What is difference between china bush and Clonal bush? which is
better?

Summer Tips > wrote:
>What is difference between china bush and Clonal bush? which is
>better?

I believe "china bush" means that a tea is from C. sinensis rather than
C. assamensus. "Clonal bush" means that it's from bushes that are clones
from a cutting of a bush that was previously known to produce good tea.

"China bush" may tell you something about the style, but is not necessarily
a good or bad thing. "Clonal bush" really doesn't tell you anything at all
useful.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Assamensus and Sinensis are the same. The difference is historical
botanical confusion based on the fact the British could never get their
hands on Sinensis from China. They classified Assamensus but it is
from the same Tropic of Cancer jungle region as Yunnan. In fact Assam
is generally believed to be the home of the tea plant not Yunnan which
was first cultivated. Cultivated plantations in general are based on a
clonal. The bush or clonal assumes the properties of the local soil
and weather conditions.

Jim

Scott Dorsey wrote:
> Summer Tips > wrote:
> >What is difference between china bush and Clonal bush? which is
> >better?
>
> I believe "china bush" means that a tea is from C. sinensis rather than
> C. assamensus. "Clonal bush" means that it's from bushes that are clones
> from a cutting of a bush that was previously known to produce good tea.
>
> "China bush" may tell you something about the style, but is not necessarily
> a good or bad thing. "Clonal bush" really doesn't tell you anything at all
> useful.
> --scott
> --
> "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Scott /8/06

> Summer Tips > wrote:
>> What is difference between china bush and Clonal bush? which is
>> better?
>
> I believe "china bush" means that a tea is from C. sinensis rather than
> C. assamensus. "Clonal bush" means that it's from bushes that are clones
> from a cutting of a bush that was previously known to produce good tea.
>
> "China bush" may tell you something about the style, but is not necessarily
> a good or bad thing. "Clonal bush" really doesn't tell you anything at all
> useful.


If I'm not mistaken "clonal" tells us that genetically all the clonal bushes
from the same source are exactly the same. When it comes to tomatoes and
other vegetables and grains, the loss of genes in the gene pool due to
cloning a small number of uniform, homogeneous varieties is now seen as a
serious problem. The problem extends into such areas as lack of resistance
to diseases, boring tastes, and so on. Why would clonal teas not be subject
to the many ills of uniformity brought about by clonal planting?

Michael, speaking on behalf of plants everywhere.

Space 5/8/06


> Assamensus and Sinensis are the same. The difference is historical
> botanical confusion based on the fact the British could never get their
> hands on Sinensis from China. They classified Assamensus but it is
> from the same Tropic of Cancer jungle region as Yunnan. In fact Assam
> is generally believed to be the home of the tea plant not Yunnan which
> was first cultivated. Cultivated plantations in general are based on a
> clonal. The bush or clonal assumes the properties of the local soil
> and weather conditions.
>
> Jim

You can clone by taking cuttings of the original plant. You
can clone from cells/DNA of the original plant, using the technologies
under severe scrutiny today as we approach the ability to clone people.

The Michaels

Identical twins don't have to worry about DNA at a crime scene.

Jim

Michael Plant wrote:
> Michael, speaking on behalf of plants everywhere.

Michael Plant > writes:

> Scott /8/06
>
> > Summer Tips > wrote:
> >> What is difference between china bush and Clonal bush? which is
> >> better?
> [...]
>
> If I'm not mistaken "clonal" tells us that genetically all the
> clonal bushes from the same source are exactly the same. When it
> comes to tomatoes and other vegetables and grains, the loss of genes
> in the gene pool due to cloning a small number of uniform,
> homogeneous varieties is now seen as a serious problem. The problem
> extends into such areas as lack of resistance to diseases, boring
> tastes, and so on. Why would clonal teas not be subject to the many
> ills of uniformity brought about by clonal planting?

They would be subject to those ills if there were very few lines in
use. I don't think it's come to that, at least not in Darjeeling.
But my knowledge isn't very deep. Karsten - are you there?

