The Ahs can separate bearded from crested but they wont. The two are distinctly different forms and are hybridized as such.

Its not confusing to the hundreds if not a thousand of daylily enthusiasts who follow the bearded daylily. As it stands, a search in any place like here or AHS, you cannot find it on the bearded merit alone. This problem doesn't exist for other forms to date but surely will as the daylily evolves.

From my conversations, it is my understanding that if Brad coined the form anything else...it would have been ok. Hence, you can call a form after clothing or drapes but not anything already in botany (If this makes any sense?).

Instead of working against the bearded daylily, why wasn't an effort made to say we should except it and most definitions in botany when it comes to forms are pretty liberal after all, nature doesn't care about your boxes.

"In a sense this seems to be going against his own interests because of the confusion being caused to potential interested parties/purchasers by having two terms for the same thing."

This couldn't be further from the truth. Again, crested daylilies are not bearded daylilies. The source of the confusion is this.

I get that sometimes there is conflict in what we know vs. what is discovered. I urge AHS and others to work with Brad on getting this distinct form its own name (with stability percentages) to move forward as one. Im afraid until then, this will not be resolved. If anyone is watching FB, knows that the this form is more so recognized as bearded than else. Role with it, embrace it, and leverage it to gain membership. I wont hold my breath for botanical police to knock on my door.

My 2 cents anyway.

I guess after reading both sides of this argument I more or less agree with the official AHS way of describing these plants, I see no reason to expressly use the word "bearded" to describe them when the current definition seems adequate. Still, the AHS has recently made a move to use the American Daylily Society in order to appeal more to the "common daylily grower" for lack of a better term. I could see that by maybe adding a form of "Bearded" with an explanation and listing so it could be found when searching for this type of plant.

"From my conversations, it is my understanding that if Brad coined the form anything else...it would have been ok. Hence, you can call a form after clothing or drapes but not anything already in botany (If this makes any sense?). "

Not quite anything else, but yes for AHS to approve a term it must be called something that doesn't already have a clearly established meaning in botany, or be a botanical term that actually fits the type of daylily. The AHS is an international organization and if the horticultural world understands a word to have a specific meaning it should not be used for something else.

There's no reason why Mr. Best cannot request that AHS consider a different category in the same way other hybridizers have done for other types of daylilies.

Edited to add, FWIW crested is also not an official AHS term.

@DavidR
When we classify things we often use a hierarchical approach. As an example we could have a top classification of objects that floated on water as "ships". So a passenger liner would be a ship; an oil tanker would be a ship; a battle cruiser would be a ship; an aircraft carrier would be a ship. They are all classified as ships but they are not the same. They share some characteristics but do not share all of them. We could have sub-classifications within ships for different types of ships so for example, different types of cargo ships.
The daylilies that are derived from Bee's Bettie Sue [BBS] (and other cultivars) can be classified as having a type of crest. Their crests may be larger horizontally than vertically. Other daylilies can also be classified as having a type of crest. In their cases the crests may be larger vertically than they are horizontally. Some daylilies may have crests that originate in one location and other daylilies may have crests that originate in different locations.
Many different combinations and permutations of the characteristics associated with unusual growths on the petals and sepals could be classified as crests. Within that classification there could be sub-classes that separated groups of cultivars that shared certain characteristics.
The daylilies that are derived from BBS cannot be correctly botanically classified as having beards. To be classified botanically and scientifically correctly they would have to consistently have hair, or hair-like structures that are accepted botanically. The plant species, bearded aloe, bearded grasses, etc., have common names that include bearded based on their consistently having structures that are considered botanically as hair-like. A plant may have many different common names - they are not required to be scientifically correct. The daylilies derived from BBS do not have structures that are considered botanically correctly as hair-like.
The classifications of daylily types by the AHS are not designed for hybridizing. As an example, doubles are not all identical - there are different types of doubles. Some doubles are hose-in-hose, some are peony type and some are both but they are all combined under the double classification.

The years of bullying and harassment with fairy tales and Cinderella stories, contradicting statements, references to "hair" ( I can quote if you'd like), carefully disguised threats....Ten years ago there was an effort to work with Brad, don't ever tell me there wasn't. As a newcomer to his battle I would recommend you learn the history and facts.

Greetings Earthling is registered Sculpted cristate
Emperor's Crocodile is registered Sculpted cristate.

In fact, Hanson, Rich, Hansen, Stamile, Faulkner, Gossard, Owen, Rice, Mussar, Davisson, Maryott, Reeder, Elliott, Howard....and others have all registered Sculpted cristate forms. These are experienced, knowledgeable hybridizers that understand the cristate definition and have registered their daylilies as Sculpted cristate forms. Hybridizers of correctly registered Sculpted cristate forms have no problem with people being able to find their daylilies in the AHS or NGA database.

It appears the classification Sculpted cristate and the cristate definition are not the problem....

