Iris and some Irids 2009

[Lvandelft]

I found only an old picture (scanned dia) and a picture I made once in the glasshouse
of Iris mellita (suaveolens), but they show very good what I meant with the difference to
what I grow as Iris attica.
For comparing one of I. attica (again) and finally one of the yellow I. suaveolens.

[Regelian]

According to what little research has been documented, although many of these Iris look similar, we are dealing with different chromosome counts and basic ploidies.  I. attica is listed as having 16 chromosomes (1n=8), I. reichenbachii 24 chromosomes (1n=12), I. mellita (suaveolens) is diploid, but I haven't found a documented count.  As I have aril hybrids with it, I have thought it was 1n=12.  Unfortunately, I do not grow any of these species, only I. pumila, which is a tetraploid (4n=32) and hybrids based on I. chamaeiris, an amphidiploid, 8-8-12-12, giving 4n=40. 

If any of you have plants of provenance to be counted, I could add it to my current chromosome project with arils.  I only need a healthy fan from which I can harvest active roots.  I can't promise anything, other than it may help to shed some light on what counts are attributable to which collections.

[Tony Willis]

Jamie

I have lots of plants of known provenance of several species if you are interested,I will write to you seperately.

[Lesley Cox]

Iris mellita (suaveolens) also comes in the 'Rubromarginata' form with its fine red line edging each curved leaf.

Presumably Iris pumila is I. attica? and I agree, Iris suaveolens with curved leaves, Iris attica/pumila with straighter leaves. This is entirely from a rock-gardener's point of view and the experience of the plants I've grown ober 50 years. I know NOTHING about chromosomes, etc. Jamie, you are saying that I. attica is NOT I. pumila?

[Regelian]

Lesley,

although one is always going out on a limb when dealing with descriptions based on preserved specimens, which is the case with all Iris species, the living plants attributed to these species are genetically different.  Now, we can dance with the angels on the head of a pin and admit that we are unsure as to what actually constitutes a true species, but, especially for gardeners, being able to put a name with specific qualities together is the basics of understanding. 

Now, according to chromsome studies that have been done, what we accept as I. pumila and I. attica are two very different genetic entities.  They may appear similar, but they are not interfertile (after the F1).  This is due to their different chromosmal composition.  It has been suggested that attica and pumila represend diploid and tetraploid versions of the same genetic species basis, which I do find a tenable conclusion, but we are unable to prove this one way or the other without some very detailed research of the actual chromsome composition.  This would require dedication and quite a sum of money to realize.  Probably why it has not yet been done.

Now, as someone who hybridizes to produce better garden plants, the actual chromosome counts and their compatability are more important than knowing whether we have natural tetraploids in this case or not.  We do know that I. chamaeiris is an amphidiploid, which leads one to believe that nature has long been playing around with the genome of these smaller iris species.  It has been argued that it is a cross between an n=8 and an n=12 diploid species that then doubled its chromosomes, making it fertile.  An example of nature doing what we do with cochicine to get fertile families.  Another possibility is a cross between two tetraploid species, such as I. pumila (n=8, 4n=32) with I. aphylla (n=12, 4n=48), giving an amphidiploid of 40 chromosomes (8-8-12-12), which is the actual chromosome combination of I. chamaeiris.

Over generations of breeding within the original F1 cross, we eventually get a stabile and reproducing population, that we have given the species status to.

Coming back to your question, yes, they are for our purposes two different species.

[Regelian]

Tony,

I would certainly be interested.  Let me know what would be possible.  Provenance makes the results much more creditable!  There are many plants in circulation which, despite knowing their ploidy, cannot confirm that this is applicable for a given distribution.

[Lesley Cox]

Thank you Jamie. I suspect you and I may not have a lot to talk about if we were to meet.

[Regelian]

Thank you Jamie. I suspect you and I may not have a lot to talk about if we were to meet.

Oh, I think we would find a few 'classic' gardening subjects to waffle on about.  I do love picking tidbits and hearing of personal relationships with the botanical world.    Plus, you do live in one of the greatest gardens Mother Nature ever concieved.

[Hristo]

Hi there,
Anyone got the foggiest what cultivar name this little DB iris might go by?
Cheers 

[Rafa]

very beautiful Iris indeed.

Here one of my favourite Iris
Iris stolonifera

[Rafa]

But..! I missed all that marvellous species. Since I posted Iris tingitana I haven't seen all your Iris!. Well I want all of them, thank you!
About Moraeas I don't know if M. monophylla was recordered In Portugal, but I don't think so as in the rest of Peninsula Iberica only grows M. sysirinchium, so maybe is a new record for Portugal.

[Miriam]

Amazing Rafa -great use of light!

[BULBISSIME]

Wondefull pic rafa !
I've never had any flower with mine... may be this year ??
Your pic look's like a painting I've seen somewhere.. 

[Oron Peri]

Rafa,

Wonderfull species, I. stolonifera seems to arrive from another planet.

Have you found only one plant of M. monophylla or was it a colony?

[Lesley Cox]

Thank you Jamie. I suspect you and I may not have a lot to talk about if we were to meet.

Oh, I think we would find a few 'classic' gardening subjects to waffle on about.  I do love picking tidbits and hearing of personal relationships with the botanical world.    Plus, you do live in one of the greatest gardens Mother Nature ever concieved.

And of course there's always politics, religion and the weather.