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: Re: Re: Allbicans ? Florentina?

  • Subject: Re: [iris-photos] Re: Re: Allbicans ? Florentina?
  • From: "David Ferguson" <manzano57@msn.com>
  • Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 23:57:56 -0700
  • Seal-send-time: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 23:57:56 -0700

This question comes up fairly regularly.  It is discussed in several books, and has been discussed on most Iris chat groups.
I brought it up a few times myself.
I was confused by the fact that I had plants that were supposed to be both, but weren't really either.  What I had was clearly a white I. pallida, and it was driving me crazy for several years.
It was members of this group that helped to straighten me out on what 'Albicans' and 'Florentina' really are.
I have the "real" 'Albicans' and 'Florentina' now, and the difference is actually very easy to see.  First of all 'Albicans' flowers very early, often right along with most of the SDB's (even before many of them).  'Florentina' is somewhat later.
'Albicans' has moderately wide leaves, and the fan looks a bit "wavy", while the leaves of 'Florentina' are narrower and the fan is flatter.  'Albicans' usually has short branches on the flowering stalk and the flowers are held close to the top of the ovary.  The bracts are somewhat rounded and inflated looking, and green with a sharply defined papery margin at the top edge.  They don't look blue in my garden at all, but clean white with a bit of yellow.
'Florentina' comes on about a week or two later, seems to average a bit taller, and the flower looks a bit more "slender" and "stretched out".  They are held above the bracts on a longer tube, and the bracts are more papery when the flowers open (but still green when still in bud, and toward the base when the flowers are open).  For me the buds are light blue before the flower opens, and the flowers have a bluish tinge.  There are prominent hairs on the narrowed base of the standards in 'Florentina' but not on those of 'Albicans'.
Of course this ignores the fact that the original 'Florentina' was probably actually 'Albicans' and not what everyone is calling 'Florentina' now.  In the photos I've seen, the appearance is sort of in between the two.
I have not had the clone known as "I. germanica alba" flower for me yet, so I don't know for sure how it compares with 'Albicans' and 'Florentina'.
My white I. pallida are similar, but they flower later with the TB's (and with most other I. pallida clones), and they have entirely papery pale bracts even when still in early bud.  Right up until they open the flowers tend to stay crumpled up inside the bracts, and don't protrude beyond the bracts in a neat rolled up pointed bundle as in the others.  They are typical I. pallida, except that the flowers are pure white.

Yahoo! Groups Links

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

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