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: Fw: Hyb Registered Rebloomers

Yes, I would agree about bud count.  It mgiht be too soon to discount a rebloomer for low bud count.  Exceptionally low count (say 5!) should be an issue and kept by the hybridizer (or distributed to others solely for the purpose of breeding) assuming it has other characteristics that are in it's favor.

Yes, I would agree with incorporating difficult growers into breeding programs as they do have things to offer that can be unexpected.  'Best Bet' is a good example.  I have never been too pleased with its growth either here in Raleigh or back in Indiana.  However, I liked the flower.  I crossed it with another plant that I didn't particularly like but had flower qualities that I wanted to combine with it.  Eight years later I still have two of their seedlings and both grow and bloom wonderfully every year despite the abuse they have had.  AND they both bloomed after the Easter weekend freeze beautifully with spathes in the fans and one with spathes emerging and no stalk damage.  

I will be attempting 'Lunar Whitewash' for a third time as I keep hearing how wonmderful it is.  I got some tips on growing it differently to get it established.  

Paul Archer
Raleigh, NC  Zone 8

-----Original Message-----
>From: "J. Griffin Crump" <jgcrump@cox.net>
>Sent: Feb 6, 2008 1:37 PM
>To: iris@hort.net
>Subject: Re: [iris] Fw: Hyb Registered Rebloomers
>Paul  --  I think that you, Mike Sutton and others have it right  --  the 
>time when an iris could be introduced just because it rebloomed is long 
>past.  Still, I think that it might be counterproductive to hold rebloomers 
>to all the same standards as oncers.  Bud count is one such standard.  If 
>the rationale for "requiring" 7 or more buds on a stalk is the length of 
>time that the grower gets to enjoy the bloom, then might not the fact that 
>it blooms twice or more during the year offset a smaller bud count?
>As regards the question of where rebloomers are and aren't hardy, I can say 
>this:  I only began hybridizing deliberately for rebloom after I happened to 
>get reblooming seedlings from crosses involving advertised rebloomers that 
>never rebloomed here.  That experience demonstrated to me that genes carry 
>powers of improvement of which I had been unaware.   Similarly  --  a topic 
>about which we've often talked  --  the matter of whether one should acquire 
>irises, rebloomers or not, that have a reputation of not surviving in one's 
>zone.   My response, as a hybridizer, is yes.  If the cultivar seems to have 
>something in it that you'd like to incorporate in your breeding, do it. 
>Example:  My third planting of BEST BET over a period of a dozen years or so 
>has just expired, once again.  But I and others have introduced vigorous, 
>hardy seedlings from that pretty rebloomer.  So, I don't regret the few 
>dollars spent or the care given.  The desired genes have been captured and 
>passed on.  --   Griff
>  ----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Paul Archer" <pharcher@mindspring.com>
>To: <iris@hort.net>
>Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 9:54 PM
>Subject: Re: [iris] Fw: Hyb Registered Rebloomers
>> It could also be (as is in my case) that the quality of rebloomers I am 
>> getting doesn't come close to comparing favorably to the Spring bloom 
>> plants in the quality of flower characteristics.  The standard has been 
>> set quite high in these past few years for Spring bloomer Intros.  Also 
>> the quest for better rebloom characteristics is under more scrutiny. 
>> Rebloom is not as rare as it used to be.
>> Just because a seedling reblooms on a decent plant is not reason enough to 
>> introduce it... in my opinion and perhaps in others' minds as well. 
>> Shouldn't it be?
>> Paul Archer
>> Raleigh, NC  Zone 7
>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

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

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