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
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

Unauthorized use of a plant doesn't invalidate it's patent

RSS story archive

Re: TB: Average Height

  • Subject: Re: [iris-photos]TB: Average Height
  • From: "The Lobergs" loberg@adelphia.net
  • Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 09:11:10 -0800

    That's interesting Walter, I'm guessing you mean they'll be getting taller and taller.  Surely there must be a limit?   Does anyone know if an analysis of the irises of the early 1900's, in terms of height, vs. the average heights of the most popular irises today?   Have the average heights increased?
    I do know, back in the 70's, I had an old iris, name unknown, handed down to me, that filled a row, which was probably the tallest iris I'd ever known.  It was a light muted rose in color.  I didn't keep it because I thought the form was terrible and newer things quickly replaced it over time.
   What forms do you suppose we'll be looking at in 100 years from now? 
I expect I'll be looking up at them instead of down.  The colors won't be so impressive from that angle.

Yahoo! Groups Links

Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index

 © 1995-2015 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement