Wildbirds said:So Sweet >> Miss Victoria ... Miss Victoria >> So Sweet .... Thx Hortaholic for this information ....

(Never yet divided & has bloomed well every year) ... (Like the Eveready Rabbit: Takes a beating but keeps on going)

I'm in Ontario @ Z4/5 range ... MV is as hardy as a polar bear ...

HSD ('High-Scape-Density' - Charlie Zettek Rochester NY breeder introduced this term/characteristic to me @ an Ontario Daylily Society presentation several years ago)

You're welcome! I'm surprised at the interest in this topic, and gratified!
Thanks for confirming that with your own observations of Miss Victoria and 'So Sweet'!! You clearly keep excellent records.👍🏻

Your crossing plans sound very interesting I'll look forward to hearing some of the results. I like all types of daylilies and love it that some hybridizers are working to advance the less "trendy" types. You never know when you'll start a new trend.

Like Robin, I loved your "hardy as a polar bear". ❤️ Maybe that will start a trend 😀

Scape density..introduced to you by Charlie Zettek. I think this is one of the most overlooked aspects of evaluating garden performance of daylilies!! Is there a thread on the topic? I'd love to hear about daylilies which put on a true display!

For anyone who hasn't heard it, this is exactly as it sounds- how many scapes are there "per square foot of clump"? Do you see a bouquet of flowers on top surrounded by a ruff of foliage? (Dense, and probably mostly straight scapes) Or do you see a lot of foliage dotted with a flower here and there?

No matter how beautiful the flowers, a dotty one will never make a great garden / landscape daylily.

Scientists have another way to look at this - photosynthate partitioning. Simply, what does the plant do with the sugars and other products of the leaves? Make a lot of roots but few leaves or flowers? Make a lot of leaves but neglect the flowers and roots? Or a well balanced distribution? Preferably tilted somewhat toward flowers 😄

Also, your point about continued excellent performance despite not being divided for years is well taken. I haven't divided mine either, and I suspect rebloom would improve with occasional dividing. Um, not to mention fertilizer and water which it doesn't get, just a lovely fertile soil and rain per nature's whims.

Thanks so much for your informative post! 👍🏻

Isn't scape density going to depend a great deal on the size of the clump (fan/ramet density) and the size distribution of the fans in the clump. The size of the clump will presumably depend on its age (time since it was last divided) and how quickly the cultivar increases vegetatively. Most of those measures are strongly affected by the growing environment of the clump (fertilizer, water, light, etc.).

Continued excellent performance after not being divided for years might suggest plants that produce increase fans/ramets slowly or plants that produce new increase fans/ramets loosely on short rhizomes rather than tightly in a crown.

Photosynthate partitioning would presumably also involve producing scapes and flowers versus producing new increase fans/ramets versus storage of photosynthate for future use.

Now the term scape density is fairly new to me...and it has captured my interest now like bud count and branch count was my main concern the past couple of years when purchasing plants. So I am going to start a new thread and hope everyone one contribute any first hand knowledge they have with plants that process this trait, and any articles and research about it.

' High Scape density' ...Just checked back to see what comments have been generated .... Maurice (ADMAN) certainly raises some important bio/hort/scientific aspects to consider (Perhaps I'll get back to this ... to these points later as I'm a wee bit rushed right now.)

A couple of quick points however ... I've been aware of daylilies since the mid 1990's. And became specifically interested in them since the late '90's when the Ontario Daylily Society (ODS) was formed. It's my nature, my mindset to delve into a degree of depth & breadth about any subject that interests me ... SO, I read everything I could find, I went to various forums & symposiums & Regionals (USA) (NOT yet a National) and have attended almost every ODS CAN-AM since the first one. Also visited a number of daylily nurseries & gardens on both sides of the border.

