Shop Products
Houzz Logo Print
jaga_gw

Who are my parents?

jaga
15 years ago

Hi all,

Need help to id the parentage of this plant. It is called Neo Tiger in Australia & NZ but it's not registered. It's a lovely compact plant so am hoping someone can shed some light. We had detective Kerry Tate on the case, so maybe she can chime in with her findings so far to jog some memories.

Here's a pic of the lost child!

{{gwi:439629}}

Comments (16)

  • LisaCLV
    15 years ago

    It is registered, jaga, it's just not in the photo index. Check the registry database.

    I bought one of these at the WC in SF. It's a Bill Baker hybrid, actually just an F2 of Grace Goode's 'Bingo'. Bingo's parents are farinosa 'Durispina' (also used to make Barbarian) and fosteriana.

  • jaga
    Original Author
    15 years ago

    You are amazing Lisa. Thank you for solving that mystery ! Have checked out the database & it's all there! Just a bit confused as to how they can call it Neo Tiger when there is a Neo Tiger ie Carcharadon Tiger on the photo index database. How does that work?

  • mike4284m
    15 years ago

    What a looker! And it looks like it was grown perfectly. Is that a bit of a flush in the center? Anybody know where to pick one up in the states? (before I check the usual sources)

  • kerry_t_australia
    15 years ago

    ahah! Mystery solved - 'onya Lisa.

    That lovely neo has been distributed in Australia by Olive Trevor. She said she picked it up "somewhere - can't remember from whom", and then built up her stock for sales.
    I grow it too, and think I must have bought it from Olive.

    My original maturing plant from Olive
    {{gwi:439631}}

    A current young plant
    {{gwi:439632}}

    Glad your Tiger has found its ancestry, J+A.

    Cheers,
    (retired detective) Kerry

  • LisaCLV
    15 years ago

    Kerry, I can't remember offhand, but it's possible Olive got it from me.

    Jaga, carcharodon Tiger is apparently not registered. I'm guessing that may be because it would not be accepted under that name with the Baker cv. already registered. On the other hand it would be crazy to change the name at this point since it's become so well known. Just another one of those little glitches in the system, but somehow I doubt that Skotak loses much sleep over it. ;-)

    As to how it works: the photo index and the registry are two separate databases and one need not be on one to be on the other. Anything submitted for registration since the FCBS photo index was started must be accompanied by a photo, and that will automatically be forwarded to FCBS for posting there, but there are a lot of registered cvs. that predate the index that don't have their photos online. Also, anyone can send photos of any species or cv. directly to FCBS, but if they see it's a new hybrid to be registered, they will automatically get sent on to the registry first. It's cooperative, but not synonymous, and although it's discouraged, there's really nothing to prevent two or more cvs. with the same name from appearing in the index. The registry is another story. Hope that's not too confusing.

  • bromadams
    15 years ago

    Lisa, are you going to become the new registrar?

  • hotdiggetydam
    15 years ago

    carcharodon 'Tiger' was just lumped in with the carcharodon group in the registry
    Didn't we just get a new registrar? G. Lawn

  • bromadams
    15 years ago

    The bsi website still shows Derek.

  • hotdiggetydam
    15 years ago

    I dont think BSI has a webmaster at present

  • LisaCLV
    15 years ago

    Yes, Geoff Lawn is the new registrar as of the first of the year. Not a job I would want!

    One more clarification-- cvs. may be LISTED in the registry, but that doesn't necessarily mean they have officially been registered. In order to do that, somebody (in my opinion it should be the breeder or someone to whom he/she has given permission) has to submit the name, the parentage (if known), the approximate dimensions and a photo to the registrar. Other plants in circulation may be included as a reference, but if you click on the name it will say "REGISTERED: No" (see link for example).

    Here is a link that might be useful: N. carcharodon 'Tiger'

  • hotdiggetydam
    15 years ago

    I was always under the impression car 'Tiger' was a species plant. I am sure thats incorrect too

  • bromeliaddict
    15 years ago

    hdd, I think you're on to something here...and it probably would be a good subject for a journal article. There needs to be greater clarification between a "variety" and a "cultivar". For me, a "variety" is something which has developed in the wild, while a "cultivar" refers either to a sport of a species under cultivation, or a nameworthy hybrid. I'm not sure at this point that there has been a clear policy for differentiating between the two. If Geoff is monitoring this, I'll look forward to hearing his two cents worth!

    Paul

  • jaga
    Original Author
    15 years ago

    Thank you Lisa for the explanation. We have assumed that the photo index were of registered plants only & that the 2 were linked, so it's good to have our misconception cleared up. I guess like most we like to look at the pictures more than the data!

  • LisaCLV
    15 years ago

    Carcharodon 'Tiger' is presumed to be (a cultivar of) a species. See where it says "TAXON_RANK: S"? The S stands for species. They don't seem too sure about whether that species is in fact N. carcharodon, though. N. pascoaliana is also mentioned as a possibility. That whole complex is apparently undergoing study right now, so there may be some taxonomic revision in the works. Last I heard, what we have been calling carcharodon Rubra is actually N. gigas, so what IS N. carcharodon now? Kerry, have you heard anything more about this?

    The thing is, in order for a taxonomist to describe and publish a species, they need to have information about the type location. If this thing was found in a nursery as the entry says, then it's impossible to describe it unless somebody can find it growing in the wild. If that is the case, then it will probably remain a cv. forever.

    Paul, I'm not sure what the criteria is for designating something a "variety" or "form" of a species (in the strict botanical sense), as opposed to merely a cultivar, but it must be fairly stringent because that designation doesn't seem to be handed out that often. Any taxonomists here? I'd like to know too.

    Generally, though, a cultivar doesn't have to be something that occurred in cultivation. It could have been selected from a wild population based on superior color, markings, or whatever, and then propagated in cultivation. It might help to think of the word as synonymous with "clone", i.e. every specimen of a particular cv. must derive from the same original plant by way of asexual propagation (either division or tissue culture), and therefore be genetically identical. For that reason you can't grow F2 seedlings of a cv. and have them be known by the same cv. name, even if they look virtually identical. They'd still be the same species (if it's a species), but the genetics have been reshuffled. That's my understanding anyway. If anyone knows otherwise, feel free to jump in here.

  • kerry_t_australia
    15 years ago

    Hi all.

    Sorry to take a while to respond.
    Lisa - I have not heard any more about the contentious carcharodon versus gigas/silvomontana/pernambucana debate. I hope to pick some brains on this issue at the next national brom conference at Easter this year.
    BTW - any other Aussies or O.S. members from GW attending Bromadelaide2009?

    Regards the term 'cultivar', I share Lisa's understanding. The only thing I would add is that the original collected and described species is referred to as the type specimen. If subsequent specimens are discovered, which still fit the coded description of the type specimen, but with some nuances (be it morphological or geographical), then they usually get a variety name tacked onto the species name...or not. When one of those specimens of a species is, as Lisa suggested, a superior "clone", then it may be relegated to cultivar status, with an anglicised name. A species cultivar is not a hybrid, but kind of a variation-of-the-theme. Most of us think of cultivars as being people-made hybrids - which is also true, and hence the confusion.
    eg. Aechmea nudicaulis var. rubra = Aechmea 'Xanthe' i.e. a cultivar of a species, and also propogated in cultivation.

    Cheers,
    Kerry

  • bromadams
    15 years ago

    Who knows the difference between forma and variety? Is that just latin vs english?

    For example: recurvata var. albobracteata and billbergioides forma azurea.

Sponsored
Grow Landscapes
Average rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars8 Reviews
Planning Your Outdoor Space in Loundon County?
More Discussions