Hoping someone among our many members knows this daylily -

I took pictures in a public display garden. First, this flower is not a traditiional double but every bloom I saw exhibits its distinctive look. Secondly, this is a VERY fragrant daylily, it was the scent that caught my attention even before I saw how unusual the flowers are.

And yes: I have already contacted Cornell University (associated with the display garden) who passed my request to the volunteer at the display gardens who is currently updating the daylily mapping of the gardens... None of the 'possible' IDs (based on tag numbers near this daylily in the display gardens, according to their records) could possibly be the correct daylily. I've checked out each possible and none of them are this one.

The display gardens had ID tags with numbers (not names) - upon checking the numbers closest to the daylilies, their list gave me 'Kecia' or maybe 'Kecia Delight' - Calif_Sue ruled both of those out, the only doubles registered by Munson-R.W were both reds and could not be this daylily. The other tag anywhere remotely 'nearby' was for 'Catherine Woodbery' (not double and not even close to this colour). There were no other tags, numbers or plaques to ID this gorgeous daylily.

I am desperately hoping someone can tell me what this daylily is, I have never wanted to add one to my gardens so badly (though I only have a few over 250 at this point ... or maybe 300, I added another 50 or 60 last year).

Thanks for any help!

Dianne

Try Peggy Jeffcoat. It's not registrered as fragrant, but some hybridizers don't note that or it may not have been an option at the time it was registered. Do you remember anything about height or size of bloom? Peggy Jeffcoat is on the short side at 18".

Daylily (Hemerocallis 'Peggy Jeffcoat')

Not a match, I've checked that one too. But thank you!

It looks like Peggy Jeffcoat but the fragrant part doesn't sound right. I have Peggy Jeffcoat, but it hasn't bloomed for me yet. "Fragrant" isn't in the description.

Daylily (Hemerocallis 'Peggy Jeffcoat')

... height / full plant is definitely short...

- NOID, close up on flower

Peggy Jeffcoat:

To me, the form of the two flowers just do not look alike ... (?)

Any idea of scape height and/or flower size? I searched the AHS database and there was nothing for double and very fragrant. There were quite a lot for double, fragrant and pink but no guarantee it was registered as pink and there were 40 pages of those to wade through. Narrowing it down some way other than colour might help.

Is this the garden?
https://s3.amazonaws.com/asset...

adknative said: First, this flower is not a traditiional double but every bloom I saw exhibits its distinctive look.

I know I am not very observant, but this looks very much like the traditional double to me, so I would appreciate being told what it is that makes this not a traditional double and what makes it have a distinctive look?
I appreciate other people being able to see things I don't so this is not critical in anyway, just wanting to be enlightened and educated.
Going to look again.

adknative:
You should probably check out this other image of Peggy Jeffcoat:
https://oakesdaylilies.com/pro...
It looks almost identical to your own, no?
Here they both are, together:


Here is cheaper to purchase it:
http://www.sterrettgardens.com...

Another edit to add a bit about the smell:
"Peggy Jeffcoat Daylily features bold fragrant peach trumpet-shaped flowers with creamy white overtones and yellow throats at the ends of the stems in late summer. "
http://plants.marlinorchards.c...

I have to say, at first look, I totally agreed with Char. The look is unmistakably Peggy Jeffcoat. But you might also look at one by the same hybridizer, VANILLA FLUFF. That one grew here for years, and was one of the few that was strongly fragrant. Here are a couple of pics of it. Here, water and temperature affect the bloom color. It varied from cream to butter yellow .






However, it still looks more like PEGGY JEFFCOAT to me. Here's a pic of PJ for comparison.

This pic too from the database here, it's also on the list at that display garden associated with Cornell I mentioned above, if that's the garden. But not registered as fragrant (which doesn't necessarily mean it isn't - I don't grow it so can't say on that score)

The daylily in question looks like a hose-in-hose double to me. I think that is what Dianne means when she says it is not a traditional double.

AHS definition of Hose-in-Hose Double:
https://daylilies.org/daylily-...

Wish I could help on the ID. Sure seems to be a match for Pegy Jeffcoat given that it is short and the coloring looks so similar. No idea about fragrance on PJ though. Vanilla Fluff is probably to tall.

Yes, thank you @blue23rose for being able to clarify what I am fumbling over: hose in hose (looks like a flower in a flower) is exactly what I see that is so very different from other doubles I have in the gardens...

I have Big Kiss...

Dorothy and Toto ...

