shed light on the effects of these genetic differences on plant morphology and physiology, a BLAST search of the DNA sequences (approximately 100bp) from both Marker 6 and Marker 8 was undertaken. The search identified a similar in sequence cDNA fragment (AK322845.1) found in Solanum lycopersicum (Tomato) varieties with high homology but were deemed unidentified coding regions. It is theorised that the obtained primers coding for the specific marker sequences used in this study identified marker regions with intron and exon portions of DNA. Such marker regions may not be conventionally catalogued, as well as the fact that the COS2 markers used in this research have been only very recently been developed and categorised (Wu et al. 2009) and may not have been augmented into BLAST databases. The phenotypic physiochemical factors underpinning the differences between the two varieties were not identified but it is suggested that reduced crop load in this instance may be derived from a proportion of genetic incompatibility (Onus and Pickersgill 2004; Yaqub and Smith 1971) or niche temperature required for viable pollen production or pollen tube growth (Bosland 1992) .
There were a number of limitations imposed on this experiment that may have contributed to the findings. The requirements for plant growth and development (Bosland 2000; Deli and Tiessen 1969) were not met according to plan. The main contributing factors were the reduced diurnal temperature and hours of sunlight as a result of growth in an unheated greenhouse throughout the winter months. This impacted on the reduced development of flowers and poor quality of fruit required for potential HPLC (High Performance Liquid Chromatography) analysis (Canto-Flick et al. 2008) as well as for the compilation of morphological character measurements. The HPLC analysis would have been instrumental in providing information on the capsaicinoid (pungent chemicals) concentration in the Bhut Jolokia which is indicative of its variety description. The measurement of morphological characters coupled with genetic results may have been subject to software analysis with programs such as STRUCTURE to create cluster analyses and phylogenetic trees giving insight into evolutionary relationships such as that performed in similar Capsicum genetic studies (Tam et al. 2009; Tam et al. 2005).
Another significant drawback with regard to materials was the quality and origin of some of the seed obtained. Three successive plantings were required for some varieties namely C.frutescens and C.baccatum which failed to germinate and were removed from the experiment. The likely causes of poor germination may have been linked to a lack of overripening phase or storage at improper temperature and moisture conditions (Wall et al. 2003). These varieties may have been useful for comparisons regarding the genetic heritage of “Bhut Jolokia” and “Bih Jolokia”.
Factors affecting results were also prevalent in the molecular methods utilised in the experiment. The PCR analysis was initially problematic due to a wide variation in primer pair annealing temperatures; this also adversely affected the length of time required for PCR denaturing, annealing and extension phases. These constraints were fine-tuned throughout experimentation but were still not at an optimum. In addition to the concentrations of extracted, genomic sample DNA, the agarose gel concentration, run time and voltage all had to be fine-tuned and perhaps such tasks may not have been performed under optimal conditions. The subjectivity of band comparisons for both the PCR gels and the CelI Digestion gels was also aimed to be minimised through the production of high resolution images which were analysed in a mixed peer group.
A study comparing the potential most pungent Capsicum species is novel in a country that is becoming increasingly demanding of increased spice and flavour (FAO Stat 2009). Establishing defined, specific genetic distinction between such varieties has the potential to open up new plant breeding and varietal development opportunities. Whilst such crop species as the Bhut Jolokia are currently being cultivated as a source of nutrition, avenues related to the farming of capsaicin for medicinal (Carmichael 1991; Chou et al. 2009) or defence (Barry et al. 2008) purposes are developing.
Future research in this field could revolve around a comparison of the Bhut, Bih and Naga Jolokia varieties along with some of the many suspected closely related landraces in the Assam region in Northern India. Studies could involve molecular genetic analysis coupled with detailed morphological character measurements. Comparison of such landraces may enable information to be obtained that clarifies the genetic process by which such varieties with extreme phenotypes have evolved. Such varieties when studied and classified can be useful in the creation of Capsicum germplasm banks that retain future plant breeding material.
• “Bhut Jolokia” and “Bih Jolokia” have different genetic structure based on comparison of DNA fragment and sequence data using 3 molecular techniques employed across six of the 12 Capsicum chromosomes.
• “Bih Jolokia” genetic structure is highly homologous with C.chinense and C.frutescens species whereas “Bhut Jolokia” is structurally more closely linked with C.annuum species.
• Reduced crop load in “Bhut Jolokia” as compared with “Bih Jolokia” may be linked to genetic self incompatibility.
• Continued research comparing such varieties and their closely related native landraces will prove to be vital in understanding evolutionary relationships that may be useful in overcoming agricultural barriers such as crop yield for such varieties.
So there Ya go, Scientific Proof the Bhut and Bih arn't the same Oh and the Bihs are Better Producers too
One thing just realized as doing this is that the Bih Jolokia's used for this study were THSC's so therefore, have Scientifically DNA tested and Proven BIH jolokia's how cool.
hope ya enjoy the read and helps out knowing more bout Naga's
*I HAVE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS RESEARCH, CREDIT IS NOT MINE RATHER HIPPIE AND HIS FRIENDS*
Posted 17 August 2010 - 06:23 AM
I thought it entertaining to read they got the seeds mixed up...which is evident when the Bhut came out an annuum...
"If people will learn to "listen" to their plants, they will tell you what they want". AlabamaJack
Posted 17 August 2010 - 06:27 AM
nice post scott!
Thankyou Franz however please realise i copy/posted. I want no undue credit.
Posted 17 August 2010 - 11:13 AM
Posted 17 August 2010 - 12:16 PM
Posted 17 August 2010 - 12:45 PM
Datils, Datils and more Datils!
Posted 17 August 2010 - 12:50 PM
"incorrect and improperly identified seed may have been acquired and used for “Bhut Jolokia”." This right here should have ended this. How do you do this type of study if you're not sure you have the correct seeds?
"It is theorised that the obtained primers coding for the specific marker sequences used in this study.." theorised is the key word here.
"the fact that the COS2 markers used in this research have been only very recently been developed and categorised (Wu et al. 2009) and may not have been augmented into BLAST databases." Using new and unproven science.
"were not identified but it is suggested that reduced crop load.." key word "suggested"
"There were a number of limitations imposed on this experiment that may have contributed to the findings. The requirements for plant growth and development (Bosland 2000; Deli and Tiessen 1969) were not met according to plan."
"Another significant drawback with regard to materials was the quality and origin of some of the seed obtained.Factors affecting results were also prevalent in the molecular methods utilised in the experiment."
These are only a small number of questionable practices used in this study.
My other hobby
Posted 17 August 2010 - 01:04 PM
That kind of fundamental uncertainty kills the study for me...
Posted 17 August 2010 - 01:46 PM
I'm not saying the experiment couldn't have been performed in a more controlled manner but I can assure you that is why research is re-validated by FURTHER research: to see if the results can and will be duplicated. I had nothing to do with this experiment but have a fair amount of experience with experiments in general and have come to understand that no matter what you find there may be a different answer to be had at a later date. We do the best that we can with the available resources and abilities at hand.
I'll get off my soap box now and return you to your regularly scheduled program already in progress
Posted 17 August 2010 - 04:16 PM
It is still interresting though, and I would lay odds that it won't hurt Neil's seed sales.
Edited by Datil Patch, 17 August 2010 - 04:17 PM.
Datils, Datils and more Datils!
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users