The next AIS special Handbook meeting Tuesday, April 27
Claire S
Janis Shackelford
I will not be able to attend the review of the chapters on Tuesday. I have reviewed the four chapters and have only one observation:
This statement was left out of the MDB chapter:
The skills of the exhibitor are evaluated here. The specimen should reflect visible improvement in the flower and stem resulting from the exhibitor’s grooming. This includes neat removal of diseased or damaged foliage; cleanliness of the stem and flower; absence of insect infestations; firm upright positioning of the specimen; facing of the specimen; and a neat removal of spent blossoms, including the ovaries, with no damage to the spathes. The result should be a specimen being presented in its best possible appearance.
A judge may encounter trickery such as pinning or taping of flower parts, flower replacement from another stem, splicing of stems, unattached leaves or leaf spathes, cracking of stems to make them appear straighter, or hidden supports and wedges. If any such alterations are found, the entry is to be disqualified from competition.
Is there a reason it was left out?
Janis
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "AISTalk" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to aistalk+u...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/aistalk/42553c5f-a0f5-4024-be02-6d5671baa87dn%40googlegroups.com.
Claire S
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/aistalk/FD6B6D73-CB8F-45EC-BC33-9E43A3A5F012%40cox.net.
Bob Pries
Upon reflection I have come to the conclusion that there should be two forms of Containers at an Iris show. First would be "An Iris grown in a container as a specimen" showing that Iris can be effectively grown in containers. And second a container that includes in essence a small garden, in other words several types of plants making really a floral/foliar arrangement. Both are important to today’s gardeners who rely more and more on gardening in containers. The first is what has been written about so far in this chapter. The second has yet to be addressed and calls for a different set of criteria more akin to Floral arrangements. Most garden magazines refer to this second source when they refer to container gardens.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/aistalk/CABq9cizUnN9sNHmaSDudtKsENkT6FdEJKjk2jiV_VZ5hDiwXMw%40mail.gmail.com.
Bob Pries
I chaired the original AIS committee to formulate the Spec and SPX classes. Ever since then there has been confusion due to poor semantics. Unfortunately people tried to make clear the original motion that was passed by changing wording that really confused things further. When the SPX class was created its intent was to include all irises not included in any existing class. At the time Belamcanda was viewed as a separate species so some provision was made for Iris bred with even a non- iris.
It was also a class meant to encourage innovation. Therefore even irises that technically could be included in an existing class, could be included if they brought new traits from a species into the mix. For example, small talls were acceptable even if they already were tall-beardeds.
A common misspeak is that SPX is a interspecies cross. Inter species crosses involve two species but do not include the subsequent offspring being crossed. SPX does. In other words two Calsibes crossed with each other still constitute a SPX .
An important goal of the SPX class was to encourage the cultivation of species. If Species are available they can be brought into new crosses to reveal dormant traits not previously realized. Again this promote innovation and the development of new types of irises.