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
New Trillium species discovered

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

RSS story archive

Re: HYB: AIS: Trial Garden Idea

No, I didn't miss your point, but was briefly trying to discern between the
two purposes of the Trial Gardens and express my interest in only the
Hybridizer Group.  I agree with you completely on your followup email. The
"Public Test Garden" is quite useful to the public for growabilty as well as
the hybridizer for determining new breeding stock for hybridizers wanting
those that perform uniformly (hopefully everywhere) and to isolate the gene
combinations that do so.  I think that is what is missing in most breeding
programs.  They are two distinct groups and should essentially operate
separately.  Obviously the goal would be to have one's seedling "cross over"
into the "Public Test Garden" for general approval and comparison to existing

Sure, there will be be individuals involved in both groups at the same time
and that is OK.  They just need to be willing to do the separate record
keeping and attributes required for each group.  Each should have separate
forms as their needs would be different.

Hybridizers might even have their own individual forms.  Although, I think
there should be a uniform hybridizer evaluation form which a hybridizer would
ber able to see all results of an evaluated seedling and they can choose which
observations to pay attention to or are more important to them at that time.

Just a thought.......how about a website that could be created and logged on
to for people to enter their observations?  No need for anything too fancy,
but could also be as fancy as the ability to upload photos taken at the trial
site of flowers and foliage.  Obviously, someone computer saavy enough would
have to do that and I'm sure a small fee paid by the hybridizer to maintain
their profile and entries.  This would save some time and ease with
information transmittal.  It could also save the hybridizer from trying to
read/interpret other's handwriting or information lost in the mail.  There
could also be a "Public Test Garden" website detailing observations as well.
I think that would be the best way to disseminate the information out to the
public.  People could look varieties up on their own (AIS members or not),
print the information, catalogs reference the website to potential purchasers,
ect, ect.

Origianal Message:----------

Paul, I believe you missed my point; I noted that there are two purposes.
goals require different approaches. Anner's plan certainly works for
hybridzers and
should be developed as such. But I was noting there is another type of test
not for hybridizers alone, but for the public. This would mostly reflect
of cultivars already introduced. It may aid hybridzers in that it may suggest
for future parents but it is not the private relationship between hybridizer
friend but essentially a public forum for people selecting new varieties to
in their area. It would be useful for people in different regions of the
to know how cultivars have performed in other places and not designed to limit
information just with a hybridizer

Paul Archer <pharcher@mindspring.com> wrote:Yes, I would agree that the Trial
Gardens should be for hybridizers and those
willing to trial new seedlings. Those with a proven abililty and knowledge of
Iris culture. These are the opinions I am most interested in. I can honestly
say that I am not interested in doing tours and catering to smallk or large
masses trudging through my plot. I don't have the time and the situation
where my garden is does not lend itself to "parties".

I also am not willing to go "public" with my seedlings as would probably
happen with willy nilly gardens amoung irresponsible people. Those who
evaluate and contribute should enter into a responsible and non-profit
endeavour with each other. I am also not interested in writing/receiving
lengthy reports on Iris variety's culture. That is not a hybridizer's
purpose, and it really doesn't serve a public purpose either. An Iris
variety, especially bearded's and others, shouldn't need a report to know how
to grow it. Isn't that our goal?! NO FUSSY varieties. Aril's and Arilbred's
would be the only exception I would think as they are still in need of this
detailed information in working toward their improvement.

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

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

 © 1995-2017 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement