Suppose a flower having both male and female reproductive parts is self-fertilized then can this be called asexual reproduction...?I'm quite confused cause in this case the fusion of male and female gametes do take place but again the gametes are from the same parent....please help.
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
2
-
$\begingroup$ I'd be interested in your reasoning why some common and known definition that seems to fit still doesn't. What makes you think "sexual" reproduction needs two, not one? $\endgroup$– Peter BernhardFeb 27, 2022 at 16:58
-
$\begingroup$ "... from the same parent"... that must stay the same and may not change, may not exchange genes while alife or staying the same... The fact that "mitosis" is not confined to diploid people I find confusing. It is no trivial thing (to me) to "learn" that it just does not seem to make sense to duplicate some "haplo" in order to exchange genetic information that has got to be identical. Related answer pointing at proof reading as an underlying motif. What's the sense of exchange if there is some identical copy that 's being exchanged with. $\endgroup$– Peter BernhardFeb 27, 2022 at 18:37
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
1
According to this article from Berkeley, asexual reproduction is:
Any reproductive process that does not involve meiosis or syngamy
Using this definition of asexual reproduction and knowing self-fertilization involves meiosis and syngamy, it is not asexual.
-
$\begingroup$ Is there a strict definition of meiosis? If there were no crossing over or mingling of genes that would still be meiosis? - So only diploids can have sex? $\endgroup$ Feb 27, 2022 at 17:00