I outline this only to be able to tell you that I had never encountered the term 'High Scape Density' (HSD) until Charles Zettek (Rochester NY Cobb's Hill Gardens) introduced it to the group, to myself, & explained & illustrated the term at one of our ODS CAN-AM Forums. It IS one of those descriptive, defining terms that immediately registered with me ... And I look for it whenever appraising a cultivar or seedling to bring into my breeding collection. (My first breeding activity started about 2000-2001 ... Caught 'The Infection' & thus became more serious, more focused, somewhere after 2010 due to listening to breeders like Gossard, Zettek, Sobek, Rood, Huben, Apps, Hanson .... Plus our own ODS breeders such as Stelter, Carlson, Lycette, Mussar, Culver, Retallack, Georges ...)

A simple GOOGLE search will bring up the term several times with some specific photo examples (Go into Results Pages #'s 2-3 etc.). Check the AHS database for Charlie's own intros as well, as I recall both his submitted photos and his descriptions include the term for some.

Frillylily said:







Here is the one I am comparing to, It has a good bud count, very diamond dusted, 36ish tall, holds its color pretty well through the day-does not melt, and has upright scapes-not a sprawler. Very robust plant that increases fast. I know it is an older one as I've had it for 15 years at least, it was given to me by someone who ordered alot from Oakes and Wilds, and she did not buy newer things, just the lower priced items. She could not remember it's name. It glows across the yard, I will never get rid of it

I'd appreciate any tips on names if anyone has ideas.

Very interesting thread. Almost looks like Frances Joiner. Also, we carry unregistered seedlings at our nursery. Feel free to take a look at www.roycroftdaylilies.com.

It is not Frances Joiner, although the coloring is similar, it does have less of the mauve over lay, more of sherbert color, and much taller. I have grown FJ in the past and it was not a good performer for me, although it's blooms are gorgeous. Thank you for taking a guess though!, and I will look at your website for sure, not that I need any more

Hortaholic said:Frillylily,

Miss Tinkerbell (unregistered) is clearly identical to 'Siloam Little Girl'.

Miss Amelia (unregistered) is identical to 'May May'. Compare the descriptions, Every detail is identical.

Pat

So I have Miss Tinkerbell and Siloam Little Girl right beside each other and yes, I agree they are one and the same.

But I can't agree that Miss Amelia and May May are the same. I have both of them and while they bloom around the same time, May May is taller than Miss Amelia. But now I will have to pay closer attention this year to really see how similar they really are.

mom2cjemma said:I have both of them and while they bloom around the same time, May May is taller than Miss Amelia.

I have both, too, and was thinking the same thing. I also get earlier rebloom from May May than Miss Amelia, when they are kind enough to provide any, which is not every year. Although I have one on the east side of my house and one on the west side of my house, so I was thinking maybe it was a location thing, until Heidi mentioned it. I, too, will pay more attention to bloom size, etc.

I'm glad to see this as initiated some discussion! I look forward to hearing from Heidi @mom2cjemma and Tim @lyshack about their comparisons!

Tim, I think a difference in exposure could affect bloom and rebloom timing. Maybe you could transplant a piece of each, to beside the other on each side of the house, so you have them side by side in the same exposure, soil, watering regime, etc? Probably have to wait a year for the transplants to re-establish to get a reliable comparison.

Pat

My spring to-do list is pretty extensive this year, but I might give this a try in the fall, Pat @Hortaholic

Jobe01 said:

Very interesting thread. Almost looks like Frances Joiner. Also, we carry unregistered seedlings at our nursery. Feel free to take a look at www.roycroftdaylilies.com.

@Jobe01, Hi, I was curious about your mention of selling unregistered seedlings and was not familiar with the company so checked into the site. Lots of lovely daylilies!

Being fond of white daylilies, I was drawn to 'Casper the Ghost' (Roycroft 2019).

But then, I was a little surprised to find this note in the description:

"Note: Was formerly test sold as seedling 08-525-near white and also by our garden name of "Forlorn Phantom 2". Since it was so popular we decided to register and introduce. So, here it is!"

One of the issues we've been discussing is the problem of having the same cultivar circulating under 2 or more names. Usually "garden names" are most likely to be used by unsophisticated novice hybridizers.

