Viewing post #940094 by sooby

admmad said:

2. The buyer propagates it by self-pollination and selection, chooses individual seedlings that are indistinguishable from the named cultivar and sells them as that cultivar.

Rule 2.20 from the ICNCP
"2.20. In considering whether two or more plants belong to the same or different cultivars, their origins are irrelevant. Cultivars that cannot be distinguished from others by any of the means currently adopted for cultivar determination in the group concerned are treated as one cultivar. "

I don't think the AHS rule prevents someone from producing more plants of the cultivar by sexual reproduction versus asexual reproduction.

Agreed as a general case but the case we're discussing in this thread is not the same as item 2. Heidi's question related to crossing two different parents to try and re-create a cultivar that is presumably itself different from both its parents. That is not the same as someone propagating one specific cultivar by seed and considering the seedlings that have the characteristic of that parent to be the same cultivar.

Edited to add that the first checklist (Hemerocallis check list, 1893 to July 1, 1957, American Hemerocallis Society) specifically talks about the registrations being clones. My understanding is that the AHS can have its own rules over and above the ICNCP as long as it doesn't contravene the ICNCP, so it looks to me as if the intent is not to include anything other than asexually produced cultivars from the original seedling.