iris@hort.net
- Subject: Re: Test Gardens
- From: P* A* <p*@mindspring.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 16:30:46 -0400 (EDT)
Yes, I am quite aware of Loomis's. But it is only one site. We need a wider exposure to climate, soils and water availability. -----Original Message----- >From: irischapman@aim.com >Sent: Jun 22, 2010 11:06 AM >To: iris@hort.net >Subject: Re: [iris] Test Gardens > >There is The Dr. Loomis Memorial Test Gardens. they trial iris in all >classifications. All are pointed out each year for each of three years and a >report is sent to all with iris in their gardens. Every plant scoring over 80 >is given an Loomis award and results published in AIS bulletin. > >Germany has its trial garden for SDB and TB and also points out entries and >publishes results. > > > >There also is a trial garden that was on last years convention tour. This >included older plants, but I don't think they publish their results > >Any group could easily do the same thing.If they so wished. > > > >Chuck Chapman > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Robert Pries <robertpries@embarqmail.com> >To: iris@hort.net >Sent: Tue, Jun 22, 2010 8:50 am >Subject: Re: [iris] Test Gardens > > >Paul; I think your thoughts on test gardens are good ones. As with anything >that > >can prove useful there are many problems to overcome. And perhaps it would be > >best not to discourage you with a list. AIS has had a long history of test > >gardens. Often they created so much controversy they were eventually disbanded > >and many remember the problems and hope to avoid them again. But it should not > >be ignored that they also gave us an enormous legacy of information. Cornell > >Plantations was a test garden and the venerable Austin Sands provided a > >tremendous archive of information about the irises of his time. > >Originally many of the test gardens were first organized to sort out what >irises > >were growing under what names and correcting the nomenclature. But even from >the > >beginning, judges would visit and evaluate irises. Although there still are > >public test gardens around the country, In the recent past AIS has pretty much > >divorced itself from the concept. But one must always remember that the >society > >is not its officers, and those officers continually change. It is really about > >what its members do. The society is only a network and how individuals use >that > >network is what makes the iris society. > >The issue of test gardens will never die because it has some intrinsic value. > >Its problem is mostly execution. Many of you know that I am very interested in > >preservation of cultivars and have been trying to establish a relationship >with > >the American Association of Public Gardens such that AIS could participate in > >their system of National Collections, both to create some in members gardens >and > >collections in the botanical gardens and arboretums. As part of this effort I > >proposed to the board we have an Office of National Collections and test > >gardens. Although they did not understand what an office would be in our > >structure they did approve this Spring a committee. Note this did also include > >test gardens. Whether some like them or not, test gardens exist, and if we >have > >input we can perhaps help them avoid some problems. Of course all public > >displays are of strong PR value for the Iris society, negatively or >positively, > >depending on how the plants are grown. > >Of course what Paul has been talking about is more personal than a public > >garden. But believe it or not AIS still has robins flying. I could see where >the > >efforts of a network of individuals could provide some real benefits very much > >like a robin. A standardized form, that could be easily filled out, might aid > >individuals in separate parts of the country to remember to comment on the >same > >things. Even four individuals scattered across the country could give a useful > >clue as to the performance of an iris nationwide. If someone would like to > >volunteer to be a part of the Gardens-Committee they might work on >coordination > >of such a project. Sadly I have so much on my plate at present that my garden >is > >suffering, along with my wife, both of whom deserve more attention. I am not > >sure how much effort I have in me for another project, let alone guesting any > >irises myself. But I am sure there are others who would do this. I would like > >to, but if I abused the plants it would be unfair! > > to the hybridizer and no real test. > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Paul Archer" <pharcher@mindspring.com> > >To: iris@hort.net > >Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 12:32:29 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern > >Subject: Re: [iris] iris DIGEST V1 #1084 > > > >I know this is mostly falling on deaf ears at this point so I guess I'm really > >just stirring the pot (I like to do that!) > > > >I wasn't suggesting the AIS or anyone else take away your right to Register a > >variety or not. Where did I say that? Would I want that? No. I am an > >American, but guess what ...I'm even more loyal to my beloved Irises! Give me > >your tiered, your poorly branched, huddled masses yearning to breathe free. > > > >So, let's say being trialed in a test garden not be a part of Registration. >And > >that is fine if you don't want your seedlings to be judged by others. Then >fine > >don't participate (even though they will be anyway whether you want them to or > >not simply by releasing them and through time and in commerce). However, >there > >could still be a system of accreditation for varieties. Yes, I know the >Awards > >system as it stands is intended for that but apprently it's not working well > >enough to suffice, otherwise we wouldn't all be here in this chat forum > >complaning of all the problems