Is it a standard procedure at your nursery to offer seedlings with unregistered "garden names" before then registering them under a different name?

Do you individually inform each customer who purchased the plant under the garden name of the new, registered name?

I suppose you're aware that selling an unregistered seedling, even under a seedling number, is risky. The purchaser has the right to name and register it if they choose. AHS has ruled on that in at least one case I know of firsthand. It was unfortunate for the hybridizer, as the cultivar eventually received an Award of Merit!

Curious minds sometimes encounter situations that create more curiosity!

Pat

Hortaholic said: Being fond of white daylilies, I was drawn to 'Casper the Ghost' (Roycroft 2019).

But then, I was a little surprised to find this note in the description:

"Note: Was formerly test sold as seedling 08-525-near white and also by our garden name of "Forlorn Phantom 2". Since it was so popular we decided to register and introduce. So, here it is!"

I imagine it couldn't be registered as 'Forlorn Phantom 2" because there already is a registered 'Forlorn Phantom':

Daylily (Hemerocallis 'Forlorn Phantom')

So now there are potentially two 'Forlorn Phantom's in circulation presumably. Of course there's no issue selling unregistered seedlings as long as it's not with a name.

Another example from the source originally under discussion here is 'Frankly Scarlet'. There is a registered 'Frankly Scarlet' and an unregistered "Frankly Scarlet". I suspect more people have the unregistered one than the registered.

https://oakesdaylilies.com/pro...

versus

https://www.daylilies.org/Dayl...

I thought an unregistered seedling could only be registered by the person who bought it if they purchased it before it had ever bloomed?

Lol I have a frankly scarlet looks like the flower but last year mine was almost 4 feet tall. I got mine at a garden center

@Seedfork, that is what I thought was the situation also. However, I did not find any mention of it in the current Registration Instructions or the previous Registration Rules (2016 version?). My searches in the documents may have missed its discussion but it appeared to me that only the term hybridizer is used.

In the instructions for registration on the ADS under the heading "*Originator
The complete name of the originator must be given. The originator has been determined by the Board of directors to be the person who has ownership of the entire cultivar when it blooms for the first time."

The next section under Name and address of Registrant goes on to say that if the registrant is not the originator, the registrant must have written permission from the originator to register a plant.

If you download the instructions these sections are on page 11.

sooby said:

I imagine it couldn't be registered as 'Forlorn Phantom 2" because there already is a registered 'Forlorn Phantom':

Daylily (Hemerocallis 'Forlorn Phantom')

So now there are potentially two 'Forlorn Phantom's in circulation presumably. Of course there's no issue selling unregistered seedlings as long as it's not with a name.

Another example from the source originally under discussion here is 'Frankly Scarlet'. There is a registered 'Frankly Scarlet' and an unregistered "Frankly Scarlet". I suspect more people have the unregistered one than the registered.

https://oakesdaylilies.com/pro...

versus

https://www.daylilies.org/Dayl...

Hi Sue @sooby,
Good catch on Frankly Scarlet! I hadn't checked that. Those two will likely end up hopelessly confused as long as both are being grown. The unregistered one could pass for the registered one on a quick glance.

Given that I'm watching for white daylilies, I looked into 'Lady Elizabeth', another AADSC designee.

There is a registered 'Lady Elizabeth' (Hersdorff 1948) , a dark yellow self. Obviously not the same . Pity the exhibitor who cuts , transports, and grooms one of these for a show and then is told by classification there that it's wrong because it doesn't match the registration. Also pity the clerk who might hear adamant protests that it's exactly the one purchased from this catalog, and you can see right here, it's white!

The AADSC version has an unregistered cultivar name, 'Robbobelli', and is patented (will soon expire). The patent number is given and a quick Google search links to it. The "inventor" is Jack Roberson (of American Daylily and Perennials). Within, it says:

"I have chosen to identify this new cultivar as Hemerocallis 'Robbobeli'. This cultivar is being marketed in the United States under the name LADY ELIZABETH™."

