Poeticus

17 comments for “Poeticus”

1. I fully agree with John on stamen length and configuration; and cup shape.
   Daniel Bellinger
   Wadsworth OH

   _____

2. On the subject of anthers, I want to know how far down is “down” and how far up
   is “up”?  Can the anthers be rounded or may they also be long and flared?
   On the cup shape, I want to know which is the prefered shape – disc shaped and
   tiny, disc shaped and larger, flared bowl shape, upright bowl shape, small cup
   shape, larger cup shape, acorn cup shape.  Then there is the fluted shape, the
   flat shape, crenate edges, entire edges.
   On the color, I want to know which shade or tint of red is “red”, is pink a
   shade or a tint of “red”, how far toward yellow is still orange,  how far toward
   purple is still “red”?
   Then we, of course, have to debate if the cup can have no shade or tint of red,
   and still be a poeticus.
   We still have not discussed the petal shapes, the round ones, the oval ones and the dogwood blossom shaped ones.  Nor have we discussed the overall size of the flower.  How big is too big?

   I have, in my file of pictures I use for a background on my desktop, a lovely
   photo taken at Shaw Nature Reserve in St. Louis,  It shows a wide variety of
   shapes, colors and anther placements.  I think the photo was taken by Larry
   Force or Jason Delaney.

   Let the discussions begin!
   Donna Dietsch

3. How about a totally different test. When the cup is less than
   one-third the length of the petaloid, and the petaloid is longer than
   the neck (to the base of the ovary) it is a Division 3; otherwise, it
   is a Division 9. Denis

4. Ooooh-la-la… Now this is good!

   Mary Lou, what color are cyclamineus in the wild? Perhaps I’m misreading Peter’s post, but it could be inferred that if poets must have red rims, then surely cycs and their offspring must all be golden yellow. And wouldn’t the same be true for N. jonquilla and its offspring? This rationale could be carried quite far until we’ve chocked up the contemporary daffodil to be nothing more than some freakish Franken-flower, which would leave us all in a real pickle to reclassify all divisions and color codings in time to re-write the show schedules before the 2012 season begins. Unless 95% fell into Division 12. Case closed!

   I haven’t traipsed the wilds where N. poeticus naturally occurs, so I cannot speak for their willy-nilly and wanton tendencies when left for millennia to get intimate. I have, however, gone exploring on a few collecting missions in the Caucasus and in China, for many other plants, and I must say that each journey reaffirms the fact, not theory, that plants are unpredictable and sometimes quite highly variable even within a species. Albinism occurs. Other color mutations occur. Dwarfism occurs. Doubling occurs. Inflorescence variability may occur. And on. Clearly, poeticus daffodils have the potential to breed rimless flowers when crossed poet x poet; thus, surely somewhere high up on a mountainside across the pond naturally exist bulbs of other such rimless poets, storing up their winter energies to burst forth from the earth next spring to guffaw at us for considering otherwise. Donna’s posted Keith Kridler image of the Shaw Nature Reserve poets represents what 80+ years of naturalizing can do to an original colony of what was formerly a few poet selections, mostly species and yes, F1 or F2 hybrids at the very most. To witness them in person is quite an amazing experience, to see so much natural diversity. As I’ve reported formerly, there are even poets at SNR exhibiting strongly orange-flushed perianths with vivid red disc cups, each clump distinct, each a natural hybrid in a veritable sea of diversity.

   In as much as I agree that poets are distinct—and absolutely unique in the world of Narcissus with their pigmentation—I also see them as a simple plant that, like most, may occasionally break conformity. And when such rimless poets manifest, it doesn’t make them any less of a poet than the birth of an albino buffalo brings to the world some other non-buffalo animal—it’s still a buffalo… In fact, it immediately becomes a *sacred* buffalo which, for me, are so many of Max Hamilton’s rimless poets…sacred that is, not buffalo-esque.

   Oh! Gotta run… popcorn’s done. I’ve plans to sit down with a big bowl of it and enjoy the rest of this discussion! :-)

   Most respectfully submitted,

   Jason

5. Hi Jason,
    
   I think that is exactly what Peter is refering to. If all Poets must have a red rim then by definition all Cyclamineus must be yellow and all Jonquillas must be yellow as well. Imagine the howls of protest if it was decreed that division 6 flowers such as Trena must be shown as either a Division 1 or 2(not sure what it would measure) because it was not an all yellow. Something to think about.
    
   Robin Hill -New Zealand
    
    

6. Re: [daffnet] PoeticusJason, I wondered at first what Peter meant. I didn’t think he was asking if all cyclamineus hybrids should be yellow. I thought he was putting me on for giving a first prize ribbon to a Div. 6 cultivar with less reflex than one of the others in the class. If he meant otherwise, he’ll have to explain.

   Certainly I don’t think you have to keep color out of other hybrids. I think the main characteristics of the species should be clearly evident. In the case of cyclamineus, that would be the reflexing perianth. In the case of poeticus, I think it would be the red rim. And of course species are variable. You’ll get no argument from me on that point. Any population over time is likely to show lots of variability. The poets at SNR are a good example. Who knows where the pollen came from to get the wide variety in the photo Donna posted? Maybe from the adjacent flower, maybe from a bloom across town. Who knows where the bees have been?

