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: Re: HYB: registered rebloomers


Thanks for putting things into a positive perspective.

Indeed, standards have evolved, and the rebloomers will benefit from the
higher standards as well !

But even if we would add all the irises with rebloom genes and potential
rebloom to the few irises registered as rebloomers, the % would not reach 10!



It surprises me a lot that so few breeders have rebloom in mind:
I've noticed that the few rebloomers that were on the market must have a big
commercial impact, since they can be found in a majority of catalogues.
So why not focus more on breeding new better ones?

Cordially,

Looc




 ----- Original Message -----
  From: ChatOWhitehall@aol.com
  To: iris@hort.net
  Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 4:15 PM
  Subject: [iris] Re: HYB: registered rebloomers


  In a message dated 2/5/2008 9:07:22 AM Eastern Standard Time,
  lmann@lock-net.com writes:

  Loic,  maybe that's just year to year variability?


  And was there not some noise at one point about urging  more circumspection
  generally in denominating cultivars as  "rebloomers" so that the rail may,
  perhaps, now be perceived to  be somewhat higher than previously, viz a viz
the
  normative expectations  ...or am I misremembering?

  After all, one understands that gains are being made, and it  follows that
  the standard within the category must also be  evolving. Perhaps because, to
the
  discriminating, some newer  rebloomers are better rebloomers, fewer lesser
  cultivars are perceived  to be worthy of introduction, so that whereas the
  quantities of  introductions are  more or less static, the overall quality
of the
  introductions is higher.

  Cordially,

  Anner Whitehead
  Richmond VA USA USDA



  **************Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on AOL Music.
  (http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?NCID=aolcmp003000
000025
  48)

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

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



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



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