Re: MTB vs. BB

The topic of 'Pretty Butterfly' quietly brought up the classification issue
again, since I saw a bit of confusion about how to list it (?IB, ?MTB, ?BB).
'Pretty Butterfly is a bit robust to fit in with many of the MTB's, but the
diploid MTB's are very similar.   There are many others of these (probably
mostly derived from I. pallida x I. variegata) cultivars that are like large
MTB's, and which, to me, don't really fit anywhere.  If they stretch tall
enough, they become TB's, but are rather uncomfortable there.  They are much
like diploid MTB's but thicker of stem and larger of flower than most of those
(but they are closely related).  They have a different genetic makeup and
usually bloom much later than the traditional IB of Dwarf x TB ancestry, but
they are similar in proportions.  A few that have known parentage might
qualify as species hybrids, but most of the oldest ones seem to have no
recorded ancestry (perhaps many of the oldest were actually collected?). They
have recently been called Border Bearded, but they are mostly diploids, while
traditional BB's are mostly tetraploids with larger flowers like short TB's.
So, is there maybe a case for another class here?  I'm a bit biased, since
these "large MTB's" are probably my favorite group of Irises.  I realize that
few new cultivars are added to this group now, as they are almost inherently
an old fashioned diploid group, but there are a lot of them, and they don't
seem to fit anywhere else nice and neatly.  Also, it would be nice to be able
to go through listings and be able to not have these beauties all dispersed
all over the place through four or five classes (some are even listed
sometimes as SDB's!).

Not sure what my point is.  I suppose I'm just curious if I'm alone in this
sentiment?

Dave

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index