# Guess what the parentage is (3);



## Phrag-Plus (Dec 29, 2008)




----------



## Leo Schordje (Dec 29, 2008)

You selfed your Sorcerer's Apprentice
1, 2 & 3 all could be Sorcerer's Apprentice.


----------



## Phrag-Plus (Dec 29, 2008)

Leo Schordje said:


> You selfed your Sorcerer's Apprentice
> 1, 2 & 3 all could be Sorcerer's Apprentice.



No! We previous talk about colour domination lost in hybrid...


----------



## SlipperFan (Dec 29, 2008)

Phrag-Plus said:


> No! We previous talk about colour domination lost in hybrid...


So it must have besseae in it.


----------



## rdlsreno (Dec 30, 2008)

Sorcerer's Apprentic x China Dragon. Or Red Dynasty.

Ramon


----------



## Leo Schordje (Dec 30, 2008)

You sure there wasn't some Sorcerer's Apprentice pollen left on the toothpick? I don't see the China Dragon at all. Accidental selfings happen. Do you emasculate the pod flower before creating the hybrid? If not the pollinia sometimes turn down and self the flower, similar to what happens in exstaminodia or lindenii. I am thinking of all the Phrag After-Glo I have seen (Sorcerer's Apprentice x Eric Young) and even though they were only 1/4 besseae there was distinct besseae influence in every clone I saw bloom. 

I do recognize that photos can be misleading - but from the images here. All Sorcerer's Apprentice would be my guess.


----------



## Ron-NY (Dec 30, 2008)

I see sargentianum in that flower and possibly longifolium but something else as well


----------



## Phrag-Plus (Dec 30, 2008)

Leo Schordje said:


> You sure there wasn't some Sorcerer's Apprentice pollen left on the toothpick? I don't see the China Dragon at all. Accidental selfings happen. Do you emasculate the pod flower before creating the hybrid? If not the pollinia sometimes turn down and self the flower, similar to what happens in exstaminodia or lindenii. I am thinking of all the Phrag After-Glo I have seen (Sorcerer's Apprentice x Eric Young) and even though they were only 1/4 besseae there was distinct besseae influence in every clone I saw bloom.
> 
> I do recognize that photos can be misleading - but from the images here. All Sorcerer's Apprentice would be my guess.



Yes I always took off pollen, an there is no technical mistake here...I do and always agree at 25% besseae color still there...
I did not use any Sorc. Apprentice is use in this cross...


----------



## Phrag-Plus (Dec 30, 2008)

rdlsreno said:


> Sorcerer's Apprentic x China Dragon. Or Red Dynasty.
> 
> Ramon



:evil:


----------



## NYEric (Dec 30, 2008)

I'm going to cheat!


----------



## slippertalker (Dec 30, 2008)

The problem with deciphering these crosses is that as they get more complex they also are more variable with different characteristics showing in each plant. It is almost impossible to figure these out without more information and the ability to see a decent population of the progeny. This particular flower is quite lovely......


----------



## Phrag-Plus (Dec 30, 2008)

:evil:


NYEric said:


> I'm going to cheat!


----------



## Phrag-Plus (Dec 30, 2008)

slippertalker said:


> The problem with deciphering these crosses is that as they get more complex they also are more variable with different characteristics showing in each plant. It is almost impossible to figure these out without more information and the ability to see a decent population of the progeny. This particular flower is quite lovely......



It is that why I’m always said than it is very difficult and getting more and more problematic to try to put name on mislabelled plant. Even if the label show the good parentage, variations that occur in complex hybrid are becoming very difficult to deciphering. 
And this exercise is showing than even if you use besseae or schlimii hybrids with their dominance for colors at a certain rate it become unexpressed and recessive. But there is much than that too... There is more fun and more rule to challenge and apply in breeding... Real passion!


----------



## NYEric (Dec 30, 2008)

When you look at the side photo you can see that maybe the pouch has a velvet texture from a besseae ancestor.


----------



## rdlsreno (Dec 30, 2008)

Phrag. Allan Tazlaff x Alice.

Ramon


----------



## Phrag-Plus (Dec 30, 2008)

rdlsreno said:


> Phrag. Allan Tazlaff x Alice.
> 
> Ramon



Very interesting observation, 
This is the cross you are proposing and should look pretty similar to this... 
37.5 sargentianum + 25 richterii + 16.25 longifolium + 12.5 besseae + 6.25 caudatum
But isn't...


----------



## SlipperKing (Dec 31, 2008)

rdlsreno said:


> Phrag. Allan Tazlaff x Alice.
> 
> Ramon


Ramon you are working too hard at this oneoke:


----------



## goldenrose (Dec 31, 2008)

rdlsreno said:


> Phrag. Allan Tazlaff x Alice.Ramon


I don't think I've heard of either one!



SlipperKing said:


> Ramon you are working too hard at this oneoke:


Rick - it appears he's the only one working at this! It's over my head!

Just how long will he keep us in suspense?


----------



## NYEric (Dec 31, 2008)

I have his list of plants but I'm not going to look yet.


----------



## Yoyo_Jo (Dec 31, 2008)

Ummm, Jean-Pierre, I need one of your plant lists. I'm really interested in Phrag. Michel Tremblay. :evil::evil:


----------



## NYEric (Dec 31, 2008)

_Touche!_
Canadian reverse-discrimination in action!!!oke:


----------



## Phrag-Plus (Dec 31, 2008)

:arrr:


NYEric said:


> _Touche!_
> Canadian reverse-discrimination in action!!!oke:


----------



## Yoyo_Jo (Dec 31, 2008)

NYEric said:


> _Touche!_ Canadian reverse-discrimination in action!!!oke:



 
Don't worry Eric, I'll try not to buy all the Canadian phrags you want; what were they again? :rollhappy:


----------



## NYEric (Dec 31, 2008)

I've got my passport; now all I've got to do is figure out where the heck Lavaltrie is!?


