So Evolutionist, are you in favour of "cross-pollination"?

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

And you have been keeping this from me, this whole time???

Of course, it's a big secret that you tricked me into revealing [/sarcasm]

... are you saying "hybrid vigor" is enhanced by faith in Evolution?

No. No amount of faith in evolution will make the slightest difference to hybrid vigour.

Or that it may be more easily believed because of Evolution?

No. Belief is not necessary, the evidence for it is overwhelming. Hybrid vigour plays a part in evolution, but understanding it doesn't require knowledge, understanding, or belief in evolution.

 

[Mr Laurier]

And you have been keeping this from me, this whole time???

Nobody but yourself has been keeping this well published factoid from you

Be that what it may: are you saying "hybrid vigor" is enhanced by faith in Evolution? Or that it may be more easily believed because of Evolution?

Nobody is saying any such thing.
As far back as the old kingdom period, it was noted the mixed strains of wheat and barley, tended to resist crop blights.

 

[gaara4158]

I wasn’t sure how to vote here and there’s a clear fundamental error in the way you’re using your terms. I would humbly suggest you make a better effort at understanding the science you’re discussing before setting up a thread like this. You’re asking if the ability to graft branches of orange trees onto apple trees has any surprising implications for the theory of evolution, and the answer is no.

 

[Gottservant]

Some years ago I wanted to replace an old, end-of-life, flowering fruit tree (the kind that don't produce any edible fruit) with a smaller fruit tree. The old tree was too big for my modest yard so I wanted a smaller tree. I found a fruit tree on "dwarf root stock" that would limit how large it would get (3-4 m tall, about half the height of the old tree). To create that tree, the nursery took the top part of a tree of the particular variety I wanted and essentially replaced its roots with a naturally smaller tree's roots so that it would not grow as tall. The roots and the leaves of my singular tree are genetically different individuals. However, that configuration doesn't reproduce.

This grafting enhanced the response of the tree to the selection pressure placed on the tree by the size of your garden? Right?

What I am interested in, is what would a population of grafted trees be in terms of Evolution - would they be more limited or more expressive?

Are there configurations that do reproduce?

 

[Hans Blaster]

This grafting enhanced the response of the tree to the selection pressure placed on the tree by the size of your garden? Right?

(My tree is in the yard, not the garden.)

The growth of trees can be restricted by limiting the space available for the root system, but that's not the case for my tree or the point of my example. It also isn't about "selection pressure".

So in answer to your question "Right?" -- No.

What I am interested in, is what would a population of grafted trees be in terms of Evolution - would they be more limited or more expressive?

A population of grafted trees aren't anything in terms of evolution. They are artificial by their nature.

Are there configurations that do reproduce?

As I wrote in my post (the one you quoted) the root system and the rest of the tree are two different genetic individuals. Seeds planted from my tree will grow the same fruit (top part) as my tree, but they will have their own roots. A normal cherry tree like mine will grow to 5-8 m tall, mine is about 3-4 m tall and fairly mature.

(This is not uncommon in fruits. All European wine grape vines are grafted onto root stock from American grape vines of a different species of grapes. This is because only the American grapes are resistant to a fungus that originated in North America. Each grape vine must be hand grafted onto a root stock.)