/Lew
---
Lew Perin /
http://www.panix.com/~perin/babelcarp.html

Lewis 5/9/06

> Michael Plant > writes:
>
>> Scott /8/06
>>
>>> Summer Tips > wrote:
>>>> What is difference between china bush and Clonal bush? which is
>>>> better?
>> [...]
>>
>> If I'm not mistaken "clonal" tells us that genetically all the
>> clonal bushes from the same source are exactly the same. When it
>> comes to tomatoes and other vegetables and grains, the loss of genes
>> in the gene pool due to cloning a small number of uniform,
>> homogeneous varieties is now seen as a serious problem. The problem
>> extends into such areas as lack of resistance to diseases, boring
>> tastes, and so on. Why would clonal teas not be subject to the many
>> ills of uniformity brought about by clonal planting?
>
> They would be subject to those ills if there were very few lines in
> use. I don't think it's come to that, at least not in Darjeeling.
> But my knowledge isn't very deep. Karsten - are you there?
>
> /Lew

Lew, my understanding is that when you begin an
agricultural cloning program, and when you devote
your fields to the cloned plant/s, regardless of the
number of lines you've got, in effect and by definition
you've limited the gene pool. So, we could speak of
a degree of harm. We could also speak of
making sure that the clonal doesn't completely take
over the industry, that (more) naturally occurring plants
thrive in sufficient numbers. Anyway, that's my
take on it, based on old studies.

Michael

Michael Plant > writes:

> Lewis 5/9/06
>
> > Michael Plant > writes:
> >
> >> Scott /8/06
> >>
> >>> Summer Tips > wrote:
> >>>> What is difference between china bush and Clonal bush? which is
> >>>> better?
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> If I'm not mistaken "clonal" tells us that genetically all the
> >> clonal bushes from the same source are exactly the same. When it
> >> comes to tomatoes and other vegetables and grains, the loss of genes
> >> in the gene pool due to cloning a small number of uniform,
> >> homogeneous varieties is now seen as a serious problem. The problem
> >> extends into such areas as lack of resistance to diseases, boring
> >> tastes, and so on. Why would clonal teas not be subject to the many
> >> ills of uniformity brought about by clonal planting?
> >
> > They would be subject to those ills if there were very few lines in
> > use. I don't think it's come to that, at least not in Darjeeling.
> > But my knowledge isn't very deep. Karsten - are you there?
>
> Lew, my understanding is that when you begin an agricultural cloning
> program, and when you devote your fields to the cloned plant/s,
> regardless of the number of lines you've got, in effect and by
> definition you've limited the gene pool. So, we could speak of a
> degree of harm. We could also speak of making sure that the clonal
> doesn't completely take over the industry, that (more) naturally
> occurring plants thrive in sufficient numbers. Anyway, that's my
> take on it, based on old studies.

I'm not sure we actually disagree, unless you're saying that *any* use
of vegetative reproduction is bad. Cloning isn't different in
principle from grafting apple trees or grape vines. Think of it this
way: if you like so-called heirloom apples or tomatoes, you're in
favor of cloning. It isn't just Monsanto and friends.

/Lew
---
Lew Perin /
http://www.panix.com/~perin/babelcarp.html

Lew, curiously pulling on a funny looking cord:
> Karsten - are you there?

Yes Lew, I´m just so much focused on gong-fueing these days, found a
secret stash of Oolongs in the cellar, shllllllrppppp, oh my ...
Well yes clonals, when it comes to Darjeelings I´m afraid I don´t
enjoy them that much as I like those old chinese bushes.
IMO tastewise the major problem with clonals is the lack of genetic
diversity among those thousands of plants in (parts of) estates where
those old (up to 150 years - game over) chinese bushes have been
replaced by clonals - in Darjeeling mostly "Tukdah 78". Sorry for the
bad comparison but to me drinking a clonal brew feels like going to a
museum with 100s of copies of the same painting and not much else to
see. However wonderful that painting might be, I´d always prefer
variety. Additionally to me clonals smell and taste somewhat "hollow",
everything is on the surface, on "display". Again that is not meant to
turn anyone off.
Of course there are "exceptions", e.g. Castletons 2005 SF Muscatel cl
(=clonal); that tea is just so damn expressive, bold and playful but
then again it´s from the food synthesizer in the main deck cantine,
sniff ...

