RE: Re: SPEC-X

---

There are many complex issues that are being discussed here and it is hard to address them all but let me hit a couple. First the idea of showing irises is to display the diversity to the gardening public. Irises at shows are not shown against each other. The ribbons that are awarded are based upon the quality of the exhibit of that plant. In otherwords you are judging the exhibitor not the Iris. The goal is to create the best display of Irises for the general public not to grade the Irises as to their garden value. If they are well represented by being well-grown and well displayed, then they allow the public to choose what they like based upon a quality sampling. Many Judges do not understand the difference between show judging and garden judging.
 
Second the classification of garden Irises is totally arbitrary. When the first crosses where made of a pumila with a Tall-bearded  produced what we think of as SDBs the size range was completely arbitrary. That cross can produce plants anywhere from 4 inches to 4 ft in height. But the garden classes are more about how a plant is used in the landscape. People desiring dwarf irises created the MDB and SDB classes but the genetic background that would be used to determine this in a botanical sense would achieve at plants all over the size spectrum.
 
Although some garden classifications are dictated by genetic background and not size again much of this has to do with culture and not Botanical evolution. Arilbreds for example require a slightly different culkture than TBs. Unfortunately the Species and Species-X categories were the last to be created but If the world worked logically they would have been the first since all irises fit in either one category or the other. All the other categories are refinefinements. The Japanese Iris are a horticultural development out of the species and all the other classes are hybrids and therefore species crosses. When the SPEC-X category was created it could just have well have been called the Micellaneous Hybrid class. But the name was chosen to emphazie the importance and value of species in creating these crosses.
 
When does a group within the SPEC-X class become a class on its own? Easy, when there is enough interest and plants to warrant a separate category. Originally the classification system had only Tall-bearded  and dwarfs, the beardless were classed by their botanical series. The tall-bearded originally did not have a firm height limit so you will find old historic TBs that would now be classed as MTBs. IBs, and BBs. This creates a great deal of confusion in the older checklists because they reflect older definitions since we do not have a new revision  The Iris Encyclopedia has tried to provide some comments on historic Tbs that no longer fit that class. Also some SDBs in the 1940s were actually classed as IBs since SDB did not exist as a class.
 
We keep trying to improve the horticultural classifications just as botanists keep re-evaulating the phylogeny of the species. Horticultural classes point to haw a plant would be utilized in the garden. SPEC-X creates a problem for many judges in that it can contain plants or many different garden uses. I find the need to divide the SPEC-X class into a narrow definition both uncharitible and unwise. Of course we all get excited about the really wide crosses such as Paltec. But in the last hundred years there have been so few of these there are not enough to have a viable competition of garden worthiness. It would destroy the award. And each plant of this type would not be noticed by many of the less informed irisarians. Limiting the award to non-bearded would also so dilute the number as to destroy the award also. It is sad that we can not be generous enough to allow inclusion of all iris species in this award. It does not mean you have to grow them and it does not mean you have to like them. The only thing a broadly defined award accomplishes is to make more people think about more types of irises. But of course Judeges do not always like to think. And just plain gardeners often like to complain about judges.