Thank you.
Where does he publish, please, and in what language?
May I take it you have read these pieces and would have mentioned something had he had said anything about tets....
AMW
-----Original Message-----
From: Chuck Chapman <irischapman@aim.com>
To: iris-species@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, Jun 13, 2011 7:38 am
Subject: [iris-species] Re: Iris Pallida
Bonzena Mitic is a Croatian professor of Biology. He has studied pallida and related species in Croatia and area intensively. Has written about 11 articles on intensive studies of pallida. Gene count , denograms, drawings of gene configuration , flavaonid composition of leaves etc. etc.
It would be worthwhile to look at these. Very interesting. He is very willing to discuss his articles with interested people.
He finds cultivated pallida to be different from wild collected ones, much larger. But does include them in his study of plant sizes. Over 200 plants from some 34 locations, including botanical gardens. All of his research breaks down pallidia group into four clear parts with notable differences from each other. I. cengialti, pallidida, pseudopallida and illyrica.
A few years ago I made a number of crosses of pallida with other close species. One cross was Kupari X I. variagata reginea. This produced a large number of various plicata patterned seedlings. Kupari is at south end of pallidia range, and very very close to northern range of I. variagatea regina.. Also of note is that all of the seedlings had papery sheathes, some more papery then others, but all papery. Reginea has very puffy large green bud sheathes.
Chuck Chapman
---- Original Message ----
From: David Ferguson <m*@msn.com>
To: iris-species <i*@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon, Jun 13, 2011 4:32 am
Subject: RE: [iris-species] Tetraploid Iris Pallida? PBF
Another thought. I want to emphasize that the garden cultivars that I mention are all plants that fit the concept of "true" Iris pallida. I do not eliminate from consideration plants that cannot be proven to be of wild origin. I consider that if they have only I. pallida in their cultivated ancestry, they are still "true" Iris pallida, and to my eyes, these plants are all probably of pure I. pallida ancestry. Agreed, they cannot be used to study the species as a wild entity in habitat, but they can indicate the sorts of variation that likely might be found in the wild gene pool, and that have (presumably) been selected for by early growers. Also, it cannot be proved that all are genetically pure I. pallida (or not), but they look it, and until they are proven otherwise by genetic / molecular analysis I will continue to consider them as such for my own purposes (will that wo rk or not? - the various species are so interrelated and have probably been exchanging genes enough, that it may not be reliable). It would be nice to have at least chromosome counts for all of them.
I agree that there is a class of horticultural "pallida" type Iris that includes many plants that are hybrids, but I do not consider those that are clearly of hybrid origin when I talk about I. pallida. Several (i.e. Caprice, Queen of May, etc.) have been called Iris pallida, but they clearly have I. variegata (or in some cases other species) in their ancestry, as well as Iris pallida. The "yellow pallidas" (i.e. 'Afterglow', 'Palaurea', 'Shekinah', 'Hope', 'Puie d'Or', etc.) are also clearly not pure I. pallida, and I don't call them I. pallida [Though the horticulturist part of me would love to pursue further the apparently forgotten old breeder's goal of producing a yellow "pallida" type plant that has the fragrance of I. pallida.]
I suppose I have beat that subject pretty nearly to death now :0)
Dave
To: i*@yahoogroups.com
From: i*@aim.com
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 20:50:17 -0400
Subject: Re: [iris-species] Tetraploid Iris Pallida? PBF
Here is data on leaf width of Iris pallidia. Taken from the article "Morphology relationship within Alpine-Dinaric populations of the Genus Iris L. series Pallidea" by Bozena Mitic et al in Periodicum Vol 101 No 3 245-251 1999.
I have seven of Mitac papers on pallidae and the related species of iris in Croatia, where Mitac is a biologist.
For palliidia maximum width of leaves varies from 2.7 to 5.4 cm. About .75 to just over 2". Standard deviation is 0.61 cm.
Chuck Chapman
---- Original Message ----
From: C*@aol.com
To: i*@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, Jun 12, 2011 9:20 am
Subject: Re: [iris-species] Tetraploid Iris Pallida? PBF
Mr. Ferguson, thank you for all your interesting comments on the issues presented by the name "Iris pallida."
I will have to give more time than I can spare right now to fully to savor their ramifications, but I did want to offer promptly a few stray thoughts.
First, I think you are correct to remark upon the variability of Iris pallida Lam. This aspect of the species fascinated, among others, Sir Michael Foster, who had a collection planted together for comparison purposes. Dykes appears to have bogged down in this issue.
Also, I am confident you will agree with me that one thing which sometimes throws people badly off when they begin to explore some of the nineteenth and early twentieth century horticultural literature is the use of the term "pallida" as a mere descriptive category, so that not all plants described as "pallidas" are to be referred immediately to the species, although they may, and probably do, derive from it at some remove.
Just as "variegata" and "neglecta" and "germanica" and "squalens" and "neglecta" and so forth were used in catalogs and horticultural literature to describe groups of bearded irises with similar characteristics-- notably color patterns-- so the term "pallida" was also used to describe plants which bore a resemblance to what was understood to be essential Iris pallida Lam. These plants were selfs or near selfs with good foliage, generally taller than those irises --including species-- classified as the horticultural "germanicas." Some of the plants described as "pallidas" were known to be hybrids. Miss Sturtevant's 'Shekinah' leaps to mind.
In his considerations of 'Dalmatica', and the species generally, I understood Chuck to be referring to Iris pallida Lam., sensu strictu, and not to this descriptive horticultural category.
My own experience of 'Kupari' is that it is a shorter and more feeble plant than most forms of I. pallida. I cannot immediately recall any form of I. pallida which is properly referrered to as 'Florentina.' We do know that "plicata" forms of one sort or another were in cultivation comparatively early because, again, we have paintings in which they are clearly recognizable.
I have, myself, understood that the showing of PBF is usual in some clones of Iris pallida, and does not constitute prima facie evidence of admixture--or recent admixture--- with other species or natural hybrids.
You are, I believe, entirely correct about the normative width of pallida leaves, and about several morphological factors being heavily influenced by cultural conditions.
Thank you for your interest.
Cordially,
AMW
