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


  • Subject: [iris-photos] Re: ROSEMOHR sdlg
  • From: "donald" <donald@eastland.net>
  • Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2004 19:26:39 -0000


No, ROSEMOHR would not be considered 1/4.  It was disenrolled as an 
arilbred and is no longer on the AB rolls.  It did have what was 
considered a 1/4 AB parent, so at one time it would have qualified 
as 1/8.  It was registered in 1948.  ORMOHR is the pollen parent 
(1/4 under the old terminology).  ROSEMOHR has a strappy look even 
for the 1948 vintage it is.  My assessment of its bloom was zero 
aril in appearance.  I'll have to reassess that again, of course, 
when it blooms in a week or so.  My guess was that it could possibly 
be an aneuploid since similar parents gave plants counted as 
aneuploids.  So I was curious.  I'm curious about aneuploids.  I 
don't really understand them and how they work, but am curious 
anyway.  In a simple world ROSEMOHR would be a TB - period.  No 
aril.  That, I think, can be discounted based on the results of the 
two plants that have bloomed whether any further seedlings display 
as much aril or not.  Yes, both have pollen.  They have more aril in 
appearance than almost any OGB- type I grow, whether registered or 
homegrown.  I cannot find any modern equivalents to the type of 
pedigree represented by R.  That type of hybridizing seems to have 
stopped around 1960 or at least any further plants seem not to have 
been registered.  What was registered and introduced are hard to 
find.  Probably many are lost forever.  These blooms need work.  
Primarily they could use more substance and a bit more clarity of 
color.  I'm struck, though, by the fact that both seedlings have two 
well defined branches.  Now I need to find if they have the ability 
to set seeds.  I also need to reconsider R and see if a different 
cross might gain over what is here.  It set three pods quite readily 
using ESTHER, THE QUEEN, but my weather is often not conducive to 
repeating successes.  Germination was also very good for me.  I have 
two pots with new seedlings that waited a year to germinate.  
Probably some the best germination from pods I've ever had.  Not 
what I've come to expect from TB X AB seeds.

Note - I'm saying much of this from memory, so I hope the parent was 
ORMOHR and not NOMOHR.  Can't be sure until I check when at home.  
My memory is just not as reliable ANYMOHR.

Donald Eaves
Texas Zone 7b, USA

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
Printer at MyInks.com.  Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

  • References:

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

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