Iris 'Flavescens' - hybrid names

Anner,  Sorry about dropping the "r".

Excuse my rambling on here, I'm sort of changing the direction of the
subject here a bit.  Just hoping to tease some of you with the old diploids
a bit.  Great plants!  They are good for the north, and once well
established seem to survive and flower OK in much of the south as well.  In
the north they seem to thrive on the cool/cold weather and flower late
enough to usually miss any late frost damage.  Don't have any shots handy
of my own here at work, but there are some links to some listed below.

This is a favorite subject of mine, because I like the old diploids perhaps
best of all.  'Flavescens' isn't my favorite of the diploids, but it and
ones similar are great plants that have a subtle beauty that isn't
duplicated in anything modern.  I have good luck with 'Flavescens', but
it's still early to for me to know if the ones looking similar are as good
at surviving in New Mexico.  The closest-looking one in pattern with a
purple ground that I know is 'Queen of May', and it does well here too, but
it looks quite different because of the different bright color.  'G. P.
Baker' and 'Joyance', 'Mrs. Horace Darwin', and a few others with similar
subtle patterning and coloring seem to be doing well so far, but they're
still settling in after two seasons.

I forgot about Dyke's statement regarding trouble getting seed on
'Flavescens' (seems the statement was made regarding other pallida x
variegata hybrids as well?), but I have read it.  Other people have made
similar comments, which surprised me, since the diploid hybrids I grow well
generally also set seed well.  The most difficult to get fruit on for me is
the parent species I. variegata itself, but I. variegata and a lot of the
MTB's are decidedly unhappy in the hot dry summer weather.  Maybe it just
has to do with growing conditions?  My 'Flavescens' usually has a few "bee
pods", and this year I pollinated it with 'Amas' and I. varbossiana, and
the stalks I pollinated all set nice fat fruits with lots of seed (same
result using the same pollen on the "sambucina" Dinar Mountains clone).
I'm doing a little experiment to see how close the offspring come in
appearance to old early generation hybrids of tetraploid species crossed
with diploid hybrids (such as 'Dominion', 'Alcazar', 'Prospero', and dozens
of others).  I'm also curious to see where that rootbeer/bubblegum smell is
coming from that a number of those old tetraploids seem to have (a
combination of pallida grape sweet with variegata - whatever the smell is -
and the typical tall bearded Iris smell of the tetraploid species?).  All
the old "rootbeer" Iris that I've grown (not too many so far) seem to have
'Amas' or a similar tetraploid crossed with an I. pallida x I. variegata
hybrid.

I should point out that I haven't grown any of the seed I made with
'Flavescens' yet (soon now - I hope), so it may turn out the seed are
sterile or of reduced viability.  They certainly look fat and sassy though.
They would have two matched sets of chromosomes from the tetraploid parents
though, and I wonder if that isn't a key to getting higher fruit set on
diploid  hybrids?  Dyke's, I suspect, didn't have such a ready availability
of tetraploids to work with, so maybe the pollen he had was just different?
I'm sure he did have 'Amas' though.

As for the specific epithet, hybrids of species can and often do receive
names just like species, and the same rules apply.  There are botanists who
have made it their mission to look for hybrids to name.  Some have taken it
a step further and have done it purely as an easy way to attach their names
to an epithet.  Some have gone even further and named hybrid genera that
apparently don't really even exist (there are a bunch of these in the
Cactaceae now).  To a degree I think it's pointless, but on the other hand
it's easier to say I. x sambucina than it is to say "hybrid of I. pallida
and I. variegata", or even "I. pallida x I. variegata", and everyone would
know what it means.  There is a distinctly different mentality to botanical
nomenclature, which is dealing with populations of plants, as compared to
naming of cultivars, which focuses on individual clones, and it is
sometimes difficult for one group to relate to what the other group is
doing.  To a botanist the entity is the group of related plants, to a
breeder the entity is the individual plant itself.

As for this particular hybrid cross.  There's been discussion lately
(mostly thanks to me, me thinks) on the Iris Species forum about which name
was applied to I. pallida x I. variegata hybrids first (there are a lot of
these to sort through).  It appears to come down to a tie, with I.
sambucina and I. squalens published before any of the others by Linnaeus in
the same publication.  I. sambucina came first in sequence in the
publication, but that doesn't automatically give priority according to the
ICBN; however, there is an old tradition called "page priority", where the
first in a sequence is often given priority.  Legally it then falls to the
first reviser to settle priority, and somewhere (I think it might have been
Dyke's) there is a reference to "sambucina type hybrids", with a few of the
others listed under that.  This should be enough to set the proper name for
the hybrids as I. x sambucina, but I'm not certain of this, since I can't
remember the full context of the citation.  The name (which ever wins out)
would apply botanically to all hybrids derived from I. pallida x I.
variegata, regardless of generation, coloration, or parental gender.  It
would not apply to anything that has any other species mixed in.  If these
were wild reproducing hybrids, genetically isolated from their parents but
forming a stable population, they would probably be afforded full species
status; there is a strong precedent for this, but this is not the case
here.  [The 40 chromosome species probably are such cases though.]
However, for the purposes of legality and priority, a name given to a
hybrid between species is treated as the same as a species name with the
only differences being in definition of what is contained under the name,
and the addition of the "times" symbol before the name when it is written.

