Someone registering another growers hybrids, without any sense of selective breeding and no guidelines enforced on registrations...out of 4000 maybe 20 good plants. I doubt the hybridizer would ever do this.
It would shame me if they were mine. I suppose thats what happens when you sell you seedlings to a person with no character.

There really some nice plants, but after looking at the new ones month after month there are a lot that look alike. There are quite a few I wold love to have, but we will probably never see them over here.

I agree with everything HDD said, and it's frustrating because he's using up so many potential names. I've had to change a couple of mine already, and that does not make me a happy camper.

There's nothing really wrong with any of the hybrids, but very few of them are really distinctive, particularly if they weren't blooming. There's no reason to name and register 20-30 seedlings from the same grex. He's single-handedly doubling the size of the Neo registry, and it seems to me like just a way to get his name out there for work he didn't even do.

What's the link? I don't see a blast by Keith.

There are plenty of "good" names, you can actually reuse some of them by adding a a word. Pauline Henry used part of the name of SILOAM SPRINGS where she lived as a sort of prefix to name Daylilys. There could then be a BLUSHING BRIDE and a SILOAM BLUSHING BRIDE. Bob Scott uses TOP GUN, Darrel Apps WOODSIDE and BRIDGETON, Kinnebrew SPACECOAST, and the list goes on.

The thing I don't understand is why bother registering all those plants unless you are going to make a real effort to get them into circulation, and is there a big enough market to support it? I don't believe Australia alone could support it. My thought is that you would need world wide distribution to make it worth while, and we know how hard that will be, even if you had the plants in numbers. I think it is safe to assume many of thos plants will never really be available even in Australia.

I did, by the way get beaten to a name, by 2 days! I called to preregister it and was told that it had just been registered. The registrar was very nice and suggested an alternative, that works even better.

The names like the hybrids should stand out as an indivduals..kinda like us humans, we are recognized by our faces :)

Yes, it's a real shame. To me it devalues all thus produced hybrids as a whole.

Quality not quantity, please.

Well Gonzer, you've gone & stirred things up now...good on ya...!

I started hybridizing Neo's about 4 years ago, and one motivating factor was the thought of eventually being able to name, & register a plant that I thought worthy of such an honour.

I have been very disappointed in the poor quality of many of plants registered over the last 12 mths or so. I still think that formally registering hybrids is essential, but unless the hybrid is unique, and of good quality, what is the point of giving it a name...??!

Personally, I think the stranglehold he's got on the FCBS right now is not right. Submitions should be limited to either a few at a time (if they actually deserve recognition) or on a "per month" basis. Perhaps a group of individuals from FCBS should oversee the submitions and decide if they warrant inclusion. Just because a plant has a new name doesn't justify making the Neo Registry read like 'War and Peace'.

Well it was really cold yesterday, and it did give me somethig to look at for awhile between writing e-bay listings.

I'm not sure that it's a stranglehold, it doesn't seem that there are many others submitting photos. I do remembering Lisa and I think HDD commenting on how long it took their photos to get on. Just maybe they should give other peoples photos priority over the mass entries we are seeing.

I guess what it comes down to is opinion, obviously someone feels those plants need to be registered, perhaps one of the requirements should be that the plant is readliy available for sale in reasonable numbers. Like I said earlier if they are not available what is the point anyway.

Back to the names, when I see SILOAM I know that it is one of Pauline Henrys plants, I know it is of high quality and will perform well almost anywhere, and the name stands out. The same goes for Pat Stamiles "candy" series, when you see a Daylilys name with the candy suffix, you know its Pats, and it is a high quality plant. If you really wanted a unique name you would use something like that to really make them stand out, and it also puts a personal stamp on them. John Shooters MAPING series is unique, I think eventully every state will be "mapped". Ohio was introduced this year along with a couple of other states. My friend Rick Yost did GEORGE JETS ON, and family, none of which are actually spelled out like the names of the cartoon characters, or his ITZA names.

Even with probably 60,000 registered Daylilys names have not been a problem. There will still be many more to come. What it comes down to is your imagination and originality.

The issue here really isn't the names.....its the quality and MOST won't be available in a year...why waste the names for things that don't endure as they look like plants already registered years ago by other hybridizers
The only way they are available is threw Ebay and walk in trade..ones and two's....
I know from personal experience that plants are rejected...