I would suggest that if hybridizers are concerned their bearded daylilies can't be found when searching a plant database they try registering them correctly as Sculpted cristate and then describe the shape of the cristation however they like for their own marketing purposes...be they ruffles, fins, feathers, spikes, teeth, lumps, bumps... or beards. Instead of continuing to be the source of confusion perhaps the beard group should embrace what AHS, the ISHS and knowledgeable hybridizers have accepted as the Sculpted cristate form and.. roll with it.

Pretty cristate seedling by the way.

My 2 cents.

Char said:The years of bullying and harassment with fairy tales and Cinderella stories, contradicting statements, references to "hair" ( I can quote if you'd like), carefully disguised threats....Ten years ago there was an effort to work with Brad, don't ever tell me there wasn't. As a newcomer to his battle I would recommend you learn the history and facts.

I remember. Would the archives of the AHS Mother Robin have copies of all Brad Best's emails? A review of a few of them would enlighten those who were not around when it all started.

His current following has only heard his side, which of course, is how badly he was wronged and how stupid everyone (and organizations) are by [correctly] refusing to use the word "bearded". Bearded as a descriptor is HIS word, and only HIS word is correct.

Char said:
Instead of continuing to be the source of confusion perhaps the beard group should embrace what AHS, the ISHS and knowledgeable hybridizers have accepted as the Sculpted cristate form and.. roll with it.

But that would admit defeat, and he would never "let the AHS win". By his own admission, he knows more than anyone in the AHS ever will.

Has no one taken the time to wonder why knowledgeable hybridizers that are making great strides in the development of cristation refuse to align themselves with Brad Best? It's not over word usage!

Why deliberately use an incorrect term, repeatedly, ad nauseam. Is it one of those situations where if you "say it enough times it becomes a thing"? Is it a passive-aggressive thing? Why?

Seriously, Judy.....if you really want to put a label on it, I can do that for you as I'm older than dirt and can historically see it for what it is. It is called CLEVER MARKETING.

I would not be a hybridizer of unusual forms had it not been for Geraldine Couturier's black and white text catalogs that called her flowers EXOTIC and FLAMBOYANT. Those of us who were drawn to these forms and started hybridizing for them for the glorious pictures she drew in our minds with words were good and miffed that such an ugly name was chosen for our form....."unusual form".....ugh! But we comply with what has been decided in order to register our daylilies officially because the AHS science committee did a great deal of work to make definitions that could be a part of our official botanical language....a language that could be understood throughout the world. Some hybridizers still call their forms "exotic" and "flamboyant" in order to market them as we see them....as the beautiful, graceful forms that they are....they aren't "unusual" to us. One major hybridizer is even claiming she coined the term "exotic" now....we LOVED that term. It is our right to market our flowers as we see fit. Geraldine should be proud of the legacy she created with her words and marketing skills.

Patrick Stamile was also an expert at marketing! Remember the terms he created? He had a bunch of them....so did Grace. "Pony" sized flowers.....bet Patrick knew a pony was really a horse.....but in hybridizing circles the term he used for the size and shape of his pony sized flowers have stuck around and hybridizers still call them "pony" sized....we all understand it to mean something between large and small. Why? Because Patrick was really good at marketing and if you are good at marketing, you can convince people to call them whatever you like. Ditto for Patrick's "butterfly" flowers....which was the name he used for marketing the early patterns. Some hybridizers still use the term "butterfly" even though they know a butterfly is something else. Patrick was so good at marketing, he could convince people that he was the sole inventor of just about anything. And how about Grace's "popcorn" doubles....we all know popcorn is something else.


Now, if I see something really special in my seedling patch, I've learned from the experts at MARKETING that I can call it anything I want. Say I call it a WhoopDeeDoer and I can claim I'm the ONLY one who has EVER created a WhoopDeeDoer because I'm the world's best hybridizer and have been blessed by the daylily gods! I know that isn't true because my WhoopDeeDoer is something that is likely arising from the genome in a lot of other gardens simultaneously because that is how things actually happen. That's what happened when tetraploid doubles came upon the scene. Hybridizers were crossing single x single and lo and behold.... tetraploid doubles started showing up in multiple gardens simultaneously without their even trying to create them. So hybridizers were wise enough to recognize that tet doubles could become really special and started gathering them together from various sources to move daylilies forward to stabilize and develop that particular form. None of them needed a WhoopDeeDoers club or insisted they were the one and only person who had been blessed by the daylily gods because serious hybridizers know how special things can just arise spontaneously without your doing anything at all. It happens frequently in line breeding and inbred lines. I see lots of WhoopDeeDoers….many people throw them out because they don't recognize those things that are "different" or don't want to work with them because their goals are on something else. or they know it takes too much work to stabilize them. Some call them malformations. Pleated daylilies were showing up in Munson's garden and he chose not to work with them....they weren't symmetrical, which was the standard in his day. So you can bet other cristated forms have showed up in multiple places and have been discarded.... they were not created by the expertise of just one hybridizer.....they weren't created by expertise at all....they just show up! I've throw out a lot of WhoopDeeDoers….oddball things that I don't want to work with. My first cristate registration sat in my garden for 10 years because I didn't know what to do with it....didn't know what the heck it was.