we have growing them. Yes, that shakes things >up > >a quite a bit doesn't it! Oh, don't I know how the majority of this group > >doesn't like change. > > > >Besides even if a seedlings was trialed and did poorly it could still be > >Registered by the Hybridizer. We'd simply have a better idea of it's >tendencies > >and abilities before making that decision to do so. > > > >There is also absolutely nothing stopping others on other continents or > >countries setting their own system of evaluation. To imply that they have to > >send all of their plants over here would be absurd. > > > >The test gardens would be run by volunteers who already are more than happy to > >add yet another iris to their happy family. This is for growability studies, > >not necessarily Awards judging, because technically the seedling is not > >Registered yet so is not up for an Award. It is strictly a seedling >evaluation > >trial for those that we might be intersted in Registering. I know I have some > >that might do even better somehwere else and push me to actually Register it. > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >>From: M Bersillon <auxiris5@orange.fr> > >>Sent: Jun 21, 2010 9:32 AM > >>To: iris@hort.net > >>Subject: Re: [iris] iris DIGEST V1 #1084 > >> > >>Hello. . . just a "lurker" most of the time, not a regular contributor, but I > >feel that I must respond to Paul's remark about trial gardens and the > >implication of using such things (sorry, I'm only assuming that this is what >you > >mean, Paul) as prerequisites to the official registration of iris cultivars >with > >the American Iris Society. There were remarks about such a thing in one of >the > >AIS Bulletins a few years back and I feel that I must say once again that, as >a > >hybridizer, I do not agree with the idea of taking the decision to register > >irises out of the hands of the people who create them. This is an open door >to > >less, not more, responsible behaviour on the part of hybridizers (as in: "Oh, > >well if someone else is going to decide for me anyway, then I don't have to > >bother to be so exacting") and there are many problems with requiring the > >passage of plants through a test garden in order to be granted access to > >registration. . . > >> > >>First of all, how many of us would honestly be willing to accept someone >else's > >decision of "not registeration-worthy" regarding an iris that we truly believe > >is a good plant? This goes way beyond asking other hybridizers or >knowledgeable > >friends what they think of the plant and then making up your own mind! > >> > >>Then there's the whole practical business about where would the test gardens >be > >and who would run them---not to mention with what money. > >> > >>Finally, please spare a thought for those of us hybridizing iris outside >North > >America! Since the AIS holds the register for the entire planet, would it >then > >be fair to oblige "foreign originated" irises to jump through this extra hoop >of > >trial gardens---which I'm imagining would be in the USA---in order just to >have > >access to the registration process? It's already difficult enough for foreign > >originated plants to have access to the AIS awards system through exclusive > >introduction in North America for their first year on the market. > >> > >>It seems to me that even though some inferior plants may find their way onto > >the market, they won't last long there if their performance is poor. Also, > >remember that inbreeding, which is often the price one must pay for finding > >something new, can also produce plants that aren't as strong and it may take > >time to stabilise new patterns or colour combinations so that plant quality is > >also present. > >> > >>My two cents worth! > >> > >>Michele Bersillon > >> > >>Le 21 juin 2010 ` 00:42, iris DIGEST a icrit : > >> > >>> > >>> > >>> iris DIGEST Sunday, June 20 2010 Volume 01 : Number >1084 > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> In this issue: > >>> > >>> Re: [iris]:HYB:Goals:Preferences(was Limbo Seedlings) > >>> Re: [iris]:HYB:Goals:Preferences(was Limbo Seedlings) > >>> [iris] Re: Limbo Seedlings > >>> RE: [iris] Re: Limbo Seedlings > >>> > >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> > >>> Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 18:42:04 -0400 (EDT) > >>> From: Paul Archer <pharcher@mindspring.com> > >>> Subject: Re: [iris]:HYB:Goals:Preferences(was Limbo Seedlings) > >>> > >>> I was speaking of proportion the way it relates to the overall look of the > >plant. Large or even medium sized flowers on short stalks are not that > >appealing. Well, maybe dainty ones stuck down there aren't much either. Some > >of the smaller ones can have short and wide foliage and have tall enough >stalks > >to appreciate the flowers they hold up out of the foliage. The stalks may not > >fit the AIS Judges Handbook of standards for whichever class they fit into, >but > >they should look nice just the same. Dainty flowers sticking way up in the >air > >as high as your shoulder (I'm 6'3) are not that appealing either, intriguing > >yes, but worth the garden space? I had one of those, and no, it isn't. We're > >not even talking about flower form, color, haftiness at this point. This is >far > >more general. > >>> > >>> I had a nice TB seedling once that had the grassiest foliage I had ever >seen > >(about 1/2 inch wide top to bottom) and it its stalk was thin and short and > >strong. Darn it the flower was a neat carotenoid plicata almost the size of > >Silverado. I kept it for a while but in the end it simply passed that short > >grassiness on to its children and the whole lot and seedling got tossed. > >>> > >>> Yes, show bench type stalks are a goal in seedlings, but more important is > >the how the plant perfoms as a whole. It may have show bench stalks but that > >lower branch may not even show out of the leaves in the garden. > >>> > >>> If a plant touted as an improvement over its parent or grandparent that > >consistently dies over a two (or three) year period was obviosly a plant that > >was an improvement ... for the person who grew it. It simply may not have >been > >tried in other regions before being Registered and Introduced. The trouble >with > >Registration and Introduction is that most times they happen the same year. > >Why? I think we know why. But this is another topic that has been discussed > >before. > >>> > >>> A rethink on how Irises are Registered might be in order. Just simply > >knowing the parentage is enough (many don't even have that) and growing enough > >stock to sell probably should not be the only reasons to Register one. And we > >are back to the topic of Trial Gardens.... and actually using them for that > >purpose. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> - -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: autmirislvr@aol.com > >>>> Sent: Jun 20, 2010 4:10 PM > >>>> To: iris@hort.net > >>>> Subject: Re: [iris]:HYB:Goals:Preferences(was Limbo Seedlings) > >>>> > >>>> Points of discussion: > >>>> > >>>> Hybidizers DO share both plants and pollen long before a new breakthrough > >hits > >>>> the market. That is how children of said "wonder" hit the market so >soon. > >>>> Some of the plants used in breeding are never introduced--(sibling of >blah, > >>>> blah) > >>>> > >>>> Length of bloom season can be achieved in several ways. Substance is >great. > >>>> It's also possible to have stalks, within a clump, that initiate one at a > >time > >>>> throughout the season, and the blooms on the stalk may also open one or >two > >>>> blooms at a time. It's possible for a mature iris clump to have many >days, > >or > >>>> possibly many weeks of bloom. A good show bench iris may not be a good > >garden > >>>> iris based on the timing of individual blooms. > >>>> > >>>> Of course, rebloom is another method of extending bloom season! One of >my > >>>> favorites, but I'll take them all. > >>>> > >>>> Branching? Is this garden branching or show bench branching? A show >branch > >>>> must only shine on one day, whereas the garden variety must hold it's own > >>>> against others for a much longer time period. This is especially true of > >tall > >>>> bearded irises. > >>>> > >>>> I find myself looking for show bench branching on all of my seedlings > >although > >>>> I know that my rebloomers will rarely make a show bench based on the >timing > >of > >>>> most iris shows. I'd be better off looking for branching that shows well >in > >>>> the garden, but old habits are hard to break. > >>>> > >>>> During my formative years as an iris hybridizer, I grew a beautiful > >Blue(ish) > >>>> iris that was tall with a consistent branching problem. It always grew >the > >>>> middle branch at a quarter turn on the stalk rather than opposite sides of > >the > >>>> branch! It was a gorgeous bloom but most felt it should never have been > >>>> introduced, based on the branching deficiency. Yet, this iris would get >a > >>>> blue ribbon on the bench because it grew as introduced. > >>>> > >>>> Paul when you speak of proportion are you refering to both stalk and >bloom > >>>> proportion and/or balance? > >>>> > >>>> Maybe the main difference of opinions lies in bloom preference? Open > >>>> standards or domed standards? Heavy haft marks or none at all? Pastel > >colors > >>>> or heavily saturated dark colors? Ruffles, lace or tailored edges? > >Plicatas, > >>>> selfs, bitones, etc.? I love variegatas! > >>>> > >>>> If I buy an iris that is touted as an improvement and it dies for me >within > >2 > >>>> years, is it truly an improvement? Or should it be considered inferior? > >>>> > >>>> Which irises bred from Edith Wolford were truly an improvement over EW? > >>>> Several may have been considered a success by their breeder/creator, > >depending > >>>> on their goals! Use the same criteria with any of the other irises >heavily > >>>> used in breeding. > >>>> > >>>> For an Edith Wolford cross to be a success for me it would have to be as >is, > >>>> but healthy here in KY. It has height, color, branching (most of the >time) > >>>> and all other qualities I like! Unfortunately, it doesn't live here. > >Except > >>>> in my huge pot, of course. It lives, but still doesn't bloom every year. > >It > >>>> is still in some of my seedlings. It passes on the bitone effect, height > >and > >>>> good branching in plants that live. Most seedlings also have triple > >>>> terminals. Just because an iris bombs here doesn't mean it's children >will > >>>> do the same. > >>>> > >>>> Many of the Romantic Evening children appeal to me more than RE, but who >can > >>>> buy all 93 of them? (I also have children of RE, but it is long gone) > >>>> > >>>> There are many irises introduced each year that don't appeal to me, yet, >I'm > >>>> sure most furthered some goal of the hybridizer. It's quite possible that > >I'd > >>>> say "ugh" to your (generic your) favorite iris, but that doesn't make >them > >>>> inferior. > >>>> > >>>> How about that beautiful pink iris that looks just like two dozen >(hundred) > >>>> other beautiful pink irises? Was it folly to introduce it? Or did it > >exhibit > >>>> something special or new to the hybridizer? > >>>> > >>>> Just saying that much of what we see is simply "the eye of the beholder." > >>>> This is one of the reasons for National Display Gardens and iris photos! > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Betty Wilkerson . . . thanks for your time. > >>>> KY Zone 6 > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> ---Original Message----- > >>>> From: Paul Archer <pharcher@mindspring.com> > >>>> To: iris@hort.net > >>>> Sent: Sun, Jun 20, 2010 12:44 pm > >>>> Subject: Re: [iris]:HYB:Goals:Preferences(was Limbo