I must agree that a few registered lately are not worth registering at all. I saw some really nasty strappy red-brown ones. And a lot of the nicer ones are not that special or different.

Just some people who want their name on the list. Such a shame. But hey what can you do? Slagging off the registry or creating a fuss about it is not worth the effort in my opinion.

Don't forget that us Gardenwebbers gladly spill the beans on how to hybridize broms, just so that anyone can have a go. This might just be one of the downsides of that.

Don't feel bad everyone... ;-)
Be nice.

Sander

Gonzer is right! There's also another one submitting poor quality neos (with chewed leaves). I stopped opening the photos submitted by these guys at FCBS. I now only look at those submitted by Liza V., M.K., tropiflora, P.Isey, J. Arden,D.B.,C.S.,P.K.,SZ,CT,J.Irvin,DS and others that are worth looking.

This might be a good time to share an article written by Uncle Derek from the most recent issue of Bromeliaceae (thanks to Japie for emailing it to me):

Times are achanging

by Derek Butcher

Do you want the good news or the bad news? We now have 8821 names on the International Bromeliad Cultivar Register of which 4366 are Neoregelia. If you wanted to buy one of these plants how lucky would you be? Many of the older ones would be very difficult to find. With many of the newer ones you could try contacting the hybridist but even then you could have problems. Let me explain.
In the good-old-days, Nurseries printed catalogues and advertised their wares in various newsletters and journals. However, as Herb Plever from New York has already pointed out these catalogues are becoming few and far between and yet plants, especially hybrids, are still sold and purchased around the world. Ever since I became Registrar in 2000 I have tried to point out the advantages of registering hybrids if only to give some way of identification compared to the names that just occur in Catalogues, which for want of a term I have always called nurserymenÂs names or NN for short.
Another reason for having a Cultivar Register is that anybody wanting such a plant could at least contact the hybridist and in the good-old-days this was a reasonable assumption. Catalogues were invaluable in this exercise because the nurseryman had to have sufficient stock before going to the expense of printing such a catalogue. Therefore he worked with propagating offsets. Having available stock is all the more important to the large wholesalers in Europe and some larger US concerns. Here, it can be said that the plants are truly being cultivated widely and need to be recorded in the Register. If I find out they are using a different name for this same plant this is also recorded in the Register whether the company concerned likes it or not. The same name for different plants is also recorded. So the Register is more than just a register because it gives extra information in any search for identity.
We have the rule for registering hybrids that the plant should be grown through a series succession of asexual reproduction to ensure that 1. There is a chance to look at stability and 2. There is a likelihood that there are sufficient numbers for circulation for it to be considered a plant in general cultivation. This is decided by the registrant/hybridist not the Registrar. If we return to the goodold-days there was no incentive to ignore this rule!
These days of Ebay and Websites it costs no more to have just one cultivar for sale, calling it unique, and claiming a high price for it. The purchaser is not fully aware that the onus is on him/her to propagate such cultivar and in reality it is unnecessary to be in the Register because nobody else has a chance of obtaining it or needing to know its identity. This uniqueness is a decision by the seller. This is where we have problems with Bromeliaceae because of their promiscuity and fecundity where every seed raised has the potential to be Âdifferent in someoneÂs eyes. Culling is always urged but rarely put into practice because its meaning differs amongst individuals. The Registrar treads a narrow path between the thousands of named plants out there not registered and the few thousand that have been. How many growers keep the labels near their plants? I have had one nurseryman boast that over the years he had named and sold some 60,000 plants without registering one. What I find interesting is that NOT one has been referred back to me with an identity crisis. This means to me that the plants could not have been that outstanding in the first place for purchasers to want to propagate them further. This also shows that you do not need to register every seedling you obtain, and just one of my sayings is ÂQuality before QuantityÂ
Bromeliad Societies around the world play a vital role in this selection process when they conduct Shows and issue Newsletters, and check the Cultivar Register to see if the plant name has been registered. How many registered plants turn up on Show benches?

___________________________________________________________

He makes several good points, one of which is the way that eBay has changed the scene so that a grower can sell a pup of a plant that may be only a single individual. Since there is a photo with eBay auctions, it doesn't have to be a known cultivar or in general circulation in order to sell, in fact it gives the seller an excuse to call it "rare" and attempt to extract a higher price for what may be just a mediocre look-alike seedling.

