The Missing Class - Dwarf Siberians

By Bob Hollingworth

There is no official definition of “dwarf” for Siberians; such a class does not exist. So I’m creating my own here and saying that anything that typically blooms at 15” or less could be considered a dwarf. That’s about half the height of the average Siberian bloom. Such plants have their own distinct personalities and have a special place towards the front of plantings, so you might think they would be common, but they are not. Dwarf genes are there, so that isn't the major reason for their comparative rarity. Perhaps the lack of a specific size class for dwarfs discourages hybridizers since these petite plants are less imposing than the standard sizes and tend to get overlooked when it comes to awards. This would not happen if we had a dwarf or even a median class for Siberians.

In general, the requirements for a good dwarf Siberian are the same as those for the bigger brothers – attractive flowers, placed so they are viewable separate from foliage, good vigor, and flowers appropriately sized to maintain the balance between plant and flower, which means smaller flowers (2-3 inches across). An example that seems to violate these principles in terms of flower placement and size is the recently described I. sanguinea tobataensis from Japan. Actually it has been known there for a considerable period of time but because of its peculiar flowering habit was not considered to be a Siberian. As you can see, the flowers are full size and held on stems 4-6” high. Since the foliage is 12-18” high they do not present themselves well. In other words these are normal flowers on a very short stem. So this seems to be more a curiosity than an ideal dwarf plant, but one that may be of interest to a hybridizer looking for short Siberians genes.

I. sanguinea tobataensis

A plant that better meets the above requirements is an old favorite, I. sibirica nana alba (an unfortunate name since it is more likely a sanguinea) which flowers at 12-15" over short, broad foliage. It’s origins are murky, being first listed by Perry in 1940. It once graced many gardens, but I haven’t seen it recently. Does someone out there have it still? I expect it has not disappeared because it was a capable grower.

I. sibirica nana alba (Photo courtesy of Greg McCullough)

Another cultivar perfectly fitting the non-existent dwarf class is Currier McEwen’s “Baby Sister” (1986, 6”).

"Baby Sister" (McEwen, 1986:  Photo courtesy of Jim Wilson)

The very small scattering of current “dwarves” in commerce seem to have often come about by accident rather than design e.g. Steve Varner’s flat, lavender and cream “Precious Doll” (1988, 12-14“) comes from parents that are not themselves short, as does the yellow amoena “My Little Sunshine" (Schafer-Sacks, 2012, 15").

"My Little Sunshine" (Schafer-Sacks, 2012)

The only person I know of who is currently focusing on breeding dwarf Siberians is Bill Dougherty in Minnesota. His “Summerchase Advent” (2007, 10") derived from “Baby Sister” is a fine dwarf white. You can see some of his more recent dwarf seedlings on his blog http://summerchasegardens.blogspot.com.

"Summerchase Advent" (Dougherty, 2007)

I make a cross between short irises once in a while, but without a highly focused program. Here’s our 05R10B2, a seedling from “Precious Doll” and blooming at 12-14”,  that is being evaluated along with some siblings for maintenance of dwarf form and vigor. One hazard of breeding for dwarf forms is that sometimes they grow up and out of “class” with time or in different locations. This was often noted by Currier McEwen who suggested that some of his small ones should be lifted and divided every few years to preserve their diminutive size. However, the ideal dwarf iris really should not need this to maintain its miniature characteristics.

Hollingworth Seedling 05R10B2

In 1981, Currier in his “Siberian Irises” commented “there is a particular need for more miniatures with small flowers on low plants in the full range of colors and forms.” This is just as true over 30 years later. The potential to achieve this is there and advances could occur quite rapidly. It would be an excellent hybridizing goal waiting for someone with limited space and time, and a desire to create something that barely exists at this time.

If anyone else is breeding dwarves as an objective, it would be interesting to know  Please post a comment below.

Exploring the Mysteries of Bloom Season & Height: Siberians

By Bob Hollingworth

It's really quite strange that we have never standardized how we communicate the bloom time or height for irises, even though these are required characteristics in registering an iris with AIS.  

The situation of bloom time as it refers to Siberians is exactly like the bearded irises as described by Jim Hedgecock in his recent post. To me the registration should indicate when this cultivar blooms in relation to other cultivars in the class, hence the E, M or L designations, maybe with a V(ery) added to indicate unusual earliness or lateness.  However, clearly some hybridizers use these terms not to indicate peak bloom time but duration of bloom with the designation EML, meaning, I suppose, that it starts early and blooms throughout the season and not that it can start bloom at any time in the season (which is quite unlikely, since relative bloom time is quite reliable with Siberians).