Karsten,
with some DJ pouchong in der Yixing Kanne, dreaming of electric leaves

in one hand a tea garden is not a forest, i mean wild one. parameters
applied to forests can be not the same. in a garden the evolution is
stopped and manipulated by humans, although a tea garden seems to be
part of nature, in fact it is not, at least completely. so talking
about lost of diversity, maybe has another meaning than if you talk
about forest. maybe the question is, are there still wild plants of
camelia sinensis? does exit a virgin forest of camelia sinensis?

in other hand, biodiversity in crops also has been decreasing along the
20th century, the traditional varieties disappeared as global market of
seeds grew. for example in spain [i guess in other mediterranean
countries] there was to be used a rye class with long long canes, they
were used to make many kinds of baskets, and as seeds were not
'prepared' some of them used to have a very poisonous fungus called in
spanish 'cornezuelo del centeno' [Claviceps purpurea], quite common in
cereals, and more in rye, that was collected by hand, because was very
useful in chemistry, and was well paid. now cereals are all treated to
avoid this kind of things, and life is quite easier, but the seeds are
only one kind, don't know exactly the number of different varieties in
cereals, but the point is that the number has decreased, and as in
nature, variety has many advantages or pros. i heard anyone not much
time ago that those fields of cereals with long canes rocked by the
wind in castilla talked by poets will be only just a memory [i didn't
even heard of this long canes ...]

this was only an example, i guess is the same with any other crop. only
few very very local crops has been developed from traditional seeds,
but only because no big multinational factories were interested in
production of these seeds, i guess.

in wine cultivation, the ancient indigenous plants are much more
valuable than clonal, that 'only' are used to make the plant alive, but
the grapes are from ancient clones [in this lands that are still
preserved from those past epidemics] to give the wine a particular
taste. there are wine labels that only want to produce bottles and
bottles with an easy standard taste, and others that want to be
different, to be traditional, let's say respectful with their relatives
[it's a way of talking] and achieve something that has, let's say, more
layers than only a correct product... i think with tea must be
something similar, not only producing, but a particular care

regards from madrid,
bonifacio barrio hijosa
http://worldoftea.webcindario.com/
....site in progress

Hi all,

I 100% agree here. I would say clonal teas from darjeeling are very
similar/same in taste character and are missing deep character-full
taste of china bush ones. I hate the fruity/spicy sweetnes of clonal
darjeelings, it is soooo uniform and boring...
But clonal bushes are much more resistent and have better crops and
sooner shooting... So in my eyes, clonal darjeelings are strongly
commercial teas with no or very low character - but they are more and
more popular at market and its prices sometimes are horrible...
OK - I know, taste is personal thing and personal preference - so no
flame here :-) Just my opinion from more than 200 samples of 2006 FF
from darjeeling I tasted this spring and many many samples from last
years... For me clonal bush darjeeling is hard punishment of my taste
buds :-D

Nice day to all
Zdenek

m5/12/06

> Hi all,
>
> I 100% agree here. I would say clonal teas from darjeeling are very
> similar/same in taste character and are missing deep character-full
> taste of china bush ones. I hate the fruity/spicy sweetnes of clonal
> darjeelings, it is soooo uniform and boring...
> But clonal bushes are much more resistent and have better crops and
> sooner shooting... So in my eyes, clonal darjeelings are strongly
> commercial teas with no or very low character - but they are more and
> more popular at market and its prices sometimes are horrible...
> OK - I know, taste is personal thing and personal preference - so no
> flame here :-) Just my opinion from more than 200 samples of 2006 FF
> from darjeeling I tasted this spring and many many samples from last
> years... For me clonal bush darjeeling is hard punishment of my taste
> buds :-D


Your and others' comments about the nature of tea brewed from clonal bushes
interests me as I hadn't considered that aspect. Their resistence (to
disease) though is temporary at best; when the little beasties mutate to do
them in, their goes their resistence and their goes every single one of them
since they are identical twins, so to speak, essentially. Sad little
buggers.

Michael

their their their.
and i'm supposed to be a writer.
jeeeeezzzzz.

writes:

> Lew, curiously pulling on a funny looking cord:
> > Karsten - are you there?
>
> Yes Lew, I´m just so much focused on gong-fueing these days, found a
> secret stash of Oolongs in the cellar, shllllllrppppp, oh my ...
> Well yes clonals, when it comes to Darjeelings I´m afraid I don´t
> enjoy them that much as I like those old chinese bushes.
> IMO tastewise the major problem with clonals is the lack of genetic
> diversity among those thousands of plants in (parts of) estates where
> those old (up to 150 years - game over) chinese bushes have been
> replaced by clonals - in Darjeeling mostly "Tukdah 78". Sorry for the
> bad comparison but to me drinking a clonal brew feels like going to a
> museum with 100s of copies of the same painting and not much else to
> see. However wonderful that painting might be, I´d always prefer
> variety. Additionally to me clonals smell and taste somewhat "hollow",
> everything is on the surface, on "display". Again that is not meant to
> turn anyone off.
> Of course there are "exceptions", e.g. Castletons 2005 SF Muscatel cl
> (=clonal); that tea is just so damn expressive, bold and playful but
> then again it´s from the food synthesizer in the main deck cantine,
> sniff ...