The issue here is culling. I've had conversations with Derek about this, and to his credit he does urge culling, but somehow the message ends up getting lost or buried by his other message, which is that no hybrid should leave the nursery without a name, and once it's named it should be registered. You can't have one without the other, or we'll experience what we've been seeing on FCBS recently. I don't know of anybody that I've talked to who is happy about the flood of nondescript Neo hybrids that have been pouring into the registry, and not just by Golinski. If you're going to demand that plant not be sold under formula and that every plant sold or traded have a legitimate cv. name, then you have to demand also that only the best, most distinctive cvs are released.

It's impossible to enforce, of course, but that doesn't mean the message shouldn't be hammered home whenever possible. It's not the registrar's job to be judge and jury, and as far as I know it's pretty much a one man operation that few are willing to do, so we should be grateful that Derek's willing to do it. A lot of people don't like his style, and I don't agree with him on everything, but I've found him willing to at least listen to what I have to say and answer my questions, and I'm gradually coming around to his point of view on some things.

Initially I had no problem with selling hybrids under formula if I didn't think they merited registration, but that has come around to bite me in the you-know-what when people I don't even know start naming them and trying to register the names. Under the rules, there's nothing to stop them from doing that if I haven't registered it. We've talked about this before with the issue of Groves' Treasure Chest. Like it or not, once a plant leaves a breeder's hands, they've lost control over it.

Thanks to all for helping me understand this volatile issue. Possibly some of the main players here that regularly register their plants can put their collective minds together and come up with some type of solution. This wading through photo after photo nonsense is wasteful. I tend to side with Inang's thought process.

It all comes down to opinion as to what should be registered and what should not. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, where did I hear that phrase.

I guess what any hybridizer needs to look at is, is it unique, is it an improvement over what is already out there, and in 5 years will I look back on it and regret having registered it because it realy wasn't all that.

Please remember that just because you and/or I don't like a plant that it is no good. There are a lot of really nice plants that I just don't care for personally, but my opinion only counts for me.

My whole problem with the situation is, if its registered, it should be put into circulation. If the plant isn't going to be put into circulation why register it?

In reality, in a perfect world any plants that are not registered would be destroyed but we all know that doesn't happen. With nearly 60,000 named Daylilys, can you imagine how many unnamed seedlings there are out there.

I have been evaluating last summers seedlings looking at the photos, the measurements, bud counts etc. and out of thousands of seedlings, I probably only have 3 that measure up, chances are only 2 will ever be regstered. I will probably keep about a dozen hoping they carry some good genes, and continue to use them in my own lines.

The really responsible hybridizers destroy all the culls...some have to destroy a million culls a year just so some irresponsible person doesn't get hold of the plant and register it whether of not the hybridizers likes it or not.

This is becoming an interesting thread...

Lisa: it would seem that if the registrar is not to be a judge and jury, then what is to stop someone submitting multiples of the same plant under different names? This could happen the way the current system is set-up. Maybe there needs to be some policing after all? Or some sort of enforceable (and comparative) criteria developed? Species are described, but it seems hybrids are only registered...is the actual hybrid plant specimen examined before it's registered or is it all taken on the submitter's word?

Is there any scientific benefit to name the same-looking plants differently? Commercial benefit?

bambi_too: Yes, I've seen similar with hellebores that vary quite a bit. It indeed would be pointless to introduce every single seedling as a new hybrid.

Tom, the only firm requirement for registering a plant is that a photo be submitted. Parentage is asked for, but if you don't know, then you don't know, and that is not grounds for denial. Derek has told me that he takes parentage with a grain of salt anyway because people don't always tell the truth, remember correctly, or have their plants labeled correctly. He also wants an approximate size, and would like to see it in bloom, although this is not so important with some of the Neos, Crypts, etc. as it is for an Aechmea or Guzmania or even a Billbergia. I have some Bills that have never ever bloomed even though I've been growing them for years, so I just send in what I've got. He grumbles a bit, but the bottom line is he wants me to get the thing registered so he's not going to refuse as long as I'm making an honest effort to work with him.