And that brings us to Mr. Best and the saga that just won't go away. I can attest to the fact that he had MANY opportunities to cooperate with the committee who defined the terms related to sculpted daylilies and chose not to. I think the AHS science committee did a splendid job of defining the terms and describing how they are all interrelated. If you reread one of Char's post, you will see that they covered ALL the bases...those things that were already being seen plus things that might show up in the future. Do I adore the term "cristate"....absolutely not....I HATE IT. I do unusual forms and the spelling is too close to the term "crispate" and the two terms are now being mixed up. But if these terms are botanically correct and I was offered a chance to change my registration to have it correctly registered as a sculpted cristate form FOR FREE, I chose to do that. Why would I not want people who are trying to develop a new and special form to find my work by doing a simple search. Mr. Best was given that same opportunity and again made a choice not to. Why? Because he had already gathered a following using his MARKETING term and figured he could do better at MARKETING, if he set himself apart. I don't get distraught at his using a term that isn't botanically correct to market his plant. But his "followers" must recognize at some point, that he has a clever marketing technique....and that is all it is. A hundred years from now, when all of us are dead and gone and someone is writing an authoritative book about the early pioneers of sculpted daylilies, those of us who have chosen to respect the rules and terms set forth by the AHS science committee will be included in the book......and (sadly) Mr. Best will not be included because his flowers, which were not registered correctly will not be found. HIS choice. Do I wish he had come to the table when the terms were being formed....absolutely. I have nothing against Mr. Best. He has done a swell job of marketing and making money....gotta admire him for that! My college degree was in marketing by the way....so I leave the science stuff to people who know a whole lot more than I do about that.


Judy

Judydu2 said:
"Why deliberately use an incorrect term, repeatedly, ad nauseam. IS it one of those situations where if you "say it enough times it becomes a thing"? Is it a passive aggressive thing? Why? "

Yes! As Char mentioned, some of us have been around long enough to remember ALL of this "discussion " which often consisted of one sided, incredibly long, rambling Emails addressed to the powers that be in AHS. During my tenure as AHS President, I was subjected to a number of these, even though the previous two Presidents and AHS SSC had already had that discussion with Mr. Best numerous times. He simply would not accept the SSC definition which was, by that time, already published and being used for registrations. He sent me so many of these letters that I finally after discussion w/AHS legal counsel, decided the only prudent action would be to quit engaging, as there was just no reasoning with this individual.

I am sorry to say that he did this same thing with my successor. I don't know if he has tried again with the current president, but wouldn't be surprised if he has!

The sad thing is, he states repeatedly that "AHS first used the term". HE DOES NOT mention to people not familiar with this discussion that AHS published a PAID ad from him in which HE used that term to describe his plant. That was years ago and before the days when an editor would rigorously check the verbiage of paid ads! Sadly, we have learned that such comments in ads must be checked for accuracy before publication.

Oh my.

PS I read Davi's comments after mine was put up. Judy, you are NOT older than dirt! You are quite young at heart and the term I prefer to use when describing myself is, "experienced!" We've just been around the block a few more times than some on this forum. LOL

Sometimes history can be such an interesting subject.

DogsNDaylilies said:Did I miss a picture of the tooth-on-the-midrib daylily or any other quirky daylilies? I'd love to see the photos, but I am not seeing them when I scroll back to previous posts.

Here is a pic of my Rosy Spiketail that shows a strange overgrowth of teeth near the midrib.

Karen, I love it!

Very cool cristation Karen!

It takes some getting used to though. I also had a bloom of Jim Weissenberger with a white tooth right in the center of a petal. For the spirit of newness and uniqueness, I crossed these two daylilies together. I also crossed this Rosy Spiketail pollen with some other toothy daylilies.

Anyone know MMbrickner on the daylily auction site? They have a ton of bearded seeds for sale.. and did last year too.

Just seems like a lot of volume.. and I won't have blooms on seeds for another year likely.

Thanks

That would be Michelle Brickner, of the Perennial Plant Peddler near Findlay, OH....a very reputable, state licensed and inspected nursery specializing in daylilies, hosta, and iris.

Davi said:That would be Michelle Brickner, of the Perennial Plant Peddler near Findlay, OH....a very reputable, state licensed and inspected nursery specializing in daylilies, hosta, and iris.

Much appreciated!

Oh, I had to look that up and what a great collection of plants!! I love my hosta and iris too. Thanks for the info.

@Cpschult

Yes, that would be me. I hope it's doing well for you! It was grown in your climate zone so should do fine! Can't wait to see what you've create soon.

Keep us posted!