Thanks Sue! I joined the AHS recently, so I didn't know the history behind this. The Daylily Dictionary method seems much more intuitive and is nicely described.

So Fred (Spunky) give us your branching count on the ones you posted, please so we know what is correct.

Anne, and welcome to the AHS! As an AHS member you can access all the previous Daylily Journals from the AHS members' Portal, so if you're interested in reading the story behind the change, you could download the Summer 2013 Journal. The journal archives are a fascinating resource because one can download DJ's going back for decades.

Edit - sorry said Spring 2013, should be summer - fixed it.

On Fred's pics, Im guessing:
1. 6
2. 5

I feel that examining a scape looking for minutiae is a bit tiresome, so I prefer to go "old school".

The way I would describe both of those scapes would be similar; "Top cluster with three lateral branches and xx buds."

I think this gives a much better mental image of how the scape looks in the garden.

Some hybridizers like to classify the top cluster as being a Y or W, and that's fine too, but every daylily has a top cluster, and I don't really like the idea of breaking that down into 4 branches for the purpose of more appealing catalog copy. If it happens to be a magnificent top cluster, that will be borne out in bud count.

I guess old school is good enough for most people especially people like me who do not hybridize. Still, I much prefer to know if it is a single terminal, a Y terminal or a W terminal. I think it can make a difference in how crowed the open flowers are at the top and how many can fit up there without forcing some of them to be only partially opened because they are so crowded, especially if the plant is blessed with a high bud count.

Sorry about the delay in posting, but I agree with
1. 6
2. 5