Hi - I'm trying to update the rust suseptibility drop-down for daylilies, as reported through a survey posted by daylilyrust.org but was checking my work in the 'data proposals' list and saw that numerous repeats occurred and others i entered were missing (for example, all about eve shows up 5 times [oddly appropriate] even though i only updated it once). all american plum, and always afternoon; udpated .... but not showing up on the 'data proposals' list.

I imagine it may be something to do with my not backing all the way out of the database each time between entries/submission, as i used the "search" box on the right of the screen to go from one entry update to the next entry (though it did show me the next/new name) ... is there a tutorial or some other caution or advice that would help me with the procedure for doing this sequential updating properly?

Many thanks!

Thanks Tina, got your tree-mail message too.
Yes, most likely that happened because you may have hit the back button. The best way is to start each search fresh from the database search box. Also, if the proposals are pending, you may have thought they weren't done yet as the original info is still present. I cleared them all out.

Oh and can you double check them again? Click on your proposals from your My Info page. I wasn't sure which ones were correct. Some said Shows rust resistance and then the next one said shows susceptible to rust so I wasn't sure which were correct. I approved the first ones and then declined the ones that followed.

Thanks so much Sue! I'll check them, and it should be easy for me to see and identify, so i'll update and in future use the method you outlined for inputting.

Also, there's been some input from others in the DL forum ... maybe we could ask for a simple rust-counter in the DB, that each garden-grower and hybridizer could 'report' an individual case (kind of like a running survey)?

And, since there had been success in the fuchsia community with using the same kind of survey-reporting data to develop mite-resistant info (used by hybridizers to strengthen, not eliminate, strains they are working with) ... maybe that kind of reporting would lend itself well to thrips in the database? just a thought, as there's seems to be so much that regular folks, as well as hybriders, can do collectively to identify useful lines for crossing in additional vigor into the future...

Yes, the three that took are now correct: Absolute treasure, Ageless beauty, and All about eve! I'll go back to get the others that turned into repeats on those three, and keep checking until i can see that my process does not result in more dup's. Many, many thanks!

chalyse said:Also, there's been some input from others in the DL forum ... maybe we could ask for a simple rust-counter in the DB, that each garden-grower and hybridizer could 'report' an individual case (kind of like a running survey)?

And, since there had been success in the fuchsia community with using the same kind of survey-reporting data to develop mite-resistant info (used by hybridizers to strengthen, not eliminate, strains they are working with) ... maybe that kind of reporting would lend itself well to thrips in the database? just a thought, as there's seems to be so much that regular folks, as well as hybriders, can do collectively to identify useful lines for crossing in additional vigor into the future...

Here's what I suggested when the tomato special fields were being added and Dave's response:

krancmm said:could there be a section under the above specialized fields for Personal Experience rating, rather like a poll, also checkboxes, with a table/spreadsheet look?


Dave's Response: I love the idea and I think it's probably going to have to become my latest "Biggest item on my wishlist" but for now the database has zero support for something like that. Databox fields are programmed to be fixed to a single value. We can't currently have it where multiple users can select different values of the same item and have those differing values all appear. It's an "either or" kind of thing. Person "A" says something and if Person B wants to change it, it gets changed.

But having this feature would be an incredibly useful addition to the database. It's going to go on my wishlist.

This concept could be used in innumerable ways.

Thanks Monica! For now, then, perhaps if someone finds sources that show a plant to be susceptible (or is on a list for being resistant) they can use the "either/or" feature or note it in the notes section. Very promising to hear that Dave has such a feature on his wishlist to build, too - i think it would be a powerful tool unique in the world of flora!

Right now, our daylilies database has a pulldown field for "Rust Resistance" where you can choose "Shows Resistance" or "Shows Susceptibility".

chalyse has tree mailed me a spreadsheet containing detailed information that she has compiled on many hundred cultivars. The spreadsheet tells whether the cultivar has resistance or susceptibility and I will mark each cultivar accordingly.

Additionally, she has compiled a decimal system of rust resistance. Each cultivar is ranked from 1.0 to 5.0 to show resistance.

chalyse said:I'm assuming you mean one box made available in a cultivar's database page that can toggle from 1.0 to 5.0? If so, I have that data already, as aggregate averages in the scores (the source of what was used to name a cultivar Susceptible or Resistant). But, sent as decimal numbers, we could sort the database to return 1.0's ("vertically resistant"), 1.1-2.4 through each decimal setting ( for "horizontally tolerant" cultivars), as well as for 2.5-4.0 (researcher recommended range for preserving future-helpful rust-fighting genes that may be recessive or do not match current rust isolates), and even 4.1-5.0 for the small number of cultivars that only seem to survive rust with extreme chemical applications. Helpful on so many levels to a large spectrum of folks.

I'll send you the cultivar names now with their overall averaged (single) decimal-number scores, in case this all makes sense and is really do-able.

So I'll be adding this to the daylilies database soon.

Thank you so much, Dave! :} All of the data and research from American Hemerocallis Society supported studies (and others) have continuously urged hybridizers to use detailed knowledge of cultivar resilience and susceptibility; both are valuable and necessary groups of cultivars needed for strengthening and broadening the overall long-term resilience of daylilies ... but until now there's never been an easy way to search for them.

Even more so, there is a long history of research (based on wheat rust performance) that demonstrates further detail is needed to distinguish narrow (vertical) or wide (horizontal) resistance _and_ susceptibility that performs best against rust over the long-term (you can't just breed for resistance alone - there are hidden pitfalls in it. But, choosing both horizontal and vertical resistance requires a 1.0 versus 1.1+ separation, and horizontals are further categorized in 2.4 versus 2.5+ groups that are both beneficial, but used in different ways).

ATP would be Unique in its ability to:

1. Search for resiliency ratings with all other cultivar info included (photos, pedigrees, etc). If the current "resistant/susceptible" box is also retained, this would keep it simple enough to help even those who are not looking for more detail and continue to be a tool that benefits both consumers and producers ... more knowledge about garden performance, and less hassles at both ends.
2. Adding a 1.0-5.0 ratings box would supply the necessary tool for hybridizers to easily estimate and choose helpful mixes of both horizontally and vertically resistant cultivars (this includes beneficial "susceptible" plants!). Also, the equally important more-susceptible plants that likely carry beneficial and rare genes needed for the future, would benefit from crosses with more highly resilient mates; again, a more detailed scale is needed to do this.

The importance of a detailed scale lies in that, without it, there is no way to estimate the likelihood between vertical and horizontal rust resilience, or to find a range of matches that may reliably improve or broaden daylily performance. Since I have cumulative data already (840 cultivars' averaged scores from up to 10 online research rankings between 2001-2007) I already have the benefit of knowing what I work with ... but ATP could make it possible for everyone else to have equal access if they like :}

This work is now finished! Thank you for proposing this and for sending the data!

Wow!