Here's a photo of Dizzy Damselfly as it bloomed for me this year. Great color and pattern, but the effect of petals and sepals curling up in the center is not a feature I find attractive. I think this is called canoeing? I prefer a flat face. I wasn't mislead when I purchased it because all the photos I saw showed the feature. In fact, in all the many photos in this color range and pattern of many different cultivars, nearly all show this feature. It's a feature that seems strongly connected to this sort of color/pattern. Is that true or am I imagining it? Thanks

I don't think you are imagining it - I think that 'canoeing' is strongly associated with some sorts of patterning. Whether that is an accident of ancestry or whether that is a biological association I am not sure but in at least one other plant species those that have a certain pigment in their flowers 'canoe'.

Here is what one researcher found in the plant Melandrium also known as Silene (Flavone V is a flower pigment):

"Plants with only flavone V in the petals had smaller flowers, the petals were narrower than normal and curled up more easily"

Thanks Maurice. The effect seems so strongly associated with the 'blue' tones and pattern that I wondered if the trait was connected via the genes. It could be that I just noticed on those more than other colors.

Donald

Yes, I have noticed that with some patterns. I agree it is not an attractive feature Don.

I certainly do not have the scientific background that Maurice does, But I have observed this trait of "canoeing" or"tunneling" tracing back to Mort's Paper Butterfly, and some of its offspring, such as 'Gerda Brooker.' Many of these offspring have been used in some of the present day patterns. I think there is a genetic link with this trait. IMHO, it would make an interesting study!!

I just tracked back the ancestors of Dizzy Damselfly until I located Paper Butterfly in it. Then I looked at the database entries for relatives and their photos. An interesting exercise, especially when there are multiple photos posted to the database. I'm guessing the trait is linked to pattern and possibly enhanced in certain color ranges. It seemed when the descendants left that range, they often didn't exhibit 'canoeing'. Not always though. It may be associated with a pattern/color, but it's expression may also be affected by growing conditions - e.g. weather and soil. It can probably be ironed out, but not easily. I set a few pods on Dizzy Damselfly and some are up. Maybe I'll see bloom someday. I don't have a lot of daylilies and only about half are tet and not everything was blooming, so even if those bees carrying around masses of pollen messed up the marked crosses there would be limited choices and nothing else exhibited the trait.

I agree that canoeing can often be traced to 'Paper Butterfly' (PB) ancestry but one can ask is that due to some general genes in PB that cause canoeing or is it perhaps caused by a specific gene for pigment or pattern effect in PB's flowers. In other words is the canoeing linked specifically to a pigment or pattern?

One way that one might get a few clues to help decide which type of genetic effect might be causing the canoeing is to look at the offspring (that have photos available) of crosses directly involving PB as the pod or pollen parent with the other parent being a registered cultivar. From the AHS database: plants such as 'Butterfly Cravat' from ('Gay Cravat' x 'Paper Butterfly'), 'Butterfly Eye' from ('Forever in Time' x 'Paper Butterfly'), 'Carolina on my Mind' from ('Isle of Zanzibar x 'Paper Butterfly'), 'Cecile Holcombe Black' from ('Paper Butterfly' x 'Sherry Lane Carr') and so on. One needs to try and choose crosses in which the other parent does not apparently have canoeing or similar patterning as PB, which may be difficult sometimes.

With a large group of such offspring, then separate the offspring into two groups, those that show canoeing (in their photos) and those that do not. Are the flowers of the two groups the same or are there differences between groups? If they are the same then it is likely that the genetic effect is general but if they differ, especially if the group showing canoeing has patterning that is different or flower colours that are different from the group that does not show canoeing then it is likely that the genetic effect is directly linked with the pattern or the pigment or both.

Paper Butterfly is an ancestor too of above Day of Reckoning.

I don't mind the "canoeing"! Looks perky!

I have Paper Butterfly and have always like the 'canoeing' effect on it just because it is so different from all the others I have. But if I had a lot of daylilies that did this, I probably wouldn't like it as much.

ALOT of my patterned daylilies did that this year. It was very irritating! But I have to agree, it does look good on Paper Butterfly.