"registering" vintage no-names?

"registering" vintage no-names?

Postby illustrator » January 11th, 2013, 10:35 pm

Hi all,

We were several times mentioning that there are some old violets around but they have no name and no known history. We know that they "are old". They can look like named violets of known origin, but we can't be completely sure as long as we are not growing them side-by-side with these named varieties. Maybe we will never be sure.

Over here in Slovenia I "found" a double white with girl leaves and long leafstalks and maybe one or two more, I am waiting for these to flower to see "what I got". Botan has this blue/violet double with girl leaves and long leafstalks, and Laci mentioned either the same or a very similar plant from Hungary.

I think that these plants are very worthwile keeping, they are part of the European-Houseplant-Cultural-Heritage. But I hesitate to give them names, because we might create synonims for plants which already had names in the past. I like to call them "something" like a code or a number, so we will know what we are talking about and we can also decide to show them on exhibitions. I propose the following and I would like to know what you all think, please tell if this makes sense:

The "name" can be the name of the city followed by a number. The City is the "oldest" place to where we can trace where it was grown, mostly the place where we obtained it. So in my case the double white could become "Ljubljana # 1". Then should be the date of registering and the name of the person who registers it. "Registering" is nothing else than opening a topic here on our forum and describing the plant. The description is then:

"City # number", date of putting description online, name of describer, colour of flowers, type of flowers, (in case of single flowers mention if it is a dropper or a sticktite), type of leaves, color of leaves (upper and underside), size of plant, general appearance/other characteristics.

We should only do this for plants which clearly differ from what we find in shops, so only plants "which are grown for a long time", so it should be clear from the description why the plant differs from comercial varieties.

After this there should be a short text summarizing everything we manage to find out of the origin of the plant, in case of Ljubljana # 1 this could be: "grown by Ljubljana Botanical garden for about 20 years, probably longer".

Then there should be photographs which show:
- whole flowering plant
- detail of a flower
- detail of a leaf

After this, all offspring of the "plant from the describer" and all others which are for sure the same clone will have "something like a name". I think that this could stimulate people to search for and maintain these old no-names. We should be very carefull that no modern shop-plants get "name/numbers" like this, so perhaps we should make a comitee to approve these descriptions.

It might be that the same plant shows up in different cities, so perhaps we will find that Budapest # 5 will be the same as "Cluj # 7" or so, but that is part of the fun! Using city-names makes the plants easy to remember and makes them instantly recognisable from the names given by hybridisers (I am aware of the City-Line plants which have city-names, but these don't have numbers!).

So, what do you think?
Paul Veenvliet
illustrator
Member
 
Posts: 513
{ IMAGES }: 53
Joined: October 28th, 2010, 9:48 pm

Re: "registering" vintage no-names?

Postby botan » January 12th, 2013, 9:38 am

I think it is not a good idea to open new topics for each plant. I think it will be better to post it in one topic (eventually here). When you start typing a post there is "Subject:" line that can be changed with the city-number name. You said that it's better if they are side by side, and that is the nearest thing that I can think of.
The leafstalks are longer because the light they receive is not enough, I've made that experiment, they look normal in appropriate light.
User avatar
botan
Member
 
Posts: 518
Joined: December 17th, 2011, 12:28 am
Location: Bulgaria

Re: "registering" vintage no-names?

Postby illustrator » January 12th, 2013, 6:30 pm

It could be in a subforum next to "registered violets" and "NOID violets".

I'd rather have one topic for each of these violets because we can then easier add information and discuss them. I don't expect that really many "old no-names" are goung to show up, but you already found two and I have at least one ... If there are 10 or so, searching will be a lot easier when each has it's own topic, and discussions are not going to be mixed up.
Paul Veenvliet
illustrator
Member
 
Posts: 513
{ IMAGES }: 53
Joined: October 28th, 2010, 9:48 pm

Re: "registering" vintage no-names?

Postby botan » January 13th, 2013, 1:41 am

I have around 5 vintage no-names + 1 sport + that from the university. That makes 7 only from me for now, I can dig some more I think. I don't see much discussion in the topics of the named varieties even in those that most of us have and thats why I just can't imagine some pages filled with comments.
What we will do if there are 2 of a kind in different topics?
I like the idea to gather info of an oldies but the structure is little blurry to me to be honest. I don't mind to try with separate topics although. :)
User avatar
botan
Member
 
Posts: 518
Joined: December 17th, 2011, 12:28 am
Location: Bulgaria

Re: "registering" vintage no-names?

Postby Valkiria » January 14th, 2013, 1:02 pm

I also think there must be different topics for each. Till the approval by the committee we can discuss about the plants in just one topic" discussion or approval topic, and then, after debates, there could be created something like a data-base. Otherwise, the oldies will be lost in the pages of discussions.

I also agree, we must debate on each of them - is it old or just form the flower-shops.So, a committee is needed.
User avatar
Valkiria
Senior
 
Posts: 1222
Joined: October 21st, 2010, 1:43 pm
Location: Bucharest, Romania


Return to Other discussions on african violets

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 0 guests