Last year I posted a photo of N Ngaire Rogers. It has ten petals and is consistent in form and show quality. It is from a cyclamineus cross. The first flower of mine opened today with the expected ten petals. A number of you posted photos of similar multipetalled flowers. I call them ‘Windmill’ daffodils.
Here is my dilemma. I expect to have several flowers of this cultivar available for the North Island National. A daffodil flower is generally accepted as having 6 perianth segments although I can’t find any reference to this in the Register so I assume that I can enter this cultivar as Division 12. The question then becomes ‘Should it be penalized for having extra perianth segments?’ We penalise a flower with seven petals afterall.
Dave
Hi Dave,
I think it has been incorrectly registered as division 12 because technically it can be registered in division 4. Obviously it is not what we usually think of as a double and it probably won’t please the judges, not just for the lack of doubling but also because of the departure from the 2 x 3 arrangement of petals.
I can’t find the photo. Can you repost or provide a link?
Hi Lawrence,
I will post a photo tomorrow. You are correct that it can technically be registered in Div 4 but with two sets of five tepals these flowers don’t quite fit the definition of any recognized classification hence I think that Div 12 may still be appropriate. It has cyclamineus breeding.
I would still like some comment as to how one would judge a flower such as this.
Hi again Dave,
I found photos here:
http://www.srgc.net/forum/index.php?topic=13429.60
I was definite about the classification because Div 12 is defined as “Daffodil cultivars which do not fit the definition of any other division”. Given that Ngaire Rogers fits the definition for Div 4 it can’t be div 12. I see that, in that link, Graham Fleming expressed his surprise that it is registered as Div.12.
In spite of the 10 petals I think the flower has 6 anthers and the ovary has 3 chambers so it still retains much of the usual daffodil symmetry. It is an interesting form but it has too many angles for my unpractised eye. For me, I would be inclined to never give it a 1st in a single bloom class but might think a vase of them quite dazzling.
Lawrence,
Thank you for your participation in this discussion. Ngaire Rogers does not fit comfortably with me in Div 4 although I agree with you technically it should be there. I advised Peg to put it into Div 12 as it does not easily fit the definition of any other cultivar. Hence my advocacy for creating a division for ‘Windmill Daffodils.’ There are a number around. How do you judge it? I don’t know. Maybe the usual criteria of form, symmetry and condition would allow it a first prize.
Dave
I have added a photo of Ngaire Rogers. I now have two identical flowers. As the perianth segments are on one plane as in a standard daffodil I can’t see how it could be regarded as a double. A second flower has opened on another bulb. Also with ten segments but with better alignment.
Dave[caption id="attachment_134767" align="aligncenter" width="300"]
Ngaire Rogers 1[/caption][caption id="attachment_134768" align="aligncenter" width="300"]
Ngaire Rogers 2
Same flower[/caption]
Photos could be used for Daffseek.
Dave
I think there is a case for a special category of Division 12 for daffodils with extra perianth segments. We have quite a few of them and we have been working to stabilize the number of perianth segments. Some of them are quite stunning.
Thanks for your support Graham. I think we have a real innovation here. I know that Larry Force has some similar ones.
Dave
Hi Graham, Dave,
The definition of Div. 4 is quite general. It reads : – One or more f lowers to a stem, with doubling of the perianth segments or the corona or both.
Schedulers often subdivide Div.4 into single and multi headed sections. There is no reason why they cannot create a special section for: – One or more f lowers to a stem, with doubling of the perianth segments only.
If you want to change the official classification system you will need to define the characteristic. Given that there really are doubles with only doubled perianth segments this could be tricky. If you can provide a good definition it would make more sense to subdivide Div. 4 into say 4a and 4b.
If you put this properly defined group in div. 12 then you will probably need to change the wording of division 4 so as to explicitly exclude them from that division.
Div. 12 will then read something like: Div. 12a – ” …….. ” and Div. 12b – “Daffodil cultivars which do not fit the definition of any other division or division 12a”.
I guess we will agree to disagree. There are others definitely in the doubles camp. One has to see these flowers to see that there is no doubling, as such, of the perianth, just some extra petals. Here’s for a new division. Thanks for the input.
Dave
Hi Dave,
I don’t think we disagree about much. I suggested that defining the characteristic could be tricky but perhaps a botanist could do it easily in a way that is accessible to judges and registrants. I don’t have any specimens available right now and it is not a good use of my time.
You would probably define the division for all petal numbers other than 6. I think 3 petals could be attractive, 5 can go unnoticed. Certainly for numbers less than 6 one can hardly call it doubling.
We probably only disagree over 4 vs 12 and we both agree that for petal numbers higher than 6 these are technically div. 4.
There are a few strains in the classification system. My div 10 hybrids are pushing into divs 1 and 2. Hybrids between jonquils and tazettas could be either 7 or 8 but I think it makes no sense to put them in 12. We probably should move div 9 to ‘div 4’ and use the criterion of 1/5th. Perhaps 5 and 6 could be combined into a division for single and multi headed flowers featuring reflex. This might suggest a corresponding division that features deflex (eg. alpestris hybrids). And of course, if you can define the not-6 petal characteristic, a division for those.
