I often came across the term "muddy" colors in daylilies while reading the posts in this forum. Not sure what that really means. Does anyone have photo examples of daylilies with "muddy" colors? Does muddiness vary with environmental factors or is it 100% genetic and will happen anywhere the plants are grown?

We typically use "muddy" to refer to dirty yellow, brown or orange mixing in with the colors of the bloom.
We had a discussion about "muddy" in this thread from July 2014 ...
The thread "Most Radical Crosses" in Daylilies forum

, Char. I thought muddy color is a negative trait but the daylily examples there look pretty good.

Sorry wrong forum, wondered where that post went!

Color descriptions that include mauve....

To me, muddy color is a negative trait if it is the first thing you notice about the bloom or if the mud is overpowering and detracts from the overall beauty of the flower. A combination with other colors , maybe an eye or edge, or the shape of the bloom can make muddy color less noticeable and acceptable. I think as hybridizers we all work to improve color and get the mud out.

Char - I agree that the muddy color is usually not as attractive as a clearer colored daylily bloom. One of my favorite seedlings is a stippled bloom, but the muddy color detracts from it in photos. In person, the blooms are so much prettier. I wonder if that is another problem with muddy blooms when trying to photograph them?

"Muddy" color can be both situational or/and genetic. It not only refers to the color itself---but other qualities of color as well. Back in the 80's it referred to brown/bronze tones in yellow flowers. In the 90's it was more the dullness of color in the red flowers. Since then, it has broadened to mean colors that are not distinctly that color--and are unpleasing to the eye. Pinks that are not clear and true, reds that are not bright, clear, and saturated, yellows that are intense, clear and bright, etc. etc.. Color pigments are in the cells on the surface of the flower. By breeding background color of white, the colors have become much more clear and true. Pat Stamile was a pioneer of that effort. Many of the really great colors that we find today are on a white background. Solid color flowers are becoming more and more saturated. As the pigments get more saturated--covering the white background--the more intense the color becomes. The reds we have now are wonderful! The big challenge now is to get patterned flowers that have clear, well-defined, colors that are each bright, and saturated. We have yet to see a clear pattern on a pure white background. the colors of the pattern tend to either taint, or bleed into the background color. Red eye/edges are closer to the goal. Some of the Salter's cultivars are great!

Greg - Just curious .... what are some of the "white" cultivars that are often used? I know many whites are more pale yellow or pale pink.

Greg, thank you very much for the explanation and examples. I think I see what muddy means now. Seems like alot of the blues and mauves as Judy pointed in the above post look muddy.

beckygardener said:Char - I agree that the muddy color is usually not as attractive as a clearer colored daylily bloom. One of my favorite seedlings is a stippled bloom, but the muddy color detracts from it in photos. In person, the blooms are so much prettier. I wonder if that is another problem with muddy blooms when trying to photograph them?

I don't think the bloom looks muddy, to me it looks splotchy and the color does not look evenly saturated across the petals. The color is pretty.

No offense meant... The petals are stippled (maybe what Frillylily is calling splotchy) and the mud is not so obvious there, but on the sepals it is. Jmo.

Images can be misleading in either direction... Beckygardener's seedling may look better in person, but years ago I had a seedling that was unattractively muddy in person, but looked clear in the digital image.

Those that I have considered "muddy" over the years have tended to be those with a pink or lavender background. One time a club member visited back when I was fairly new to daylilies. She saw 'Dena Marie' growing in my garden, and commented that she loved the flower size but that the bloom had always looked muddy to her. I no longer grow it, but here in my zone 6/7 garden ( red clay soil but heavily amended) the color did look muddy. When I attended the Houston Convention in 2008, I saw 'Dena Marie' growing in a Houston area garden ( home territory in case everyone doesn't know) the color definitely looked clearer. So I've always thought that soil, temperature, climate, water, all play a factor in color, but some of it is definitely genetic.
Here are the old pictures I've saved from when Dena Marie used to grow here. Can you guess which image was taken in Texas, or can you even see any difference? (I'll put answer at bottom)


One cultivar that I had a love-hate relationship with was Curt Hanson's 'Inca Apothecary.' It definitely had brown mixed in with the pink. Some days I liked it, and other days I hated it, although it had good bloom habits. It grew here until last year. The hybridizer describes the color as "cinnamon rose blend above chartreuse throat."
Color was definitely unique, but in the end the muddiness bothered me, and it no longer grows here. Many undoubtedly love it!