Nobody actually examines the plant. The current registrar is in Australia, but he works in conjunction with the FCBS, which is managed by Michael Andreas in Florida. Anyone anywhere in the world can submit photos to either one of them, as it's all done by email. To quote Uncle Derek: "Registration is based on trust. Trust that the hybridist did use what they thought were the parents and trust that they did create the hybrid. I have had no instance where deliberate fraud has been tried but I have registered hybrids where the hybridist is unknown. Again, I trust the person wanting a good plant to be entered in the record."

He did notify me when he suspected a plant was one of mine, and as luck would have it, it was one that I had just registered as Unblushing Tiger, which has apparently been circulating as Spring Tiger in Australia. He didn't tell me who was submitting that name, and I don't know why they wouldn't have contacted me first, but apparently having it tagged as "Blushing Tiger F2" wasn't good enough, and somebody felt they had a right to name it.

On the other hand, I have a number of plants that I got with either no name or an obviously wrong name, and I have to call them something, particularly if I use them as parents, so I can understand how several different names can become attached to the same plant. I'm not sure why anyone would intentionally submit the same plant numerous times under different names, though. I can't see the advantage in that.

Thanks for the info, Lisa.

"I'm not sure why anyone would intentionally submit the same plant numerous times under different names, though. I can't see the advantage in that."

I am not sure if it ever could happen, and I hope not, but never say never. I can imagine someone submitting might not be able to differentiate enough between them and let them slip by--no one would really know.

One of my points was that scientific and hybrid classification are very different in approach. Does anyone think they be more similar?

Blah! The whole system is flawed, why make a big deal about this particular flaw? The process is going to change, so don't worry.

Philofan, do you work with hellebores?

Now that is downright sinful Lisa, and makes a good case for destroying any seedlings you are not planning on registering or keeping yourself.

There are actually rules at least in the Daylily world about such things. The most important being to register a plant you must OWN ALL OF IT IN EXISTANCE. If I give you a couple of fans of a seedling you cannot register it and technically niether can I. You can sell me all of a seedling and I may register it, but most people don't.

Sometimes like in the case of JUST PLAIN BILL, A Bill Munson seedling that Bill sold John Rice shortly before his death. The flower had all the Munson qualities about it and Bill was on the fence about it. It was named and registered by John Rice and the registration information reads Munson/Rice which means John introduced it for Bill Munson. This is not real common, but is being done. Al Goldner of Michigan produced GREAT plants, but didn't register very many. They are in very high demand even though they all really go by garden names. The unusual thing is NO ONE is using or has used any of the names Al gave his plants, I was told he was just too busy to worry about it, and that he once registered a plant just so he could recieve an award it had recieved as a seedling. Some of hs plants are getting registered by a friend that he handed them off to, in both of their names.

I guess its all about ethics, who is getting the credit for all theose Neoregelias that are being registered?

I don't see any point in registering someone elses work, how could you ever be proud of that?

Tom, based on how much work is currently involved in describing a species, I don't see that method ever coming into play for hybrids. It's just not worth the effort for all of the thousands of hybrids that are being produced, and how much difference is there going to be in, say, sepal length, between 20 different individuals from the same grex?

If, as Winterlager seems to be suggesting, the current system of morphological description will eventually give way to DNA evidence, that might make things easier. I think that's still a ways off, though, and I'm not convinced it will be as accurate as some people seem to think. Some preliminary work is showing that some species and even genera that are morphologically dissimilar may have more in common genetically than other species that key out as being close relatives. It's going to take a while to resolve all of these issues.

I don't work with them, but do see how easily they set seed, and there is a noticeable variation among them.

Regarding registration, I think the hybridizer's name should be part of that equation, regardless of who registers it. Gives credit where credit is due.

Good points, Lisa.

I agree that it could be a futile exercise to categorize hybrids that are morphologically the same. That brings into question of who fronts the cost for DNA sampling to establish the dis-similarities. I am not sure how viable it would be. But I am curious to see where this all goes...

Then there is the whole area of plant patents (maybe for another thread)

The hybridizer's name is part of the equation, when it's known. Check the FCBS. The hybridizer's name appears first, and the namer's appears with an asterisk.

