I believe that a clone is an exact replica, so a clone of a particular plant couldn't be a different cultivar. Is that correct? It says above that "a cultivar doesn't necessarily have to be a clone." I'm confused. Nothing new there. As I have understood it, a cultivar is different, and not identical. It may look the same, but it isn't the same. A clone would look the same, and be the same.
Human identical twins don't count. They look identical, but they don't necessarily act identically, because their brains are different. Luckily we're just talking about plants!
