Re: AIS:'39, '49 Check List for Dummies
- Subject: Re: [iris-talk] AIS:'39, '49 Check List for Dummies
- From: J* a* C* W*
- Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2002 17:46:10 -0700
> From: wmoores <wmoores@watervalley.net>
> Does anyone know if a 'tutorial' such as the subject line of this post
might have
> been written? When I research these two check lists for possible name
usage, I can
> rarely tell if something has been introduced or not. If somebody has a
clear
> interpretation for the introduction code in the '39 and '49 Checklists, I
would
> apprecate knowing it.
Walter,
In the '39 and '49 Checklists the year that appears in the same parentheses
with the name of the hybridizer/originator (immediately following the name
of the iris) is the year of introduction. If the iris was not recorded as
being introduced during the time period covered by the Checklist, there is
a capital N. where the year of introduction would normally appear.
Unfortunately, particularly in the 1949 Checklist, there appear to be many
oversights in which irises that were in fact introduced are not recorded as
such. Also, the 1959 Checklist does not take any note of irises that were
registered before 1950, but that were introduced during the 1950's.
Therefore, it is possible to use these early Checklists only to confirm
that an iris was introduced if a year of introduction is given, but not to
prove that an iris was never introduced if there is no year of introduction
recorded.
Jeff Walters in northern Utah (USDA Zone 4/5, Sunset Zone 2, AHS Zone 7)
HIPS Commercial Source Chairman
jcwalters@bridgernet.com
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get your FREE credit report with a FREE CreditCheck
Monitoring Service trial
http://us.click.yahoo.com/ACHqaB/bQ8CAA/ySSFAA/2gGylB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