I should note that a daylily cultivar name is valid even if not registered with theAHS/ADS, if it meets the ICNCP rules for that. But specimens of unregistered plants can't be shown in accredited AHS shows.

It's hard to understand why people decide to replicate a name. In the long run it may damage their reputations. There must be thousands of other "Lady" names that could have been chosen.

A case like Frankly Scarlet could be avoided with a bit of imagination.

Commercial interests choose to use trademarked names because they don't expire, unlike patents.

I really like Oakes. They send great plants at a reasonable price for the quality and quantity. This week I received 5 cultivars. All were at least 3 blooming size, heavily rooted plants. Millie Schlumpf, 5 fans for $15. Instant clump. I'm happy!

I just wish they would dissociate from AADSC!
[Edit 4/19 1:07 PM]- And of course, stop selling renamed or unregistered daylilies!

Pat
P.S. Sue, you'll get a chuckle from this. One was 'So Lovely'. Of 4 fans, sure enough, one fan shows SS symptoms.

I think that is why I sometimes see seedlings listed as being sold as unbloomed seedlings.

touchofsky said:In the instructions for registration on the ADS under the heading "*Originator
The complete name of the originator must be given. The originator has been determined by the Board of directors to be the person who has ownership of the entire cultivar when it blooms for the first time.

The next section under Name and address of Registrant goes on to say that if the registrant is not the originator, the registrant must have written permission from the originator to register a plant.

If you download the instructions these sections are on page 11.

Hi Valerie, yes this is correct, of course, but rules and ethics are not always followed (as we've been discussing here). In the case I knew of first hand, the registrant claimed he had asked for the originator's permission and the hybridizer said he could , but not to include the originator's name. The originator said no permission was asked. No witnesses. Back then verbal permission was enough . The requirement for written permission is an improvement.

For those who aren't familiar with this situation, the form
is usually written "cultivar name (originator's name - registrant's name)".

The risk that the unnamed Roycroft seedling might be registered by someone else was just an aside, actually. The main issue was selling the plant under two different cultivar names, the "garden" one and the registered one.

Pat

Hortaholic said:It's hard to understand why people decide to replicate a name. In the long run it may damage their reputations.
A case like Frankly Scarlet could be avoided with a bit of imagination. Commercial interests choose to use trademarked names because they don't expire, unlike patents.
I really like Oakes. They send great plants at a reasonable price for the quality and quantity. This week I received 5 cultivars. All were at least 3 blooming size, heavily rooted plants. Millie Schlumpf, 5 fans for $15. Instant clump. I'm happy!
I just wish they would dissociate from AADSC!

I agree on both points. I think I understand why certain punctuation can't be used in registered cultivar names. If not, we might've ended up with a Frankly Scarlet (one meaning) and a Frankly, Scarlet (totally different meaning, as well as a film quote).

My thoughts about Oakes are the same as yours.

I do have one thought: since this seems to be a continuing issue, is there any way someone (a person or organization with access to the information) could publish these commercial/trade names? You know...a "simple" list of patent name, commercial/trade name, and other names previously used, plus a pic? That way, there'd be a record of "which daylily was also called what" in the future. I know this is probably pie in the sky.

I bought my "Maya Purple" NoID from Lowe's way back in 2000-2002. I remember vast numbers of pots of it, so it had to have come from somewhere. It was like what I see now when I go there and there are hundreds of pots of Stella de Oro, which I detest, for some unknown reason.

My efforts to ID "Maya Purple" have been for nought, however. That said, there cannot be that many once-blooming, 20-22" cultivars with 5-6" deep maroonish-purple flowers that spread via rhizomes out there. It acts more like Hemerocallis fulva that any commercially-grown daylily I know of, so maybe it's a species or a first generation hybrid or something.

P.S. I know I just typed in vague dimensions! I had the sizes written down, but I think I tossed them after my last vain attempt at finding this thing's name.

P.P.S. In case anyone is wondering why I care, I just like knowing a plant's name and provenance. I'm not a hybridizer, and this isn't a high-end plant. That said, I'd like to know what it is and where it came from!