Double Intrigue...

Flamenco Christmas, Dewy Sweet,

Schnickel Fritz ....

and a number of other doubles in the gardens, but none of them has the same look as this mystery daylily. Those above look more like interlapping layers of petticoats, no real separation between the layers.

'Hose in Hose' is exactly what I am trying to describe, that separation that makes it look as though more than one flower is layered over another. Fulva 'Kwanso' has this layered look, too - at least the version I have in my gardens (unless it was incorrectly identified when I got it).

If you look at the last daylily in this picture to the far right (as the profile makes this more visible) you can see how this double is very different from the doubles above... it looks almost more like a daffodil or lily, with layered trumpets.

NOID double:



I do thank everyone for all the wonderful suggestions and I have looked at 'Peggy Jeffcoat' repeatedly. The colour may vary a bit from garden to garden, and there are a few images that make it appear more similar than others for sure! (Vanilla Fluff is too tall, but thank you for having me check it out.)

The display garden where I found the daylily growing is 'not' a daylily display garden but rather daylily display beds at the Parker F Scripture Botanical Gardens in Oneida County, NY.

I think I may have to ask for their 'complete' list of daylilies, and look at each one (if I can get the complete list from the volunteer there). Cornell and the volunteer were already kind when trying to ID thru tag numbers and figure out what might be in that section of the gardens, but so far, nothing has matched.

I have (numerous) allergies, so just having a VERY fragrant daylily that I could actually smell the wonderful scent stopped me in my tracks and made me look to see where the scent was coming from... and then, I see this gorgeous flower. How can I not want this in the gardens?

You're very welcome, Dianne. If you do find out the name of your NOID, I am sure we would all love to know!

That was my initial first impression, Peggy Jeffcoat. Daylilies can behave so differently in various gardens across the country, affecting form and even color. I'm always amazed at how different daylilies look in more humid gardens than mine.
Glad you posted this here Dianne!

plasko20 said:

Another edit to add a bit about the smell:
"Peggy Jeffcoat Daylily features bold fragrant peach trumpet-shaped flowers with creamy white overtones and yellow throats at the ends of the stems in late summer. "
http://plants.marlinorchards.c...

At least this vendor noted a strong fragrance!

Peggy Jeffcoat is fragrant and looks precisely like the NOID, so I concur. She''s my favorite double for the reasons you give, DJ., with a special grace and pristine, consistently rounded hose-in-hose form. There are other vanilla doubles out there, but I don't need em (Well, most of the time I can resist. I did just request Scatterbrain). At clump strength, the fragrance may be more noteworthy. I usually appreciate it by picking a bloom. I find her a bit taller than 18'. She seems to be harder to find than many DLs, despite her age and fairly good increase. I think she's popular and that's why the price isn't lower.




When I'm looking at a clump of Peggy Jeffcoat in the garden and there's only me to see it, I feel like going to find some garden visitors to show her beauty to, so it doesn't go wasted. You know what I"m talking about, hem friends. When the daylily is SO BEAUTIFUL you have to go show somebody! DH often gets to see Peggy J for this reason- too good not to share.

OK, it just went on my wish list for sure!!

Sterrett's price is very good, and I ordered from them last year and was happy with my order.

Also, I like Peggy Jeffcoat so much I got the converted form last year from Iron Gate Gardens. If it's true-to-ploidy, maybe it can cross with some of my favorite white tets.

Not being much of a doubles fan, I thought it might be something I was not seeing that made the flower "not a traditional double but every bloom I saw exhibits its distinctive look." I was aware of the hose in hose type of doubles. So I did a printout of all my doubles (only have 19) and was surprised to find that my only double that actually fits the hose in hose description was also either Kwanso or Flore Pleno. I had never even thought much about that, I mostly just bought doubles to have an example of them in my garden. Now I need to find a few doubles that are hose in hose doubles, I also much prefer this look in doubles. It must be more unusual that I was thinking. I do wish there was a place for that to be added in the data base under bloom traits. I guess it might not do any good if the hybridizers are not registering doubles with that info included. Pictures are nice, but when searching a database a detailed description is really helpful. I suppose we (all the members here) could add that info to the database by proposing changes if there were a check box added for it.

So I did a hose in hose search on the AHS data base using Description Keywords: and pulled up 44 plants.
Not all of them appear to me to be hose in hose.
Did a search here using Color description and brought up 28 hose in hose doubles, so I suppose if any of us grow doubles that are actually hose in hose we could add that info there?