As to why anyone would register a plant they didn't breed, I think that putting pollen to pistil is only half of the process. The other half is judicious selection. How many of you have received seeds or seedlings from friends or fellow GW members? If they are of hybrid origin, it's up to you to select the best cultivars, and if you intend to propagate, sell, or even give them away, Uncle D. wants you to give them official names and have those registered with a photo so that they can be IDed. With that comes a resposibility not to register crap, but that's left up to your discretion.

Whether or not you agree that the function of the registry is simply to be an ID bank (as opposed to a designation of merit), that's how it's currently being run. And that's why we're seeing such a flood of registrations these days. Whether they are being registered by the breeder or not, the element of the equation that's missing is the "judicious selection". In Golinski's case, he acquired seedlings of crosses made by Alan Freeman, who I've heard is not well, otherwise he would be raising them himself. I don't know either of them, so forgive me if I've got the facts wrong, but speaking as a hybridizer I suspect that Freeman would be much more discriminating about culling his own crosses. At least I hope he would. I know if I were in his position I'd be very unhappy about the way it's being played out.

One final comment for me on this subject. If you send in a picture..make it real...not photo shop'd!

Yes, that means not altering saturation, like in your example, HDD. I do recommend altering levels so blacks are truly black and whites are white, useful especially when viewed on the web under different gammas.

Hi lisa

Could you expand on this statement below please as I have recently bought a Treasure Chest after seeing one at a recent Bromeliad meet.

We've talked about this before with the issue of Groves' Treasure Chest.

I am fairly new to this chat forum hence why I have asked, as I would like to uderstand what happened if you don't mind me asking, thank you for any info.

Kiwi, if you've just bought a Treasure Chest, then no problem. The discussion was about whether Neo Monet is actually TC being sold under another name. See link below.

Since my remarks on that thread I've talked to Uncle Derek about it, and the official word is that if the original plant wasn't registered then it's fair game for anyone to come along and register it under their own name, and the only way for the breeder to prevent that is to make sure that no plant is released without being properly named and registered.

I've been following this thread with a good deal of fascination. I don't have many points that I would argue with any of you. I've been quite annoyed with the vast majority of KG's recent submissions to the registry. Whenever I consider to register one of my own plants, I have to consider my limited growing space and ask- Is this plant worthy of sharing space with 'Royal Cordovan', 'Charm', 'Milagro', 'Takemura Princeps', 'Hannibal Lector', 'and 'Blushing Tiger', etc. that I keep in my collection? It's usually fun to view the "What's New" page on the fcbs site, and ponder what plants to consider for that "wish list". Sadly, most of what we've seen recently triggers a far different response. Now, I confess to being one of those growers who is loathe to commit a plant to the compost pile, and I think we all know the society table that exists with plants/ pups "free to new members". I think that those plants have merit, if only to give confidence to newbie growers that bromeliads are easy to grow. Better perhaps to give them only a generic "Neoregelia hybrid" label with a fairly safe chance that registration won't be pursued.

I suppose that KG thinks that he is doing the "responsible" thing by giving a name to every remotely saleable plant. I'm not sure whether this makes Uncle Derek entirely happy or not. Everyone on the forum seems to agree that only plants with special merits should be considered for registration. Yes, John- I guess that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I think that at least a couple of growers need to be encouraged to use some sort of filter- feedback from friends or other trusted growers before registering new cultivars. They need to get the message that with each new cultivar, they are creating both a legacy and a reputation which may not be as they desire.

I have not shared Lisa's troubling experience of having a plant registered without any prior knowlege. I have traded and shared a number of seedlings and pups with friends around the country. So far, I have been fortunate to get encouragement- and even name suggestions from friends- to register a couple of cultivars.

Lost in all of this is that Lisa did manage to get a few of her new hybrids listed on fcbs earlier this month. There are at least a couple there that I wouldn't mind adding to my collection!

Paul

FCBS is the first place many go to if they're trying to confirm that a plant listed on Ebay is actually the correct one. It wouldn't surprise me to see these all listed in the near future, as rare plants.

This is a great discussion. I hope we get a 100 or more posts (even though I hate the garden webs software, its so 90s).

