AR: Re: ARIL SHAPES

Steve writes

:I was wondering why Arils vary so much in size / shape. For example
:ALLADIN'S TREASURE has huge standards and is quite large. MANSIONS OF LIGHT
:looks like a tall bearded, and IN TOTO looks like a MDB. What's up with
:Arils?? They are beautiful flowers but I was under the impression that they
:were shaped more like ALLADIN'S TREASURE.

The irises you are talking about are arilbreds, not arils, which is *part*
of the answer to your question. Arilbreds are hybrids with both aril and
bearded irises in their ancestry. They can be 1/2 aril, 1/4 aril, 3/4
aril...and the bearded part can be tall, median, or dwarf. Arilbreds that
are only 1/4 aril tend to strongly resemble their bearded ancestry, which
can be TB or (in the case of most arilbred medians like IN TOTO) mixed SDB
and TB. So arilbreds can have all the variation of bearded irises, from
dwarf to tall, PLUS...

the arils themselves are an enormously diverse group. There are two broad
kinds of arils that feature in arilbred breeding: regelias and oncocycli.
The regelias are tall, narrow-petaled, two-budded, and may show some
veining. The oncos are themselves a highly variable group, but many of
those most used in breeding have large, globular standards, recurved falls
with large, dark signals, and often lots of veining and dotting. This is
what is usually thought of as a "typical" aril blossom, but really it is
one form among dozens that arils may have.

The requirements for being registered as an "arilbred" are (1) at least 1/4
aril content and (2) at least two aril characteristics (a criterion that is
sometimes difficult to apply in practice).

The arilbreds really constitute a vast conglomerate class, with more
variation than all six bearded classes combined. So why isn't it subdivided
into more sensible horticultural groupings, like the bearded irises are? I
think there are two reasons, a practical one and a historical one:

The practical reason is that the arilbreds have not attracted such
widespread hybridizing attention as the bearded irises. Hence there are
just not that many introduced each year. It would be impractical to divide
this already sparse class into subcategories, if those subcategories
implied separate AIS awards. How can you give a medal-level award in a
category where only 4 or 5 irises (or maybe only 1!) are eligible?

The historical reason is that arilbred breeders tend to have an obsession
with genetics. (Sorry, Sharon!) That's inevitable, I suppose...early work
with arilbreds was so difficult that technical knowledge about chromosomes
and the like became as much a tool of the trade as tweezers. This is fine,
but one of its consequences is that aril people tend to classify arilbreds
by the number of aril chromosomes they carry, and whether that aril
inheritance is onco, regelia, or mixed. They ignore whether the bearded
ancestry is tall, median, or dwarf, but make fine distinctions regarding
the aril ancestry (that's what all the OGB+, OB-, RB kind of stuff is
about). This is a classification model that is useful to hybridizers, but
doesn't say much regarding the appearance of the plant and flower.
Introducing a horticultural classification (like that used for the bearded
irises) into the arilbred world thus requires a major cultural change.

I have advocated such a classification model, but the suggestion has not
yet received much attention from the Aril Society, and I don't really
expect it to.

I may have gotten off the subject a bit, but I hope my response was of
interest.

Happy irising, Tom.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tom Tadfor Little                   telp@Rt66.com
Iris-L list owner * USDA zone 5/6 * AIS region 23
Santa Fe, New Mexico (USA)
Telperion Productions  http://www.rt66.com/~telp/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index