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

reverse stripes - luminata pattern

  • Subject: [iris-photos] reverse stripes - luminata pattern
  • From: "David Ferguson" <manzano57@msn.com>
  • Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 00:06:40 -0600
  • Seal-send-time: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 00:06:40 -0600

First I noticed that I said for this pattern "with stripes that are light on a dark background".  This is technically not correct, but this is how they appear.  The dark coloring is in the spaces between the major veins, and makes it look as if the veins are represent as pale stripes on a darker ground.  However, the light color is still the ground or underlying color.
 
I've been getting mixed signals on definition of luminata for some time, and there seem to be two slightly overlaping definitions.  I'm not sure either one is addopted as "official" anywhere.  One, the first below, is what I would consider a mixed and incorrect definition, but is commonly followed.
 
One; rather artificial; includes anything with the outer part of the falls dark, fading to a contrasting pale zone around the beard.  This includes diverse types of pattern, true luminatas, true plicatas, a mix of the two in one flower, etc.  It is indeed purely a visual definition, and has little to due with the actual structuring of the pattern.  I do not believe this is the true definition of a luminata, but it is the one most people seem to use.
 
Two; a pattern with dark coloring lying over a lighter ground and located primarily between the major veins.  Usually this is most strongly represented on the falls, but not exclusively so, and most often strongest somewhere away from the base of the petaloids.  The distribution of the pattern can actually be anywhere on the petaloid though, sometimes even concentrated near the hafts (as in 'Fast Track').  Most often the basal area around the beard is lighter and looks like a bright light colored signal; also, usually the margin of the petaloid is lighter (in varying degrees).  This is sort of the reverse or compliment pattern to plicata, but the two often look grossly rather similar.  Plicata is commonly more strongly developed near the base and the margins of the petaloids, and the dark pigment is concentrated along the veins.  Often the two patterns occur together in the same flower.  In some cases it is possible for a plicata plus luminata pattern to compliment each other to the point of entirely masking out the lighter ground below, though I don't know how often this actually occurs.  By this definition, many plicatas appear in catalogs as luminatas and even registered as such, and the reverse is true as well.
 
I consider number two to be the true definition of a luminata.
 
 
Dave

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
click here


Yahoo! Groups Links



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



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