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
 Navigation
Articles
Gallery of Plants
Blog
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Patents
Mailing Lists
    FAQ
    Netiquette
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
Links
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: Frequent Flyer/checklist

  • Subject: Re: Frequent Flyer/checklist
  • From: Linda Mann <lmann@lock-net.com>
  • Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 14:01:21 -0400

Boy, I'll say it doesn't match. Not even close. It doesn't match the
printed 1994 or 90s cumulative R&I's either.

When we combined the file (which was a bit mangled) for the pre-existing
1998 Rebloom checklist with the new file we were creating, we did <not>
compare the existing entries from the 1998 rebloom checklist to the R&Is
& online data. Unfortunately, what is in the checklist for FREQUENT
FLYER is exactly what came from the 98 rebloom checklist.

Who knows where the entry came from originally. Only thing I can figure
is that Richard Gibson was thinking of introducing something under that
name in 1992, then superceded it with what is now registered under that
name, but somehow, the checklist folks wound up with the earlier
description.

Nothing in the online registry is under the seedling number(024-1)in the
rebloom checklist, but the numbering system matches that used for the
two introductions by Richard Gibson in the online database. Also, there
is nothing in the online database with the pedigree given in the
rebloom checklist (High Ho Silver X Champagne Elegance).

I sure hope there aren't more of those kinds of errors - anybody have
time to compare all the entries in the 98 checklist to the online
version? Let us know if you find more ;-)
--
Linda Mann east Tennessee USA zone 7/8
East Tennessee Iris Society <http://www.DiscoverET.org/etis>
Region 7, Kentucky-Tennessee <http://www.aisregion7.org>
American Iris Society web site <http://www.irises.org>
talk archives: <http://www.hort.net/lists/iris-talk/>
photos archives: <http://www.hort.net/lists/iris-photos/>
online R&I <http://www.irisregister.com>



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



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