If I had it... (wait - where's the evil scientist emoticon!?)
Hmmm... well, first I'd be thinking about how so many longiflorum interdivisionals show a tendency to seperate tepals at the base, as does this flower? I don't personally like that - I'd want to close that space up if possible, with something that kept a tighter flower. But what?
So, while I was pondering that, I'd turn to a really good selection of L. henryi citrinum, maybe something like Ypsilanti?, to reduce the numbers of same old same old henryi oranges turning up in the next generation, and L. rosthornii, because it also seems to impart greater colour possibilities to its babies - especially something that could enhance that green centre/white combo. I imagine they'd both have a higher probability than most species of being compatible, and those stiff, short pedicles look like they could do with a dose of willowy grace. A tight, bunched inflorescence is a drawback of longiflorum blood (to me, not to florists!), and I'd want to put space in the inflorescence, while taking it out of the flower base! Am I picky much?
Hmm... then I think I would look toward all the aurelians out there to find some that keep a tight flower at the base, have a clear flower with no orange and preferably no spotting, but lots of papillae (personal taste).
Maybe something like Beautiful Victoria?
http://www.pacificbulbsociety....
Does the flower have a scent? I'd try to retain/enhance that if possible... but going back the longiflorum way I imagine would compound those other traits I wished to reduce.
Those are thoughts for a start!
After observing how (if) it breeds, (buying research time
) I would then broaden horizons to things outside of the 'henryi things' group...
(If it isn't already a 4n plant... I'd be treating scales with oryzalin too - in a perfect world I would know how to do this!
)