Here are my expectations of the effect of cheaper Genotyping on plant identification:

To start with, DNA sequencing will cause a huge change in the current bromeliad taxonomy. This should not be surprising and should be welcomed. In fact, the whole concept of species/genus (Linnaean taxonomy) will have to be revised as it's arbitrary and specious (ha ha). The early work that Ive seen on bromeliad DNA is very interesting and demonstrates the unreliability of the current morphologically based taxonomy.

"Genotyping provides a measurement of the genetic variation between members of a species. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) are the most common type of genetic variation. A SNP is a single base pair mutation at a specific locus, usually consisting of two alleles (where the rare allele frequency is ≥ 1%). SNPs are often found to be the etiology of many human diseases and are becoming of particular interest in pharmacogenetics. Because SNPs are evolutionarily conserved, they have been proposed as markers for use in quantitative trait loci (QTL) analysis and in association studies in place of microsatellites. The use of SNPs is being extended in the HapMap project, which is attempting to provide the minimal set of SNPs needed to genotype the human genome. SNPs can also provide a genetic fingerprint for use in identity testing"

Eventually, popular plants will be Genotyped and the visually and environmentally appealing features will be identified. Breeders will be able to more quickly create hybrids that contain desired traits. So if you want a blue flowering, spineless bromeliad that can tolerate full sun and is cold hardy, you may have a good chance of somebody making one. Unfortunately, the time lag in creating hybrids the old fashioned way will likely be abandoned for the expectations of the quick result of gene jobs.

If you can only cross two plants that take a few (or quite a few) years to reach the reproductive state then its going to take a long time to create those highly desirable plants. If you could create a gene job plant that has all kinds of genetic changes orchestrated at the same time, then you can reach the goal much faster. Its happening right now with food products where there is a huge market that justifies the expense. When that expense will decrease to the point that its applied to Bromeliads is anyones guess, but I dont think it will be all that long. I hope to live to see it.

And what does this have to do with registering plants? Im not sure, but I suspect that things will change.

"Unfortunately, the time lag in creating hybrids the old fashioned way will likely be abandoned for the expectations of the quick result of gene jobs."

This seems so Blade Runner-esque but entirely possible.

Someday, I can imagine plants designed on order...

Have you seen those photos of glow in the dark cats? Imagine glow in the dark bromeliads.

Thanks, Paul! I had initially planned to wait out the deluge. I figured that once he got to the Zs it would be finished, but then he started all over with A again! This current batch is actually his third run through the alphabet, and who knows how many more there will be? When one of my best names got sniped, I figured I'd better get on the ball and register whatever I can NOW. So in a way it's caused me to be a little less discriminating then I might ordinarily be and to register some kind of marginal ones just to secure the names. Hopefully not too marginal, though.

The problem with changing the names as John suggests is that many of them have already been released under the original name, so that just creates even more confusion, which is exactly the opposite of the intended effect of registration.

Regarding genetic engineering, I don't think it's "Bladerunner", exactly, but I just don't think those methods will ever be affordable enough to be in the hands of hobbyists. For big agribusiness, yes, and there are plenty of GMO crops already being produced. For the backyard grower or small nursery owner, where are we going to get the sophisticated lab equipment to do gene splicing, and what's our economic incentive to do so? It just doesn't pay off at that level and it's not practical. Just as children can now be conceived in vitro, I don't think the "old method" is likely to go out of style any time soon! ;-)

As far as DNA analysis, again, I don't think it will ever be affordable enough for the hobbyist. The current DNA tests done for either forensic or medical purposes only test certain specific alleles at certain loci, not the full DNA screen, and they're still extremely expensive. They're also much more accurate in terms of "exclusion" than "inclusion", i.e. they can tell you if something DOESN'T match, but finding out if it DOES match is a much more involved process and the margin of error is still fairly high.

The link below discusses some of the issues involved with human DNA testing. We're wandering pretty far off topic, but it's an interesting discussion, so take a look:

Yes, Lisa, don't wait anymore! We need to see some more interesting additions up on fcbs.

Re: Custom DNA: It may never get cheap enough for the hobbyist. No argument there. But looking at technological progression and what is available today vs. ten years ago, and the declining associated costs, I won't say never... I can *imagine* a B2B genetic service bureau to service those who do not have the capital outlay for this kind of equipment and expertise, and at a reasonable cost for a smaller business. I've seen this happen successfully in other types of markets.