About 10 years ago I flowered several double bulbocodiums and then accidentally the entire row was discarded. Something I have always regretted. So imagine my surprise and joy to find this flowering in a pot of N. cantabricus foliosus. Not sure if it is stable or not but I
have applied its pollen liberally to several Barwick hoop petticoats and of course, selfed it too. Its not quite as doubled as the lost batch but its nice to get a second chance. A great Christmas find.
Harold
If one of these double bulbucodiums is good enough to name, would you call
it a 4, a 10, or a 13?
_____
I would hate to make it division 4. What would you do?
Harold
At 12:39 PM 12/23/2011, you wrote:
Under the current rules, what other choice do you have? If any parts show doubling, doesn’t it go into Div. 4?
Mary Lou
Well it might go into 12. But it would certainly get lost among the
other division 4s. Like ‘Molly Mop’ which has a split corona and is
bred from ‘Beryl’ x ‘Orangery’ is in Division 12 but as far as I can
tell looking at the flower is really a split but does not fit
comfortably with the 11s.
Harold
This is a similar situation to Molly Mop
At 04:27 PM 12/23/2011, Mary Lou Gripshover wrote:
Harold, I would call it a 10.
_____
Dan,
What is your reasoning for putting it into Division 10?
Marilynn
Could it be plody? (see previous discussions on 9s)
Not well thought-out yet (this is a new case); but if genetically it is all
bulbucodium, the doubling (which must be in the bulbucodium genes) should
not make it any less a bulbucodium. (In the same way, if it is two of the
same bulbucodium species, it would be a 13 (not a 4), a double form of the
species). But it suggests an different approach to the divisions, one that
I think we should not be afraid to consider.