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: Re: HYB: haft marks

I always thought of the haft markings as being the darker lines toward the
base of the tepals (they on both falls and standards), and they can be very
faint, very well defined, and they can be only very near the base or reach
clear across the tepal.  I don't see that plicata markings are really
anything very different, just an extreme development of the same
patterning.  I'm sure I'll get some reactions from that statement!  I
realize that several genes are probably involved in development of the
pattern from inconspicuous to full blown all-covering plicata pattern, but
the patterning runs together as one unit.  On the other hand, I see the
luminata pattern and certain other pattern elements as being very
different.  The white, yellow, pink, lavender, purple, blue, or whatever is
under these

Lots of different opinions on various markings.  I've got my feet firmly
rooted in the past, and still think the wild ones are the prettiest ones
(usually).  As for various patterns, my reactions are almost irrational.
In general I tend to find plicatas ugly (but some of the best Iris are
plicatas); I usually like bitones, bicolors, and solids (is any Iris really
truly one solid color?); and luminatas I tend to find beautiful, especially
if they are blends of several colors.  Iris with strong haft markings often
I think are often quite beautiful, but I have to admit that I find some are
quite ugly.  I also find that I can react quite differently to the same
exact Iris on two different days (the flowers can look quite different on
different days).  Sometimes I also find that one Iris it too gaudy or just
plain ugly, while another almost identical one is quite beautiful.

In general I think haft markings belong on Bearded Iris flowers, and I like
them.  They are part of what makes them what they are.  The first time I
saw an Iris without them (they are really there, but can be very faint and
limited the very base), I thought it looked weird and rather plain, but I'm
used to it now (sort of).

I just had a plant of 'Rajah' flower for the first time (a bright
variegata), and it has strong haft markings.  To me, it is one of the most
striking Iris I've ever grown.

I've wondered about patterns and coloring on the underside of the falls
too.  They are sometimes very distinctive from one cultivar to another, and
sometimes add to the beauty of the flower greatly, yet these details are
almost never mentioned.  Sometimes there are haft markings under the falls,
but they are usually not so developed as they are above.


To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the

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

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