
Originally Posted by
LordWinter
I get what you're saying, but you'll be hard pressed to find a geneticist who'll concede to you that a rare pheno = a strain, unless it has been stabilized to breed true. Before that happens, it's just a rare mutation or rare trait display.
Edit: To illustrate, I'm going to post the definitions of strain, phenotype, and genotype here for you so you may understand:
Strain definition - From Merriam Webster online -
a : Lineage, Ancestry
b : a group of presumed common ancestry with clear-cut physiological but usually not morphological distinctions <a high-yielding strain of winter wheat>; broadly : a specified infraspecific group (as a stock, line, or ecotype)
Phenotype Definition - Same source -
: the observable properties of an organism that are produced by the interaction of the genotype and the environment.
Genotype Definition - Still same source -
: all or part of the genetic constitution of an individual or group.
So, you see? It's not about our opinion, it's about the rules of genetics. A strain MUST have an observable lineage based on observable, stable genetics, and reproducible phenotypical traits. One instance of a phenotype does not denote a strain.
The idea of clone-only strains is nice for marketing, but there's no science behind it, as you can now see.
It's putting the luck of the draw in the hands of someone who knows what they have, followed by TONS of hard work to reproduce that phenotype and stabilize it... THAT is what gives us a new strain.
Bookmarks