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's BB'S IB's

  • Subject: Re: [iris-photos] TB's BB'S IB's
  • From: John Jones jijones@usjoneses.com
  • Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 14:53:58 -0700

On 5/23/03 2:15 PM, "harold" <h.clem@verizon.net> wrote:

> from the judges manual
> TB's  bearded iris 71cm and above(over 27 1/2inches)in height with
> branched stalks
> BB's erect branched stems from 41 to 70cm (16 to 27 1/2inches)in
> height 
> IB's plants with broomstalks 41 to 70cm (16 to 27 1/2 inches)in height
> now you must deside which is which         clem
Thatıs misleading. You have to use the complete definition, not just the
height. I donıt have my book in front of me but as I remember both IBs and
BBs have flower size restrictions. You have to look at the complete picture=

 © 1995-2015 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index