Seedlings) > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> I personally select for plants with the following (since I breed TB's, > >MTB's, > >>>> ntermediates and Arilbreds)... > >>>> First off, each cross has a particular goal for a flower characteristic. >If > >a > >>>> lower meets that goal or something unique shows up then the following is > >>>> valuated... > >>>> -Flowers that have good bloom substance (more then two days of life). I > >would > >>>> lways like 3 days but that is > >>>> slim pickin's. > >>>> Upright foliage > >>>> Disease resistance (as well as blue-green foliage) > >>>> Stalks that do not need staking > >>>> Good branching (not as easy as it might seem) > >>>> At least two increases to bloom size > >>>> Proper proportion (regardless of class). > >>>> Bud count of at least 8 with a goal of triple sockets and/or lower >branches > >>>> Rebloom if possible > >>>> > >>>> irst year seedlings are evaluated for color and general growth. The >second > >>>> ear is make it or break it unless foul weather has played a role in >general. > >>>> f any one or two of those qualities is missing in a seedlng (but the >flower > >>>> ust be exceptional) it is selected as breeding stock. Any more than two > >>>> faults > >>>> s usually tossed. I do have one plant that is an exception to that rule >and > >I > >>>> ill never, ever distribute it. Once I get what I want from it it will >get > >>>> ossed. > >>>> Arilbreds are something else altogether and have their own set of issues, > >but > >>>> imilarly judged. > >>>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: autmirislvr@aol.com > >>>> Sent: Jun 20, 2010 12:14 PM > >>>> To: iris@hort.net > >>>> Subject: [iris]:HYB:Goals:Preferences(was Limbo Seedlings) > >>>> > >>>> This is a side issue to the Limbo Seedling thread. > >>>> > >>>> So many things to consider. > >>>> > >>>> <<second class seedlings>> > >>>> > >>>> An improvement might be a taller specimen, more branches, longer bloom > >>>> season, > >>>> deeper colors, etc..What are your goals and how do they mesh with what >the > >>>> rest of us like? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Would some of the hybridizers on this list please give us some idea of >what > >>>> they consider an advancement? What are your goals? What are you trying >to > >>>> improve in the irises you breed? Specifically, what would it take to be >a > >>>> "first class" seedling in your garden? > >>>> > >>>> Each hybridizer has their own goals. To an extent, an advancement or > >>>> "better" > >>>> iris is in the eye of the beholder. > >>>> > >>>> Feed Back, please! > >>>> > >>>> Betty Wilkerson . . . extremely fussy about colors and patterns. > >>>> Bridge In Time Irises > >>>> KY Zone 6 > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: Dana Brown <ddbro@sbcglobal.net> > >>>> To: iris@hort.net > >>>> Sent: Sun, Jun 20, 2010 8:56 am > >>>> Subject: RE: [iris] Re: Limbo Seedlings > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Paul, > >>>> Just imagine how much worse it would be if all the seconds and culls > >>>> ere floating around out there as well. If your "limbo" seedlings are > >>>> etter than so many of the current intros, then kudos to you for being a > >>>> iscerning hybridizer/irisarian!! Why would you want to lower your > >>>> tandards at this point? > >>>> As far as all the tracking and record keeping....well, given the > >>>> umber of misnamed or no name iris already out there I guess we already >know > >>>> hat not everyone keeps good records. > >>>> Bottom line for me as a hybridizer, no, I don't want to send my > >>>> econd class seedlings out in public where they might get released into > >>>> eneral population. > >>>> Dana > >>>> Dana D. Brown > >>>> IS, ASI, MIS, RIS, SPIS, TBIS > >>>> alevil Iris Gardens & Kennels > >>>> ww.malevil-iris.com > >>>> ubbock, TX 79403 > >>>> one 7 USDA, Zone 10 Sunset > >>>> dbro@sbcglobal.net > >>>> Home of: > >>>> errimac's Amarula CGC TDI > >>>> H. Merrimac the Agean CD, RA, CGC, TDI > >>>> > >>>> ----Original Message----- > >>>> rom: owner-iris@hort.net [o*@hort.net] On Behalf Of Paul > >>>> rcher > >>>> ent: Saturday, June 19, 2010 6:33 PM > >>>> o: Iris chat forum > >>>> ubject: [iris] Re: Limbo Seedlings > >>>> I agree with that as well. However, considering the sheer amount of > >>>> egistered plants I have paid good money for and turned out to be complete > >>>> rap for various reasons and most of my "limbo" seedlings surpass the ones >I > >>>> ought, and by that standard maybe I should be Registering a whole lot >more. > >>>> lso some Registered plants make very poor parents once I get seeds from > >>>> hem, yet they were Registered by the Hybridizer anyway. The assumption > >>>> hat a Registered plant is a worthy parent is mute. But sorry to burst >your > >>>> ubble but the danger of releasing poor plant has already been surpassed > >>>> umerous times and is now and endemic problem, yet may great cultivars are > >>>> oming from these very plants through selection efforts. The difference >is > >>>> he Hybridizer standard of which mine is very high. > >>>> It could also be said that those "limbo" seedlings that would be released > >>>> nto this proposed program would need to be kept track of by the purchaser > >>>> nd Hybridizer and not released as a cultivar for the sheer sake of > >>>> ropagation purposes unless it has been evaluated by numerous people, > >>>> eedback reported on, and the decision made by the Hybridizer to remove it > >>>> rom "limbo" list and actually Registered. Yes, that takes some work, but > >>>> hat prevents the seedling being distributed under a false name or >confusion > >>>> nd is certainly no worse than distributing the Registered ones that I >would > >>>> ust as soon toss the second or third year I've seen them bloom. > >>>> hat is likely the root cause of much of the problem we have occuring >today. > >>>> > >>>> Original message:------- > >>>> > >>>> feel that there is danger in releasing to the public seedlings that >though > >>>> beautiful are not quite worthy of registration and introduction. > >>>> irst: One goal as hybridizers should be to improve irises. If we allow > >>>> ven slightly inferior cultivars to be diseminated-among the public, we >are > >>>> ot being faithful to that goal. Second: These nameless seedlings are > >>>> ertain to become confused with look alike named varieties to the >detriment > >>>> f the named varieties and to the people who buy them misnamed. > >>>> know we all have favorite seedlings like this. I always say, "I'll keep > >>>> t until I need the room for something better". When I am excited about >the > >>>> better one, I find it doesn't hurt to let the lesser one go. > >>>> rancelle Edwards > >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>> o sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the > >>>> essage text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS > >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>> o sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the > >>>> essage text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS > >>>> > >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>> o sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the > >>>> essage text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS > >>>> > >>> > >>> ------------------------------ > >>> > >>> Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 16:46:03 -0400 > >>> From: "J. Griffin Crump" <jgcrump@cox.net> > >>> Subject: Re: [iris]:HYB:Goals:Preferences(was Limbo Seedlings) > >>> > >>> Betty writes: > >>> "For an Edith Wolford cross to be a success for me it would have to be as > >>> is, > >>> but healthy here in KY. It has height, color, branching (most of the >time) > >>> and all other qualities I like! Unfortunately, it doesn't live here. > >>> Except > >>> in my huge pot, of course. It lives, but still doesn't bloom every year. > >>> It > >>> is still in some of my seedlings. It passes on the bitone effect, height > >>> and > >>> good branching in plants that live. Most seedlings also have triple > >>> terminals. Just because an iris bombs here doesn't mean it's children >will > >>> do the same. > >>> > >>> Many of the Romantic Evening children appeal to me more than RE, but who >can > >>> buy all 93 of them? (I also have children of RE, but it is long gone)" > >>> > >>> We've discussed the theme of weak-growing irises many times before, but for > >>> the benefit of our newer members, I'll mention that I have never been able > >>> to keep Edith Wolford alive long enough here to make a cross, but its > >>> progeny, Jurassic Park, grows well and has given me nice seedlings. > >>> Similarly, Best Bet has never lasted more than 2 years here, but has given > >>> me some introducers. Finally, Romantic Evening just struggles along here, > >>> but has given me some of my best introductions and breeders. So, as Betty > >>> says, there's more to consider than just how well an introduced plant grows > >>> in a particular place. -- Griff > >>> > >>> Griffin's Den > >>> http://www.pilmore.com/griffinsden/default.html > >>> Zone 7 along the tidal Potomac near Mount Vernon, in Virginia > >>> > >>> - ----- Original Message ----- > >>> From: <autmirislvr@aol.com> > >>> To: <iris@hort.net> > >>> Sent: Sunday, June 20, 2010 4:10 PM > >>> Subject: Re: [iris]:HYB:Goals:Preferences(was Limbo Seedlings) > >>> > >>> > >>>> Points of discussion: > >>>> > >>>> Hybidizers DO share both plants and pollen long before a new breakthrough > >>>> hits > >>>> the market. That is how children of said "wonder" hit the market so >soon. > >>>> Some of the plants used in breeding are never introduced--(sibling of > >>>> blah, > >>>> blah) > >>>> > >>>> Length of bloom season can be achieved in several ways. Substance is > >>>> great. > >>>> It's also possible to have stalks, within a clump, that initiate one at a > >>>> time > >>>> throughout the season, and the blooms on the stalk may also open one or > >>>> two > >>>> blooms at a time. It's possible for a mature iris clump to have many > >>>> days, or > >>>> possibly many weeks of bloom. A good show bench iris may not be a good > >>>> garden > >>>> iris based on the timing of individual blooms. > >>>> > >>>> Of course, rebloom is another method of extending bloom season! One of >my > >>>> favorites, but I'll take them all. > >>>> > >>>> Branching? Is this garden branching or show bench branching? A show > >>>> branch > >>>> must only shine on one day, whereas the garden variety must hold it's own > >>>> against others for a much longer time period. This is especially true of > >>>> tall > >>>> bearded irises. > >>>> > >>>> I find myself looking for show bench branching on all of my seedlings > >>>> although > >>>> I know that my rebloomers will rarely make a show bench based on the > >>>> timing of > >>>> most iris shows. I'd be better off looking for branching that shows well > >>>> in > >>>> the garden, but old habits are hard to break. > >>>> > >>>> During my formative years as an iris hybridizer, I grew a beautiful > >>>> Blue(ish) > >>>> iris that was tall with a consistent branching problem. It always grew > >>>> the > >>>> middle branch at a quarter turn on the stalk rather than opposite sides of > >>>> the > >>>> branch! It was a gorgeous bloom but most felt it should never have been > >>>> introduced, based on the branching deficiency. Yet, this iris would get >a > >>>> blue ribbon on the bench because it grew as introduced. > >>>> > >>>> Paul when you speak of proportion are you refering to both stalk and >bloom > >>>> proportion and/or balance? > >>>> > >>>> Maybe the main difference of opinions lies in bloom preference? Open > >>>> standards or domed standards? Heavy haft marks or none at