Re: [More on] TB: Germanica?

John Jones may take after us and sweep us off Iris-photos and onto Iris-tak where this thread without question belongs.  It just didn't get its start there.
 
If I get bloom on the "tetraploid *germanica*" this year on the one germinant a year more mature than the others I will post a photo here.
 
I am really glad to hear Robert Pries say what he did about the misfortunate selection of *germanica* as the type for the genus.  I remember L. F. Randolph's comments to this effect, but his attempt to get reassignment to *aphylla* really missed the mark, I think.  *I. pallida* would have been a more useful choice.  *I. aphylla* from the photos I've seen from various wild populations shows an astonishing range of variability, but so do many other bearded complexes, with or without species status.
 
I understand that the type specimen for *I. kashmirana* was collected from a ditch bank near one of the larger cities in SW Afghanistan.  That is hardly a "wild" location and requires human intervention to arrive at that location I would think.  Bearded iris do not migrate by means of flowing water to my knowledge.
 
The *I. trojana* I had from Randolph had some characteristics remarkably similar to Blue Rhythm, particularly in the pattern of branching and to a lesser degree in blossom form, although Blue Rhythm was significantly larger.  It would not surprise me at all if at some future date DNA analysis revealed parts of the anonymous ancestry of Blue Rhythm to include significant input from this species.
 
Other early tetraploids the ancestry of which were based primarily on diploids together with  *mesopotamica,* Amas, Ricardii or *cypriana* seem to have a different character, but resemble one another quite a bit.  I would suspect, if we had samples of some of these early "species" we would find clonal identity among some of them and certainly commonality of species among most--except *trojana* and *kashmiriana.*  The populations that had intergrading forms--could these be by chance hybrid swarms?
 
The reasons I suspect *kashmiriana* to be distinct from the others includes the suggestion by Keith Keppel that *kasmiriana* is the origin of the "t" factor, as well as its geographic distance from the other collected clones.  I assume that the areas in general proximity from the sites where these clones came have been searched for native plants of bearded tetraploids?  It is interesting, also, that a 44-chromosome of *kashmiriana* has been counted in addition to the 48.  I have a very vague memory of a count of 24 for the species as well.  That may not be an accurate memory but is back there in my rusty memory file drawers.
 
The designation *I. amasia* has a certain grace the "bearded" term does not, although esthetic appeal of a name is not considered adequate for settling an uncertainty of nomenclature.  Too bad.  It is a good name.
 
Neil Mogensen   z  7 western NC

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
click here

Yahoo! Groups Links
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index