Re: CULT: stress, pests and weather - very long
- Subject: Re: [iris-talk] CULT: stress, pests and weather - very long
- From: o*@aol.com
- Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 11:39:27 EDT
In a message dated 8/7/2002 7:24:22 PM Central Daylight Time,
donald@eastland.net writes:
> I'm not so sure. While I respect and tend to agree with the observations
> that lead to the conclusion, I remain unconvinced of how strongly the
> genetics should be blamed here. I would observe several things that have
> occurred this year and in the past on this piece of property. The new
> raised beds - good soil, more moisture retentive, excellent drainage. The
> iris grow better in them. They also die better. The very newest beds show
> the most rot. The newest beds last year did the same, but haven't the rot
> this year. Same plants essentially with a few new ones added, but no rot.
> New acquisitions have been hit the hardest. Next are those that were moved
> (excluding seedlings). Undisturbed clumps fare the best. This has been a
> consistent pattern over several years here now. Clumps that suffered rot
> several years ago and for several consecutive seasons, now seem to not fall
> prey to it. In the same soil, same spot. Some plants never quite
> recovered
> from the late bad freeze. Not surprisingly, they have not withstood the
> damage handed out to them as well the others. So the mortality rate is
> higher. But planting timing comes into play here as well. Those planted
> well past optimum planting time then failed to have lush growth when the
> freeze hit and did better. Not something that can be predicted. So the
> same cultivar planted on time in one place hasn't survived, but where it
> was
> planted too late has done pretty well. Everything else is more or less
> equal. So what would normally not be the best time to plant turned out
> better. Result - some plants were simply luckier. It was circumstantial,
> not genetic. Here I can't make the genetic aspect hold up. If I leave the
> plants alone and they survive two or three seasons, it stops. Disturbing
> clumps and moving them around causes it to appear where it hasn't before.
> Unfortunately, iris clumps must be disturbed to continue to perform their
> best. It just hasn't been the best thing the last few years here. But
> then
> the clumps have dwindled as often as grown, so it hasn't been as necessary
> as in years past either. The reasons for that aren't good either.
>
I understand how a plants failure to tolerate the adverse conditions they
face in your present situation may not be important from a genetic
standpoint. However, those that do survive and flourish under these
conditions are of particular interest to those interested in irises capable
of suffering this adversity and still remain capable of defending their own
turf. They are worthy of notice. I do not expect that such conclusions could
be drawn at this point in their growth/misery cycle.
I would greatly appreciate an update in the spring of next year on the
"adversity" champions. If you can find room on your "to do" list for next
year or mid winter you will garner the gratitude of many I'm sure and me in
particular.
I mention this now only because my memory tends to archive important agenda
items in places from which they cannot be easily retrieved without arduous
searches (gobbledygook for I forget important things).
Bill Burleson 7a/b
Old South Iris Society
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
4 DVDs Free +s&p Join Now
http://us.click.yahoo.com/pt6YBB/NXiEAA/Ey.GAA/2gGylB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