   Mary Lou

7. Hello all,

   My comment had absolutely nothing to do with judging at ADS shows – I was
   not on the panel at Murphys – I think it may have been Graeme Miller who
   commented. My remarks had everything to do with making colour a defining
   characteristic for poeticus. This will be the ONLY division of daffodils
   where colour is the defining characteristic. This makes the work of the
   late Max Hamilton and others meaningless. He did not intend his poet
   seedlings to end up as small cups or intermediates. I know because I
   suggested this to him and given his reaction I did not raise it again!!!!!
   And please note – he was working within the existing rules and definitions.
   John Hunter has already drawn attention to the long standing definition of
   poets. I would recommend that people go to to Daffseek and look up the
   amazing number of registrations Max made – just search for Whitford. And
   what is the harm done by having an array of colours in poets – we have
   welcomed it in all other daffodil divisions!

   Indeed if adopted this will make those delightful little poets uninteresting
   – all with lookalike “red” (see Donna’s remarks for an explanation of why I
   have used inverted commas ) rims,.

   Personally I have embraced change and support the RHS’s present definition
   as being flexible enough to allow for a wonderful arrays of colours in
   poets!

   Cheers,

   Peter

   _____

8. Re: [daffnet] PoeticusHello all,

   Of course I’m not saying all divisions should be defined by color. Each of the species divisions currently state that “characteristics of ‘N. whatever’ clearly evident” or in three cases “predominant.” What I’m saying is that in my opinion, the red rim is one of the “clearly evident” or “predominant” characteristics of poeticus, and should be retained in the definition of Division 9.

   Mary Lou

9. Mary Lou

   Is a full orange cup excluded from your definition?  Dimple 9W-O

   Jim Russell

10. Hi Jim,
    No, a full orange cup is allowed by the current definition which reads “…red rim, but sometimes of a single colour…” The option I favor, Option 1, is the one that would read “… red or orange rim, but sometimes entirely red or orange…”

    Mary Lou

11. Hi all,
    My opinion – very difficult and perhaps impossible to find a way of
    partitioning the group of hybrids, namely, 3 and 9.
    To do this, use the botanical method.
    The experienced botanist to spread and systematic searches of the gap (
    hiatus).As a professional botanist, I can tell you – it is unlikely you will
    be able to find criteria that could be clearly identified – in which
    group should
    include one or the other variety.

    But there is another method that I would like to submit for your
    consideration.
    It should make a decision – refer to varieties of daffodils 9 group,
    if they have
    symptoms оf poeticus *+**
    **Mother’s variety was too poetiсus.*
    If the mother does not variety poetiсus – then refer to a group of 3.
    Reason: All varieties which have as a mother poetiсus have poetiсus
    mitochondria. Conversely, the class with her ​​mother not poetiсus – not
    have poetiсus mitochondria.
    In this case, if a problem arises with the definition – which group should
    be to assign a variety, you can do this by analyzing mitochondria in the
    laboratory.

    Оleg,
    Ukraine

    2011/10/20 Mary Lou Gripshover <>

12. Thanks Oleg, that makes sense.
     
    David Adams
    Christchurch

    —

13. Hello John,
    I am interested in your remarks about ‘Sea Green’ and ‘Patois’ – I had not realised that they were so similar. The reason ‘Patois’ was registered was because I thought it had much better and stronger, darker green leaves than many poets in my garden. Alas, I do not grow either nowadays and will be unable to make the comparison.
    I think your point about two such similar flowers being registered 62 years apart illustrates why some of us gave up breeding Div. 9 flowers because under the existing and earlier definitions we were confined to breeding a plethora of ‘Lookalikes’.
    Brian

14. Hello Brian and All,

    The remarks made by John and Brian would, I am sure, be echoed by Max
    Hamilton were he still with us. He set out to break the mould of
    “lookalikes” and before he died made sure that some of his little beauties
    were registered where they should be – in Division 9. He also made sure
    that his seedlings were placed in a safe pair of hands with Graeme Miller
    who will have a lot of registrations on the way. I also have several of
    Max’s under number which will probably get a name. We really should support
    option 2 to prevent the de-registration of these little gems and to
    encourage breeders to think outside the square.

    Cheers,

    Peter

    _____

15. Hello, All,

    I find it ironic that some want to eliminate the requirement for red or orange in the division that has given color to all the other divisions–to breed color OUT OF instead of INTO hybrids. Whle a few wild poets have reportedly been seen without any red or orange, I suspect that 99.9% of wild poeticus have color, and I think that predominant characteristic should be part of the group definition. That’s why I support Option 1.

    Cheers,
    Mary Lou

16. Perhaps it is more a matter of breeding diversity
    into poets, than of breeding color out of them,
    as others have also voiced. In divisions where
    no bright colors existed, it was novel to bring
    diversity by bringing color. Division 6 and 7
    are examples of that. I’d love to see a 9 P-GYY,
    and think the hybridizers would find acceptance
    of such possibilities to be tantalizing and
    inspiring. So you all see where my vote would go.
    Melissa

    At 05:08 PM 10/21/2011, Mary Lou Gripshover wrote:

17. No,it`s I thanks you all for this assessment of my modest work to help you.
    :)

    Oleg.

Comments are closed.