Odds are that a majority of MTB's would fit under this "I. x sambucina"
designation botanically, but a few are probably still pure I. variegata,
even after several generations, and a number of others involve other
species and therefore don't fit under this hybrid name, even though they
may look the same.  I suspect that it would be a nightmare to actually try
and figure out the species ancestry of many of these.  Pretty much all of
those old diploid hybrids from around and before 1900 are I. pallida x I.
variegata though, and the name I. x sambucina would apply.  The "cultivar"
name 'Sambucina' is not to be confused with the botanical name.  This
cultivar may or not be the "type clone" of I. x sambucina that is preserved
in Linnaeus' herbarium, and which is the anchor point for the botanical
usage of the name.  The cultivar is just a clone that happens to match the
original description rather closely, and is one of very many clones that
would belong to this hybrid taxon.  Normally a cultivar is not given the
same name as a species, but it is easy to see how it can happen when the
species is based on one cultivated clone, and not on population studied in
the field, as many Iris names are.  There is a name for a hybrid taxon used
in the same way the word "species" is used for "non-hybrids", but I forget
what it is offhand.  I put "non-hybrid" in quotes, because all wild species
of everything living (at least everything with forms of sexual
reproduction) have had hybridization in their ancestries at some point, but
they are in theory unique established populations at this point.  This
leads to a whole different discussion, bordering on philosophical.

I do think that there is a point where the chromosomes are so shuffled and
genes so mixed up that there is little point in referring to modern garden
cultivars botanically at the species level.  I think a majority of Iris
cultivars have reached this point, but I'm not sure where one would draw
the line.

A case could be made that in our modern lines of breeding we are creating
new entities that are deserving of new species names (much as we've done
with things like horses, cattle, dogs, cats, etc.), but I'm not sure that
this would serve any purpose other than to occupy some hard core
taxonomists.

I have really never checked, but the only other hybrid Iris I know of that
has been given botanical names is I. x germanica, which like the diploid
hybrids, has been given several names.  The other names should all be
treated as synonyms botanically, but as cultivars it is different.  Some
are I. kochii, I. nepalensis, I. albicans (in the original sense, based on
the type description = 'Florentina' of gardens), etc.

I have compiled a list that includes at least 50 "I. x sambucina" names (it
may be up to a hundred now, but I haven't counted lately).  It would be
really fun and useful to know the exact parentage of each, but that
knowledge is long gone.  We would then know the coloring of the parents,
and could probably learn a lot more, a lot more quickly about inheritance
of patterns and colors from the various species.  Even so, there are
distinct trends in the coloring and patterning in these hybrids that could
probably be worked out genetically and might shed a lot of light on some of
what is going on with inheritance in cultivars that have them in their
ancestry (maybe somebody's already done most of that?).

In an attempt to stay in keeping with the fact that this is a photos forum:
There are a bunch of diploid "I. x sambucina" type hybrids shown on the
HIPS web site in the photo gallery and comparison pages.  Pretty much all
the old diploids there (at least the ones that aren't pure I. pallida)
would qualify.  This is botanically speaking, and has nothing to do with
coloration of the cultivar 'Sambucina'.  If you like these diploids as much
I do, it's fun to browse, and make wish lists.  The ones there include:
'Anne Leslie', 'Apache', 'Aurea, 'Autumn Elf', 'Black Prince', 'Celeste',
'Col. Candelot', 'Damozel', 'Demi Dueil', 'Dr. Moody', 'Evolution',
'Flammenschwert', 'Flavescens', 'Fro', 'Gajus', 'Gay Hussar', 'Geomori',
'Gracchus' (maybe pure I. variegata?), 'Honorabile' (and it's sports), 'Her
Majesty', 'Iduna', 'Iris King', 'Jacquesiana', 'Joyance', 'Juniata',
'Little Freak', 'Loreley', 'Lycaena', 'Marsh Marigold', 'Mildred Presby',
'Mme. Cheri', 'Mme. Chobaut', 'Mme Louesse', 'Monsignor', 'Mrs. Andrist',
Mrs. 'Neubronner', 'Neglecta', 'Perfection', 'Peggy Babbington','Pink
Ruffles', 'Pluie d'Or', 'Plumeri', 'Prinzess Viktoria Luise', 'Quaker
Lady', 'Queen of May', 'Red Cloud', 'Rhages', 'Rhein Nixe', 'Sambucina',
'Sherwin Wright', 'Taj Mahal', 'Troost', 'Vingolf', 'Virginia Moore'
(strongest diploid yellow I've tried in NM so far), and probably a few I
missed.  It is amazing just how much variation in color and pattern can
come from mixing two relatively stable species that show only minor visible
variation.

'Alice Harding', 'President Pilkington' and 'Gold Imperial' maybe should be
included too, but it seems there is debate about ploidy level that raises
questions about parentage.  Interesting, the first two supposedly have the
same parents, yet look so different.   Could be that a few I listed aren't
really of pure pallida x variegata ancestry, but I think they all are.

http://www.worldiris.com/public_html/Frame_pages/QFix_Index_Frame.html

http://www.worldiris.com/public_html/Comp_variegata/Comparisons.html

http://www.worldiris.com/public_html/Amoenas/Comparisons.html

http://www.worldiris.com/public_html/Small_bl_plics/Display_frame.html

There are a bunch more at Rick Tasco's web site.  Superstition designates
the diploids in their catalog, but not on Rick's web site (so far as I can
find anyway).  Great photos there of cultivars not shown as photos anywhere
else:
http://community.webshots.com/user/rickt103

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