Harold Koopowitz, California

Double bulbocodiums?

December 23, 2011
By

Categories: Daffodil Types, Hybridizing, Miniatures, Seedling

Download PDF

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

 

8 responses to “Double bulbocodiums?”

  1. Daniel Bellinger says:

    If one of these double bulbucodiums is good enough to name, would you call
    it a 4, a 10, or a 13?

    _____

  2. Harold Koopowitz, California Harold Koopowitz says:

    I would hate to make it division 4. What would you do?

    Harold

    At 12:39 PM 12/23/2011, you wrote:

  3. Mary Lou Gripshover, Ohio Mary Lou Gripshover says:

    Under the current rules, what other choice do you have? If any parts show doubling, doesn’t it go into Div. 4?

    Mary Lou

  4. Harold Koopowitz, California Harold Koopowitz says:

    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:

  5. Daniel Bellinger says:

    Harold, I would call it a 10.

    _____

  6. Marilyn Howe says:

    Dan,

    What is your reasoning for putting it into Division 10?

    Marilynn

  7. Denis Dailey says:

    Could it be plody? (see previous discussions on 9s)

  8. Daniel Bellinger says:

    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.