I expect that, no matter the system, people will make it work. I also think we should try to significantly change the system at most once every century or so. I’m not aware that there is a big demand for system wide changes just yet.
Might I suggest that a botanical definition is far more precise than a horticultural definition. We do agree actually on the fact that some horticultural classifications need review. For example Little Kiwi has a jonquil type bulb, jonquil leaves and a jonquil fragrance but because the flower is doubled it must be Div 4. To me it is Div 7 Double.
Oh well it has been nice to have a debate on Daffnet. It is a shame only two took part.
Dave
Hi Lawrence and Dave,
Though not participating, I have been reading and watching the responses with interest. It’s an interesting topic as I have had a few “Fan” daffodils in my miniatures. I’m not sure if I would consider them a separate division. More of, it has more then six petals, therefore it is not desirable. I has made an interesting joke entry into daffodil shows. Have you noticed the “Fan” in ‘Tete-e-Tete’ as I see it often?
Is Ngaire Rogers a registered name of a daffodil?
Clay
Hi All,
Like Clay, I have been watching this topic evolve. The answer to your question Clay is yes, ‘Ngaire Rogers’ is a registered daffodil. Here is link to the RHS entry.
Nancy
Hi Clay and Nancy,
Welcome in. Ngaire Rogers was raised by and Alpine Garden Society member, named after her and registered by Peg Tocher, also an alpinist. It is delightful to look at and completely consistent in form therefore different to others which sometimes have more or less petals. Remember how the split coronas were hated when first introduced. Maybe we have a similar situation.
Dave
Dave,
I agree on introduction of new plants. However, I have been into plant identification the last few years and generally daffodils are identified by 6 petals, like boxwood is identified by opposing leafs on the stem. We know there are always mutations, but to keep daffodils where they can be readily identified, there has to be some characteristics that is always constant. Then again, I’m only a master gardener and not a botanist.
Clay
Gets my vote as a delightful and different flower – and regardless of number of petals few people would have trouble recognizing it as a daffodil. I think it would have a hard time of it in diverse 4 as it just doesn’t look like a double. Nobody quite knows what a division 12 looks like (it’s the island of misfit toys, after all) so if it was in good condition and reasonably well-shaped, I’d give it a blue. And try to get a bulb for myself!
Kathleen,
I’m sorry. I’m more the daffodil police. If it showed up for my panel and even if it were the only one daffodil in the class, I’d leave it where I found it and go one to the next class that had to be judged. Daffodils have six petals. Of course I entered a doubled ‘Tete-e-Tete’ with twelve petals in the Richmond Show a few year ago just to get some laughs. It was ignored by the judges as well.
Clay
Clay,That is rubbish. You need to see the flower before making judgment. It is delightful. And do doubles only have six petals? I don’t think so.
Dave
Dave,
Sorry you feel that way. One has to have standards in which to judge. Without standards we would have to give dandelions blue ribbons in a daffodil show thinking it was ‘Rip Van Winkle’4Y-Y. :-)
Clay
Hi All,
After having seen the vase of this flower at the National Show I can only but agree with Dave that it is not a double. The perianth sits in a perfect plane to the corona, there is no doubling so how can it be classed as a double? Despite its unusual appearance it is a lovely flower.
Robin
Having witnessed this cultivar at the National show I concur with both David and Robin that this is certainly no double, it is very distinctive and different to others, and it would not fit in div 12 either
It really has to be seen in the flesh to be able to make a judgment.
Maybe it is time for a division 14 !!!!!!!
Malcolm
HI David,
We’ll take a look at ‘er and see. The judges manual for the ADS says 6 petals make a daffodil. However, I’m not here to rehash yesterday’s breakfast menu. J
Thanks for the bulb!
Clay
Some Daylily hybridizers are embracing multi petaled forms. Many
cultivars with eight total petals and sepals have been registered. The
goal seems to be even more flower parts. The native roses in the SE US
have five petals. The list goes on and on. Why not daffodils?
Annette Kahn in LA
To be accepted in our shows with more than 6 petals, there will have to be some major changes to the judges manuals and instructions. With all the “hellabaloo” over the Poets not having a red or orange rim, even when they do have other rims in the wild, I think we need to decide what criteria we are going to use to judge daffodils. All the non-red or orange poets were relegated to Div 3 until a major uprising saved the day. I personally don’t think more than 6 petals satisfies the definition of a daffodil. The botanical world will be tipped on it’s axis.
As for Division 4 daffodils that someone commented on, regardless of where the doubling occurs, it still has to have six petals on the back. Too often I as a judge have seen where exhibitors have torn off a petal on the back. To me that is the exhibitor’s guilty plea that the Div 4 does not meet standards for an award of a ribbon and I treat it as such.
Clay