@Calif_Sue,
@sooby,
@zuzu
I recently joined NGA and have been reading some old threads.
I can't seem to quote "bamira" to reply to that post.
Also I'm typing on my phone and don't have my references at hand, so I am only going to address the Kwanso question and a bit of related matters.
I believe that "kwanzo" and "kwanso" are transliterations of the common Japanese name for this daylily. Therefore there may not be one "correct" spelling. Arlow B Stout chose to use Kwanso. He recognized that it is a completely sterile form and therefore was only being maintained by asexual propagation, making it a clone and in essence a cultivar. Also he observed that the green form arose readily by sporting from the variegated form.
You will find it "registered " in the AHS database as 'Green Kwanso'. It attributes the name as (Stout 1917). I think this date is an error, see below.
Note that the names given in the database, although in modern common practice being the hybridizer, are actually the names of the AUTHORS of those names- the people who created or assigned the name to the plant. Stout did not hybridize 'Green Kwanso'!
Stout obviously used that name to differentiate the cultivar from the other name he AUTHORED of 'Variegated Kwanso'. Date given in the AHS database as (Stout 1947). This is more likely close to a correct date. I believe the 1917 date above was a data entry typo.
Both of the above can be found by searching on "Kwanso" - "anywhere in cultivar name ". It's a very useful
search function.
The generous contributors who donated their time to digitize the Checklists were not taxonomists. And ordinary typographical mistakes were made, not surprisingly.
Moreover, the structure of the database does not accommodate botanical nomenclature's stylistic renderings. IMHO botanical names should be clearly indicated and a statement made that these names are subject to disputation by various taxonomic experts.
Pat
(M.A. and Ph.D. Both with emphasis on aspects of plant taxonomy including horticultural taxonomy)
