hort.net Seasonal photo, (c) 2006 Christopher P. Lindsey, All Rights Reserved: do not copy
articles | gallery of plants | blog | tech blog | plant profiles | patents | mailing lists | top stories | links | shorturl service | tom clothier's archive0
Gallery of Plants
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Mailing Lists
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
New Trillium species discovered

Disease could hit Britain's trees hard

Ten of the best snowdrop cultivars

Plant protein database helps identify plant gene functions

Dendroclimatologists record history through trees

Potato beetle could be thwarted through gene manipulation

Hawaii expands coffee farm quarantine

Study explains flower petal loss

RSS story archive

Re: minimum a plant should be grown and observed

Beth Arnold wrote:

> I'm sure it has been done, a single division one year old plant.  Really, I
> have plants that are maybe 7 or 8 years old and many divisions and I feel
> they are ready for registration.  I feel the plant should be at least 5
> years old.

Warning: opinions follow.

Registration is not a seal of approval for a plant.  It simply means that there
is a plant and this is what it's called and this is what it looks like.
Personally, I see no reason to have a rule for when it's time to register.  If
the plant is never going to leave your yard and nobody else is ever going to
care, then, in my opinion, there is little reason to register it ever.  If on
the other hand, you know after 1 year that the plant is going to travel, then I
see no real reason to wait five years.

I understand the difficulty in describing a seedling that is only one year old,
but that may or may not be so in the case of a sport.  If I had had enough
plants to sell, I would have put Satisfaction into commerce 3 weeks after it
stabilized and can see absolutely nothing I or the hosta buying public would
have gained by waiting 3 to 5 years.  That may be an exageration, but sometimes
you have to wait for a plant, sometimes you don't.

A case can also be made, though there are many who disagree, for naming plants
before they are introduced, and it doesn't do much good to put a name on a
plant unless it's registered. (This from someone who is still working on
filling out his first registration forms)  We regularly have people who ask
about plants here that will not be introduced or registered for some time, and
I see no reason not to give these plants names if I decide to.  I use numbers,
like many others, but when I decide that a seedling deserves some special
attention, I personally prefer to give it a name because its easier for me and
for others who see it.  Sometimes it takes years to decide, sometimes you know
fairly early.

The problem is, that unless the AHS starts allowing hybridizers to reserve
names before introduction, and if you don't want to register yet, the names you
give your plants may be used by others by the time they are registered.  So
someone who saw a plant I was calling 'Yellow Submarine' in my seedlings years
ago might see it on a list today and assume it was the same hosta.
Unfortunately, someone else got the name before me, so I started calling it
Mellow Yellow, which I hear has also been taken by another plant.

I don't believe in reserving a bunch of names just because you like them and
hope someday you'll find a hosta for them, but I think there should be a way to
reserve names that are in use on plants that are not ready for registration and



To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the

 © 1995-2017 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index