Re: PHOTO:Iris sikkimensis

From: HIPSource@aol.com

In a message dated 3/1/99 1:43:45 PM Eastern Standard Time,
dkramb@tso.cin.ix.net writes:

<< So I wasn't speaking on  experience, but more along the lines of deductive
reasoning.  I hope I  wasn't out of line in doing so!  Lord knows there's
enough confusion about  this iris without me adding to it! >>

Ain't no out of line around here when interesting facts is being discussed for
heaven's sakes. I agree that if the thing ever set seed one would expect it to
have what you called an arilate seed. Not a full aril collar, if I read
Dykes' correctly, but a smaller marking. 

The bottom line on this iris as far as I know is that it probably is not out
there to be had easily, perhaps not even to be rediscovered, and that if it
is, it did not set seed in England when hand pollenated by the master, so
seeds are suspect. If anyone knows about a rediscovery of this plant, and if
the identity of the new individual or population has been authoritatively
authenticated, I sure wish someone would fill us all in or give the
bibliographical citation or whatever so I can go read up on it. 

Anner Whitehead
HIPSource@aol.com


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Come check out our brand new web site!
http://www.onelist.com
Onelist: Making the Internet intimate
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index