Quote:
|
You would be surprised to find out that this isn't usually the case, Erlend. Tests were done in a 1960s study on Musa balbisiana, in which the seeds that did not germinate were tested for viability. They cut the seeds open and did a tetrazolium test on the embryos. Almost ALL of the seeds were viable (over 95%), but only a small percentage, comparatively, germinated.
|
Yes! I have read that 60s article I think, if it was the one with several tests and methods!
Hope I didn't misinterpret anything. From what I understood musa balbisiana and musa acuminata where about the only examples given. But I clearly remember someone saying-somewhere that a fair percentage of musa seeds lack certain structures, or are built in a way that inhibits germination. If they are sterile, they're sterile! (I know, very unproffessional not referring to an article).
As I stated in my earlier post, germination results varies between species. I think maybe balbisiana is a poor example since people almost get 100% germination with it at times. But we've all struggled with acuminata and other species at some point.(Will the real
Musa Ingens please stand up?)
Quote:
|
I also believe that there's another dormancy, or more, that still hasn't been figured out.
|
Yes, I agree there must be some chemical-related dormancy as well - for seeds that contain the structures they are supposed to. So I guess we should all sit down and think in ways of how nature solved the problem. I am thinking in the ways of:
"If a monkey eats a banana with the seeds, do these get some kind of chemical treatment inside the monkey? When they come out, is the shell more permeable?" It's fun visualizing the different variables, almost like FBI-detective work.
BTW, do you know how a tetrazolium-test is carried out?