AIS: HYB: Convention Guest Irises

In a message dated 10/26/2006 8:42:28 AM Eastern Standard Time,  
lmann@lock-net.com writes:

<<I naively thought that rhizomes were sent <mostly> so  hybridizers could 
learn how their cultivars perform in various climates  and to make it 
possible for judges and other AIS members to see what new  cultivars look 
like "live" and in comparison to one another all in one  location.>>
 
Makes sense to me. 
 
Certainly your naive presupposition is consistent  with the oft heard chat 
about the convention gardens being AIS'  display and/or test gardens, as 
distinct from the other chat to the  effect that the gardens of AIS members' are the 
AIS test/display  gardens. 
 
<<On another topic, conventions keep track of performance of all  cultivars 
that are grown, report back to the hybridizer on that  performance, but 
don't share that information with the rest of the iris  community. I 
would <love> to be able to beg/borrow/see a spreadsheet  of those data! 
Both from regional conventions and  nationals


Wonder if anyone actually does anything with that information on any  scale, 
other than report back to the hybridizer? I think it should be stored  for a 
decade, then crunched until it squeals. 
 
As to individuals receiving such reports after convention, the  statistical 
variables and interpretive cowpies should be intuitively  obvious to the most 
casual observer, but, even so, such data  might well demonstrate some utility, 
especially in raw form----  with a few broad generalizations appended if 
reason absolutely  demanded it, per e.g., "Second wettest  April on record," or 
"Two hard freezes six weeks before normative TB  bloom," or "Everything in this 
border obviously stunted," or  "Pigs got into the garden."
 
After all, folks would want to pick and choose among the data  germane to 
their own preoccupations. I think people get tired of having  other people 
interpret and characterize situations for them, then tell  them what is what. People 
want to ponder and decide for themselves;  it is part of the fun. The fact 
that some cultivar died with astonishing  speed in some garden could be of 
enormous interest and importance  to people for various reasons; moreover such a 
performance does  not mean the hybridizer has failed per se, or is a bad person, 
or  his/her reputation is henceforth toast.
 
But I do think it is likely that sometimes the results of  such testing are 
aberrant. One hybridizer, a sane man with a modest  ego, told me that he was 
absolutely stunned to hear that one of his best  had done poorly in a convention 
display since everywhere else it was thrifty  to a quite remarkable degree. 
He suspected a case of egregiously  poor culture, and I am inclined to suspect 
he is correct. 
 
So, I ask, what might be the effect of your, or another  hybridizer's, making 
decisions impacted by the data arising from  atypical performance in AIS 
display gardens? 
 
And, speaking of broad generalizations quite possibly specious data, as  an 
operative posture, would you be inclined to presume that a greater  percentage 
of cultivars overall perform below their personal best in  AIS convention 
gardens, at their personal best, or above their personal  best?  
 
Just curious.
 
Cordially,
 
Anner Whitehead
Richmond VA USA Zone 7--Where the osage oranges are thick on the ground,  and 
the woodsmoke in the chill air makes the neighborhood smell like  a good VA 
ham.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index