all? Pastel > >>>> colors > >>>> or heavily saturated dark colors? Ruffles, lace or tailored edges? > >>>> Plicatas, > >>>> selfs, bitones, etc.? I love variegatas! > >>>> > >>>> If I buy an iris that is touted as an improvement and it dies for me > >>>> within 2 > >>>> years, is it truly an improvement? Or should it be considered inferior? > >>>> > >>>> Which irises bred from Edith Wolford were truly an improvement over EW? > >>>> Several may have been considered a success by their breeder/creator, > >>>> depending > >>>> on their goals! Use the same criteria with any of the other irises > >>>> heavily > >>>> used in breeding. > >>>> > >>>> For an Edith Wolford cross to be a success for me it would have to be as > >>>> is, > >>>> but healthy here in KY. It has height, color, branching (most of the > >>>> time) > >>>> and all other qualities I like! Unfortunately, it doesn't live here. > >>>> Except > >>>> in my huge pot, of course. It lives, but still doesn't bloom every year. > >>>> It > >>>> is still in some of my seedlings. It passes on the bitone effect, height > >>>> and > >>>> good branching in plants that live. Most seedlings also have triple > >>>> terminals. Just because an iris bombs here doesn't mean it's children > >>>> will > >>>> do the same. > >>>> > >>>> Many of the Romantic Evening children appeal to me more than RE, but who > >>>> can > >>>> buy all 93 of them? (I also have children of RE, but it is long gone) > >>>> > >>>> There are many irises introduced each year that don't appeal to me, yet, > >>>> I'm > >>>> sure most furthered some goal of the hybridizer. It's quite possible that > >>>> I'd > >>>> say "ugh" to your (generic your) favorite iris, but that doesn't make >them > >>>> inferior. > >>>> > >>>> How about that beautiful pink iris that looks just like two dozen > >>>> (hundred) > > > >>>> other beautiful pink irises? Was it folly to introduce it? Or did it > >>>> exhibit > >>>> something special or new to the hybridizer? > >>>> > >>>> Just saying that much of what we see is simply "the eye of the beholder." > >>>> This is one of the reasons for National Display Gardens and iris photos! > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Betty Wilkerson . . . thanks for your time. > >>>> KY Zone 6 > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> ---Original Message----- > >>>> From: Paul Archer <pharcher@mindspring.com> > >>>> To: iris@hort.net > >>>> Sent: Sun, Jun 20, 2010 12:44 pm > >>>> Subject: Re: [iris]:HYB:Goals:Preferences(was Limbo Seedlings) > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> I personally select for plants with the following (since I breed TB's, > >>>> MTB's, > >>>> ntermediates and Arilbreds)... > >>>> First off, each cross has a particular goal for a flower characteristic. > >>>> If a > >>>> lower meets that goal or something unique shows up then the following is > >>>> valuated... > >>>> -Flowers that have good bloom substance (more then two days of life). I > >>>> would > >>>> lways like 3 days but that is > >>>> slim pickin's. > >>>> Upright foliage > >>>> Disease resistance (as well as blue-green foliage) > >>>> Stalks that do not need staking > >>>> Good branching (not as easy as it might seem) > >>>> At least two increases to bloom size > >>>> Proper proportion (regardless of class). > >>>> Bud count of at least 8 with a goal of triple sockets and/or lower > >>>> branches > >>>> Rebloom if possible > >>>> > >>>> irst year seedlings are evaluated for color and general growth. The > >>>> second > >>>> ear is make it or break it unless foul weather has played a role in > >>>> general. > >>>> f any one or two of those qualities is missing in a seedlng (but the > >>>> flower > >>>> ust be exceptional) it is selected as breeding stock. Any more than two > >>>> faults > >>>> s usually tossed. I do have one plant that is an exception to that rule > >>>> and I > >>>> ill never, ever distribute it. Once I get what I want from it it will >get > >>>> ossed. > >>>> Arilbreds are something else altogether and have their own set of issues, > >>>> but > >>>> imilarly judged. > >>>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: autmirislvr@aol.com > >>>> Sent: Jun 20, 2010 12:14 PM > >>>> To: iris@hort.net > >>>> Subject: [iris]:HYB:Goals:Preferences(was Limbo Seedlings) > >>>> > >>>> This is a side issue to the Limbo Seedling thread. > >>>> > >>>> So many things to consider. > >>>> > >>>> <<second class seedlings>> > >>>> > >>>> An improvement might be a taller specimen, more branches, longer bloom > >>>> season, > >>>> deeper colors, etc..What are your goals and how do they mesh with what >the > >>>> rest of us like? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Would some of the hybridizers on this list please give us some idea of > >>>> what > >>>> they consider an advancement? What are your goals? What are you trying > >>>> to > >>>> improve in the irises you breed? Specifically, what would it take to be > >>>> a > >>>> "first class" seedling in your garden? > >>>> > >>>> Each hybridizer has their own goals. To an extent, an advancement or > >>>> "better" > >>>> iris is in the eye of the beholder. > >>>> > >>>> Feed Back, please! > >>>> > >>>> Betty Wilkerson . . . extremely fussy about colors and patterns. > >>>> Bridge In Time Irises > >>>> KY Zone 6 > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: Dana Brown <ddbro@sbcglobal.net> > >>>> To: iris@hort.net > >>>> Sent: Sun, Jun 20, 2010 8:56 am > >>>> Subject: RE: [iris] Re: Limbo Seedlings > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Paul, > >>>> Just imagine how much worse it would be if all the seconds and culls > >>>> ere floating around out there as well. If your "limbo" seedlings are > >>>> etter than so many of the current intros, then kudos to you for being a > >>>> iscerning hybridizer/irisarian!! Why would you want to lower your > >>>> tandards at this point? > >>>> As far as all the tracking and record keeping....well, given the > >>>> umber of misnamed or no name iris already out there I guess we already > >>>> know > >>>> hat not everyone keeps good records. > >>>> Bottom line for me as a hybridizer, no, I don't want to send my > >>>> econd class seedlings out in public where they might get released into > >>>> eneral population. > >>>> Dana > >>>> Dana D. Brown > >>>> IS, ASI, MIS, RIS, SPIS, TBIS > >>>> alevil Iris Gardens & Kennels > >>>> ww.malevil-iris.com > >>>> ubbock, TX 79403 > >>>> one 7 USDA, Zone 10 Sunset > >>>> dbro@sbcglobal.net > >>>> Home of: > >>>> errimac's Amarula CGC TDI > >>>> H. Merrimac the Agean CD, RA, CGC, TDI > >>>> > >>>> ----Original Message----- > >>>> rom: owner-iris@hort.net [o*@hort.net] On Behalf Of Paul > >>>> rcher > >>>> ent: Saturday, June 19, 2010 6:33 PM > >>>> o: Iris chat forum > >>>> ubject: [iris] Re: Limbo Seedlings > >>>> I agree with that as well. However, considering the sheer amount of > >>>> egistered plants I have paid good money for and turned out to be complete > >>>> rap for various reasons and most of my "limbo" seedlings surpass the ones > >>>> I > >>>> ought, and by that standard maybe I should be Registering a whole lot > >>>> more. > >>>> lso some Registered plants make very poor parents once I get seeds from > >>>> hem, yet they were Registered by the Hybridizer anyway. The assumption > >>>> hat a Registered plant is a worthy parent is mute. But sorry to burst > >>>> your > >>>> ubble but the danger of releasing poor plant has already been surpassed > >>>> umerous times and is now and endemic problem, yet may great cultivars are > >>>> oming from these very plants through selection efforts. The difference >is > >>>> he Hybridizer standard of which mine is very high. > >>>> It could also be said that those "limbo" seedlings that would be released > >>>> nto this proposed program would need to be kept track of by the purchaser > >>>> nd Hybridizer and not released as a cultivar for the sheer sake of > >>>> ropagation purposes unless it has been evaluated by numerous people, > >>>> eedback reported on, and the decision made by the Hybridizer to remove it > >>>> rom "limbo" list and actually Registered. Yes, that takes some work, but > >>>> hat prevents the seedling being distributed under a false name or > >>>> confusion > >>>> nd is certainly no worse than distributing the Registered ones that I > >>>> would > >>>> ust as soon toss the second or third year I've seen them bloom. > >>>> hat is likely the root cause of much of the problem we have occuring > >>>> today. > >>>> > >>>> Original message:------- > >>>> > >>>> feel that there is danger in releasing to the public seedlings that >though > >>>> beautiful are not quite worthy of registration and introduction. > >>>> irst: One goal as hybridizers should be to improve irises. If we allow > >>>> ven slightly inferior cultivars to be diseminated-among the public, we >are > >>>> ot being faithful to that goal. Second: These nameless seedlings are > >>>> ertain to become confused with look alike named varieties to the >detriment > >>>> f the named varieties and to the people who buy them misnamed. > >>>> know we all have favorite seedlings like this. I always say, "I'll keep > >>>> t until I need the room for something better". When I am excited about > >>>> the > >>>> better one, I find it doesn't hurt to let the lesser one go. > >>>> rancelle Edwards > >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>> o sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the > >>>> essage text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS > >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>> o sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the > >>>> essage text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS > >>>> > >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>> o sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the > >>>> essage text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS > >>>> > >>> > >>> ------------------------------ > >>> > >>> Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 19:33:28 -0400 (EDT) > >>> From: Paul Archer <pharcher@mindspring.com> > >>> Subject: [iris] Re: Limbo Seedlings > >>> > >>> I agree with that as well. However, considering the sheer amount of > >Registered plants I have paid good money for and turned out to be complete >crap > >for various reasons and most of my "limbo" seedlings surpass the ones I >bought, > >and by that standard maybe I should be Registering a whole lot more. Also >some > >Registered plants make very poor parents once I get seeds from them, yet they > >were Registered by the Hybridizer anyway. The assumption that a Registered > >plant is a worthy parent is mute. But sorry to burst your bubble but the >danger > >of releasing poor plant has already been surpassed numerous times and is now >and > >endemic problem, yet may great cultivars are coming from these very plants > >through selection efforts. The difference is the Hybridizer standard of which > >mine is very high. > >>> > >>> It could also be said that those "limbo" seedlings that would be released > >into this proposed program would need to be kept track of by the purchaser and > >Hybridizer and not released as a cultivar for the sheer sake of propagation > >purposes unless it has been evaluated by numerous people, feedback reported >on, > >and the decision made by the Hybridizer to remove it from "limbo" list and > >actually Registered. Yes, that takes some work, but that prevents the >seedling > >being distributed under a false name or confusion and is certainly no worse >than > >distributing the Registered ones that I would just as soon toss the second or > >third year I've seen them bloom. > >>> That is likely the root cause of much of the problem we have occuring >today. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Original message:------- > >>> > >>> > >>> I feel that there is danger in releasing to the public seedlings that >though > >>> beautiful are not quite worthy of registration and introduction. > >>> First: One goal as hybridizers should be to improve irises. If we allow > >>> even slightly inferior cultivars to be diseminated-among the public, we are > >>> not being faithful to that goal. Second: These nameless seedlings are > >>> certain to become confused with look alike named varieties to the detriment > >>> of the named varieties and to the people who buy them misnamed. > >>> I know we all have favorite seedlings like this. I always say, "I'll keep > >>> it until I need the room for something better". When I am excited about >the > >>> better one, I find it doesn't hurt to let the lesser one go. > >>> Francelle Edwards > >>> > >>> ------------------------------ > >>> > >>> Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 08:56:27 -0500 > >>> From: "Dana Brown" <ddbro@sbcglobal.net> > >>> Subject: RE: [iris] Re: Limbo Seedlings > >>> > >>> Paul, > >>> Just imagine how much worse it would be if all the seconds and culls > >>> were floating around out there as well. If your "limbo" seedlings are > >>> better than so many of the current intros, then kudos to you for being a > >>> discerning hybridizer/irisarian!! Why would you want to lower your > >>> standards at this point? > >>> As far as all the tracking and record keeping....well, given the > >>> number of misnamed or no name iris already out there I guess we already >know > >>> that not everyone keeps good records. > >>> Bottom line for me as a hybridizer, no, I don't want to send my > >>> second class seedlings out in public where they might get released into > >>> general population. > >>> > >>> Dana > >>> > >>> Dana D. Brown > >>> AIS, ASI, MIS, RIS, SPIS, TBIS > >>> Malevil Iris Gardens & Kennels > >>> www.malevil-iris.com > >>> Lubbock, TX 79403 > >>> Zone 7 USDA, Zone 10 Sunset > >>> ddbro@sbcglobal.net > >>> > >>> Home of: > >>> Merrimac's Amarula CGC TDI > >>> CH. Merrimac the Agean CD, RA, CGC, TDI > >>> > >>> > >>> - -----Original Message----- > >>> From: owner-iris@hort.net [o*@hort.net] On Behalf Of Paul > >>> Archer > >>> Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2010 6:33 PM > >>> To: Iris chat forum > >>> Subject: [iris] Re: Limbo Seedlings > >>> > >>> I agree with that as well. However, considering the sheer amount of > >>> Registered plants I have paid good money for and turned out to be complete > >>> crap for various reasons and most of my "limbo" seedlings surpass the ones >I > >>> bought, and by that standard maybe I should be Registering a whole lot >more. > >>> Also some Registered plants make very poor parents once I get seeds from > >>> them, yet they were Registered by the Hybridizer anyway. The assumption > >>> that a Registered plant is a worthy parent is mute. But sorry to burst >your > >>> bubble but the danger of releasing poor plant has already been surpassed > >>> numerous times and is now and endemic problem, yet may great cultivars are > >>> coming from these very plants through selection efforts. The difference >is > >>> the Hybridizer standard of which mine is very high. > >>> > >>> It could also be said that those "limbo" seedlings that would be released > >>> into this proposed program would need to be kept track of by the purchaser > >>> and Hybridizer and not released as a cultivar for the sheer sake of > >>> propagation purposes unless it has been evaluated by numerous people, > >>> feedback reported on, and the decision made by the Hybridizer to remove it > >>> from "limbo" list and actually Registered. Yes, that takes some work, but > >>> that prevents the seedling being distributed under a false name or >confusion > >>> and is certainly no worse than distributing the Registered ones that I >would > >>> just as soon toss the second or third year I've seen them bloom. > >>> That is likely the root cause of much of the problem we have occuring >today. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Original message:------- > >>> > >>> > >>> I feel that there is danger in releasing to the public seedlings that >though > >>> > >>> beautiful are not quite worthy of registration and introduction. > >>> First: One goal as hybridizers should be to improve irises. If we allow > >>> even slightly inferior cultivars to be diseminated-among the public, we are > >>> not being faithful to that goal. Second: These nameless seedlings are > >>> certain to become confused with look alike named varieties to the detriment > >>> of the named varieties and to the people who buy them misnamed. > >>> I know we all have favorite seedlings like this. I always say, "I'll keep > >>> it until I need the room for something better". When I am excited about >the > >>> > >>> better one, I find it doesn't hurt to let the lesser one go. > >>> Francelle Edwards > >>> > >>> ------------------------------ > >>> > >>> End of iris DIGEST V1 #1084 > >>> *************************** > >>> > >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the > >>> message text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS-DIGEST > >> > >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the > >>message text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the > >message text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the > >message text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the >message text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS --------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the message text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS
- Prev by Date: Re: RE: Test Gardens
- Next by Date: Re: Test Gardens
- Previous by thread: RE: Test Gardens
- Next by thread: Re: Test Gardens