Re: CULT: # of cultivars here, by decade
- Subject: Re: CULT: # of cultivars here, by decade
- From: Linda Mann l*@volfirst.net
- Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2002 19:38:58 -0400
<This lack of attention to pedigrees created a more or less random
sample from
that period. A necessity when attempting a statistical comparison. It
has value. Bill Burleson>
Well, maybe - I'll have to think about that a little bit. I think there
are many underlying biases, plus it is a small sample. On the other
hand, being a small sample means that I might dig up the data - it's all
on scraps of paper here and there.
Do you want to do a comparison of death rate of a random sample versus a
sample based on pedigrees? The death or lack of bloom rate due to
frozen out terminal buds here was around 50 to 70% (I think - I can dig
that up from somewhere, possibly in the archives?). It dropped to about
30% when I started only buying late bloomers, and is down to nearly
nothing now that I do pedigrees (not counting the rash experiments, like
the ones I swapped from you; or the 'try this Linda's', many of which
either die or don't manage to bloom).
Linda Mann east Tennessee USA zone 7/8
Tennessee Whooping Crane Walkathon:
<http://www.whoopingcranesovertn.org>
American Iris Society web site <http://www.irises.org>
iris-talk/Mallorn archives: <http://www.hort.net/lists/iris-talk/>
iris-photos/Mallorn archives: <http://www.hort.net/lists/iris-photos/>
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Home Selling? Try Us!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/QrPZMC/iTmEAA/MVfIAA/2gGylB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
