Re: Labeling of self iris
- Subject: Re: Labeling of self iris
- From: Laurie Frazer <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2007 13:58:08 -0600
On Jan 14, 2007, at 1:14 PM, Linda Smith wrote:
Why is this one not called or described as a self???
You will find that a relative few hybridizers actually use terms such as "self", "bicolor", "neglecta", "amoena", "variegata", "plicata", etc. in their official iris registration descriptions. I'm not sure why that is, but I'm guessing it's to make the descriptions more understandable to people who aren't acquainted with the meanings of those various terms.
There's many that seem to have no difference in the F & S so can I safely say it is a self??
Yes, I would say that the registration description you provided does refer to a self.
(B. Miller, R. 1986), TB, 38" (97 cm), E & RE (mid-Oct in AL)
"Crimson, inconspicuous haft markings. Samaritan Woman X Red Duet. Enchanted Rainbow Garden 1985 "
It seems the beard does not have to be same color to be called self--Is this correct??
Yes, that is correct.
Also, why in the past did people not like Rebloomers??
There are plenty of people who still don't enjoy growing rebloomers. The reasons I've seen stated most often are:
1) Many rebloomers don't have quite the evolved modern form, color/pattern variety, and/or bud count of the newest spring bloomers.
2) Many rebloomers start developing rebloom stalks so late in the fall that the stalks are aborted by early frosts, which means that the rhizomes with the aborted fall stalks will not bloom the following spring, which means that those potential rebloomers have essentially turned into never-bloomers.
At least that's my understanding of the primary complaints about rebloomers.
USDA zone 3b, AHS zone 4 - northern Minnesota
normal annual precipitation 26-27"
slightly acid, potassium deficient, clay soil
Other Mailing lists |
Author Index |
Date Index |
Subject Index |