So, go figure, I find 'Old Termite' which is definitely completely mud (LOL) intriguing! I don't grow it but have admired its look in several gardens. Maybe the brown without hints of pink , at least for me, is easier on the eyes! Don't like mud in clear pinks or lavenders, but brown flowers sometimes can be intriguing!


No lavenders come to mind at the moment, but there are some plants which left here because the color was not a clean clear lavender color and it bothered me. This is just a personal preference, it probably wouldn't bother most people.

Here's an old story about muddiness..... Back in 2006, a well known hybridizer was teaching a Garden Judges II workshop at the National Convention on Long Island that I was assisting with. The garden where we were taking the classes did not have a lot of seedlings to use for the seedling evaluation part, so he selected a recently introduced cultivar at the time which was growing nearby in the garden ( which was selling for high $$ and highly sought after back then) for students to "pretend" that it was a seedling and evaluate. He went through the various attributes of the plant, commented on foliage, scapes, vigor, buds, etc. but when he got to the bloom, he mentioned that he thought the bloom color was quite muddy and that he wouldn't have introduced it. I privately thought at the time that it was mean to make such a statement about a fellow hybridizer's prize introduction, but, honestly, I've grown the plant for many years, and most days I must admit, it looks muddy to me also. The cultivar is 'Alexa Kathryn.' (Kinnebrew -J. 03) What do you think?



Answer from above: The Texas picture of Dena Marie is in the middle.

I bought The Band Played on based on the pretty photos I saw of it. But in my garden it looked very muddy to my eye. Though in my photos I still liked it! I did eventually get rid of it.

@Floota, although I guessed correctly on your Dena Marie, your does not appear muddy to my eye. But the color is not as clear/vibrant as in the Texas photo.

Grey Witch is one that always looks muddy to my eye.

DARLA ANITA has always looked muddy to me

Thanks to everyone for the comments on my stippled seedling! I have to agree with most comments.

Julie - Ironically, my Stippled Statement seedling is crossed with 'Alexa Kathryn.' I am sure that cultivar added to the muddiness of this seedling's blooms. I love everything about this seedling except the muddy color on the blooms. But in real life, the muddiness isn't quite as pronounced. It has so many good attributes that I like, even the fact that the blooms scapes grow lower in the foliage didn't bother me because of the abundance of blooms. It is a great plant for the front of the garden. And it thrives here .... which is a BIG plus! There does seem to be a little bit of rust resistance to it as well. And it re-blooms before the rest of the first blooms are finished. Instant re-bloom. So I need to cross it with something "white" to clean up that color?

I've followed this thread with some interest. Now two plants that occurred to me at the beginning have shown up. One I grow and like - Grey Witch - and one - Old Termite - that is on my wish list because of the muddy color. It went the whole nine yards, didn't it? In reality, isn't the 'muddy' tone just a blend of colors? Whether the blend ends up being something appealing is a matter of personal taste. At least it seems that way to me. I think that odd color in Grey Witch is what makes it distinctive. If it were a clear lavender purple it would lose a lot of character and be less interesting. Also, I think colors like this can work very well in a garden setting combined with more pure colors. I wonder, too, if those that have blended colors are more susceptible to environmental factors in how they look. Grey Witch is one that displays that sort of variation more than any plant except Galaxy Explosion which also is variable - and perhaps might be considered muddy. Sunny days vs cloudy days, temperature, maybe even nutrition and moisture are factors that might affect a blended color more, it seems. Maurice might know the answer to that.

I think that I read somewhere recently (it must have been on this forum) that clear pinks do better for clearing up the mud, than do the near-whites...

I have read that supposedly Richard Norris' 'Clarification' is great at clearing up colors. (I'm not really into eyes, though, and you may not want eyed seedlings either.)

Isn't it interesting? The color of Grey Witch and Trahlyta and others with Trahlyta breeding have never bothered me. They look "smoky" and mysterious to me, and not muddy. Once, years ago, I saw Milk Chocolate for the first time in a tour garden and said quietly to a friend, " That is the ugliest Daylily I've ever seen." A lady a few people behind me saw it and said, "Oh, that is the most beautiful Daylily I've ever seen." What an aha moment for me- it's all in our perception!

Thank you so much for explaining. Yes, you are right! There are some smoky colored daylilies out there that some may see as muddy but very attractive to my eyes. Some others are not so, though. However, I think my preference is toward the clear bright color. Those really pop in the garden.