Since I'm out of my depth in talking tea agronomy, I wrote to
S.M. Changoiwala, the Darjeeling and Dooars tea planter whom longtime
RFDT readers will remember.

While Karsten never said the 2005 Castleton was the only "exceptional"
clonal tea, SMC thinks there are lots of good clonal teas in
Darjeeling:

All the Clonal bushes are not inferior to Chinary bushes, from the
quality angle. Take our wonder tea- it comes from clonal bushes.

By the way, he warns against assuming that a Darjeeling tea is grown
from seed just because you don't see "CL" in its name:

All Darjeeling gardens do not mark separately " clonal " for their
clonal teas.

According to SMC, to focus on Tukdah 78 would be concentrate more on
the past than the present:

Tukdah is the Darjeeling garden which was our TRA ( Tea Reserch
staiton's) first "Clonal proving station". So naturally first of the
few darjeeling clones have come out of bush selection at Tukdah or
from gardens( like Banneckburn etc belonging to the same english
company - later on it was sold to warren india and a few years back
has changed hands to Lohias) Tukdah 78 is the first released clone
from the bush selections in Tukdah. Earlier released clones
cuttings/ plants sell cheaper than the late released clones in
general. Some gardens still may be using T 78. \we planted T78 at
Soongachhi [in Dooars] and response was very good , for orthodox
manufacture.

T 78 leaf mixesd with some other clones / mixed with chinary leaf
gives better quality than the individual clonal leaf or chinary leaf,
but not always.

Tukdah 78 is an assam type of clone and is a yield clone. Furthe now
after so many years, this clone has started dying at high elevation
and since last 5 yeaars or so this clone is not being propagated any
more in darjeeling gardens.

Moving beyond the Tukdah 78 question, SMC notes that the quality of
the leaf has to do with a lot more than the genealogy of the bush:

Genetically all the tea bushes of clones like Tukdah 78 as
mentioned, should give the same quality, but other factors likes
soil, pruning operations etc etc affect the quality, and there is
day to day varion in quality and bush to bush variation in quality
from the same section.

And there are lots of clonal lines in play now:

And again the selected clone it self may be a chinary bush/or asssam
or hybrid. Clone selection , if done for flavor, may be one single
chinary tea bush selected from say a lac [100,000 - Lew] of chinary
tea bushes and this one selected tea bush after so many trials is
found to give best flavor and that why this particular bush was
selected and treated as mother Bush.

Clonal selection is done for quality or quantity or both or for any
particular characterastic and for particular areas/ regions.

Darjeeling has good number of clones like AV2, Phoobsering etc,
having different characterastics .

Clonal bushes are not more resistant- due to the basic fact that
they are always shallow rooters in comparision to seeds.

Again some clones are better rooters than other clones which are
better shooters , so the cutting of the better shooter is grafted on
top of the cutting of better rooter, so that we have a clone with
both better roots and shoots.

All the Darjeeling clones are not early shooters and all are not
high yielders. some are quality clones and poor yielders and some
are quantity clones with less quality and some have both but with
average quantity and quality.

In the same section in Darjeeling , most of the gardens would have
more than one clone. So that the taste is same - as suggested by the
person concerned- [this would be Zdenek - Lew] can not be true.

And SMC warns against assuming that a Darjeeling invoice is
necessarily all from China-seed bushes even if it's definitely
non-clonal;

Even chinary leaf mixed with some assam leaf [here he means bushes
of Assam heritage rather than leaf harvested in Assam] gives bettr
quality than china alone at times.

One thought just occurred to me (and for this, SMC bears no
responsibility.) In Phoenix oolongs, it's considered a big plus to be
able to buy from a small lot of tea from a single tree, i.e.,
genetically identical leaf. So I doubt that there's anything inherent
in cloning that imposes a "hollow", surface-only taste and aroma.

Note that I'm not endorsing planting vast swaths of land with one
strain, or for that matter, a small number of genetic lines.

/Lew
---
Lew Perin /
http://www.panix.com/~perin/babelcarp.html