----------



## Phrag-Plus (Dec 31, 2008)

goldenrose said:


> I don't think I've heard of either one!
> 
> 
> Rick - it appears he's the only one working at this! It's over my head!
> ...



Ramon is using some of my new crosses posted on this forum few months ago... I think is a good try!

I will keep the suspense on till 2009 at least ... 
In the past few months, when people did post photos for "guess what it is”, I’ve seen many try from experts and connoisseurs... Now I’m wondering why it seems much more difficult to guess, with a well identified plant...?


----------



## benilaca (Dec 31, 2008)

:evil:
[Sorcerer's Apprentice X lindleyanum]


----------



## rdlsreno (Jan 1, 2009)

Dragon's Year x Bel Croute.

Ramon


----------



## Phrag-Plus (Jan 1, 2009)

rdlsreno said:


> Dragon's Year x Bel Croute.
> 
> Ramon



Interesting but just a little bit too much caudatum....
37,5% longifolium + 25%caudatum + 25% sargentianum (kaieteurum) + 12,5%besseae


----------



## Phrag-Plus (Jan 1, 2009)

benilaca said:


> :evil:
> [Sorcerer's Apprentice X lindleyanum]



I did not use any Sorc. Apprentice to make this cross... But I agree lindleyanum is the pod parent.


----------



## SlipperKing (Jan 1, 2009)

Oh my! He finally gave us a hint!


----------



## rdlsreno (Jan 1, 2009)

lindleyanum x Red Baron.


Ramon


----------



## goldenrose (Jan 2, 2009)

Good try Ramon! Hang in there - we're behind you!


----------



## Phrag-Plus (Jan 2, 2009)

That colourful one is sowing the lack of influence of caudatum at the same % in a cross. But show color dominance in lindleyanum and hincksianum.

No 3: Is lindleyanum x Mont Fallu (one made with hincksianum as longifolium the pinkish dorsal and ventral one) = 50% lindleyanum + 37,5 % longifolium + 12,5 caudatum. Again the two dominant are lindleyanum and longifolium, it is that why it look again like a Sorc. Apprentice.

As I said, it is not easy to put names on misslabelled plant isn't? 
Enjoy! And I’ll wait for comments!


----------



## Jorch (Jan 2, 2009)

Thanks for posting the answers! It sure is quite interesting to see the domination of specific species in hybrids!

And of course, it's nice to see the actual bloom (or at least have a feel for what the flower will look like) of the hybrids on your sale list.  I will need to save up a lot for spring, when your website or 2009 list is available! :evil: :clap:


----------



## goldenrose (Jan 2, 2009)

:clap: Very interesting, really enjoyed it!


----------



## Kevin (Jan 2, 2009)

Thanks for the answer! The comments about besseae being a parent really threw me, so I had no idea what it was, but it turns out there is no besseae in it! 

Did you say this was on your sales list? Or maybe on your '09 list? 

How many have bloomed for you, and what is the variation?


----------



## SlipperFan (Jan 2, 2009)

Interesting, Jean-Pierre. It would be fun to see these side-by-side.

Are you finding much variation within the sibs?


----------



## NYEric (Jan 2, 2009)

Forget all these, just save the ones for me that I asked about!!!  
I'm going to try to sneak, errr, I mean visit during the spring!


----------



## Leo Schordje (Jan 4, 2009)

Interesting, nice pink flush. I am surprised the petals are so short, but the rest of the flower scheme makes sense. Thanks for the informative posts, I am still not convinced about the parentage of # 1. & 2. but I won't say it can't be either. That is why I try to buy several, 6 or more, of a new cross, just so I can see some of the range of variation. 

Leo



Phrag-Plus said:


> That colourful one is sowing the lack of influence of caudatum at the same % in a cross. But show color dominance in lindleyanum and hincksianum.
> 
> No 3: Is lindleyanum x Mont Fallu (one made with hincksianum as longifolium the pinkish dorsal and ventral one) = 50% lindleyanum + 37,5 % longifolium + 12,5 caudatum. Again the two dominant are lindleyanum and longifolium, it is that why it look again like a Sorc. Apprentice.
> 
> ...


----------



## Phrag-Plus (Jan 4, 2009)

Leo Schordje said:


> Interesting, nice pink flush. I am surprised the petals are so short, but the rest of the flower scheme makes sense. Thanks for the informative posts, I am still not convinced about the parentage of # 1. & 2. but I won't say it can't be either. That is why I try to buy several, 6 or more, of a new cross, just so I can see some of the range of variation.
> 
> Leo



Hi Leo, I do understand your hesitation and you don’t know me personally; it is very difficult to change our mind when our opinion is already made. But this time I did not just said something hypothetical, I’ll bring you proves you’ll asked and results of years of my work to demonstrate it. One thing I can say, there is no doubt for the parentage of #1 and #2. I’m not taking any chance when I do my breeding. 

To get better stud plants, I will prefer to get a flask or a division instead as a seedling for sure... I’m always tried to keep a maximum of 25 seedlings from crosses to get all the possible range of variation. I’m always happy when a cross gives me only 2 or 5 seedling, that way I’ll keep them all.


----------

