Re: Bearded-beardless crosses
Bill Shear wrote:
> I don't know of even a single bearded-beardless hybrid. Does anyone else?
> One assumes that this has been tried many times in the history of iris
> Or maybe not: Perhaps it was just assumed that it couldn't happen so no
> one tried very hard.
> There are bearded-crested hybrids, but also so far as I know, no
> crested-beardless hybrids.
> Given this information it seems that the subgeneric classification of the
> genus Iris should be revised. Crested irises should no longer be grouped
> with beardless irises, but either with bearded ones or in a separate
> What do you think?
> Bill Shear
> Department of Biology
> Hampden-Sydney College
> Hampden-Sydney VA 23943
> FAX (804)223-6374
On one occaision, I crossed several pallida flowers with cristata in
both directions and did not wind up with any seed. I also do not know
of anything other than a paltec, the pallida tectorum cross. I though I
heard Tomas Tamberg mention using gracillipes in some crosses he made
with beardless, but I may be inventing it.
Enough of musing, here is the conjecture: If the pollen could manage to
fertilize the egg cells and seed was obtained, the odds of that seed
being viable is pretty slim due to sheer amount of genetic material that
is different. When speaking hypothetially of Bearded\Beardless crosses,
it is my belief that these kinds of plants have the potential to
increase negative traits as well increase positive traits. For example,
Paltec is, from what I have observed, more succeptable to rot than its
parents. It would be nice to have water tolerant bearded-looking iris
(If you like that kind of flower), but the liklihood of the genetic
crossover creating a plant that can grow in neither environment seems
the most likely result.
Just a thought. Was that hard to follow?