'Who's On First' (Hollingworth, 2008)

'China Spring' (Bauer-Coble, 1999)

The introduction of  I. typhifolia to US hybridizers about 20 years ago moved up the bloom season for Siberians since these typically bloom 2-3 weeks before the more familiar sanguinea/sibirica hybrids (although a few sibiricas can bloom quite early too). So the meaning of Early has changed a bit with time.  Cultivars with some I. typhifolia genes will likely bloom well before the pack, such as 'China Spring' and 'Who's On First,' or Dave Niswonger’s “China” series.  

The season used to end for us when derivatives of Bill McGarvey's later whites including heritage from 'Esther C. D. M.' and 'Gull’s Wing' opened up, such as 'Hooked Again'  or 'Blushing Violet' . But I believe we may have a new winner for latest to bloom - 'Pool Party'. The last two years this has bloomed for us so late you wondered if it would ever open - after many early cultivars were already bloomed out. However, this may not be typical since 'Pool Party' is registered as an ML bloomer not VL. We don’t grow 'Worth the Wait' (Schafer-Sacks, 2002) or 'Last Act' (McEwen, 1985), but the names suggest that they should be very late bloomers too.

'Hooked Again' (Jim Copeland, 2006)

'Blushing Violet' (Hollingworth, 2005)

'Pool Party' (Cole, 2008)

Unfortunately, it seems that nothing is ever that simple and there are a significant number of Siberians that repeat bloom (mostly rather sparsely) a few weeks after first bloom. If the repeat bloom period is clearly separated by a flowerless period, it is easy to characterize, but a few irises stagger along between these two seasons and never seem to be entirely out of bloom for several weeks. This characteristic probably this led to the most convoluted registration I know ('White Prelude', McEwen, 1993) which is registered as VE-EML-VL & RE!

Whether to indicate the “repeat” bloom in the registration (and advertising) is a matter of judgment for the hybridizer – but if this happens most years and gives a display that attracts attention, it certainly is justified. There is a genetic basis for this tendency.   Nevertheless, the nature and environmental conditions that govern "continuous bloom" and "repeat bloom" are still quite mysterious. It also seems that some Siberians repeat bloom more readily in some regions than others, which makes their characterization even more difficult.

Height is in some ways a bigger problem, since here we are giving absolute values (e.g. 25 inches) rather than relative ones (dwarf, median etc.) and of course this is going to vary from year to year and from place to place as growing conditions vary.  

With Siberians a good clump will often have blooms at several heights - shorter around the outside and taller in the middle.  This gives a desirable bouquet effect as seen in the photos above.  So which height to choose? And then again, the flower stems elongate during the bloom period and may end up several inches taller on the last blooms compared to the first ones.

I expect different hybridizers use different methods to handle this variability. I generally record the height of taller stalks (ground to top of flower) for several years before introduction and use the tallest year as the registration height. Why not the average? Because this way seems to me to best represent the genetic potential (under ideal  growing conditions) of the variety. What does everyone else do?

'My Little Sunshine' (Schafer-Sacks, 2010) 

In fact, since there are no size classes for Siberians as there are with bearded irises, exact height is not critical and it would be just as good to have relative classes for height as we do for bloom time.  Dwarf, median, and tall are convenient, but that’s not how the current system works, in part because “dwarf” has a specific meaning in the bearded world that does not translate to Siberians. We do have irises that regularly bloom much shorter than most others  ranging from the old sibirica nana alba (which is actually a sanguinea in all probability!) to more recent ones like 'My Little Sunshine' that bloom at around 12-15 inches.  Compare this to the giants of the Siberian world at 48 inches or taller!  Let’s leave  with the thought that the long and the short of the Siberian iris world might make a good topic for a future post.

Siberians and Species Irises: Looking Forward to June

By Renee Fraser

It was a great disappointment to those of us who love irises when the Triennial Siberian and Species Iris Convention had to be postponed for a year.  A mild winter and a record hot early spring forced all of the blooms 4-6 weeks early, so the Convention will be held in June of 2013.  As consolation, I asked  Brock Heilman, a talented photographer and member of the Michigan Iris Society, to share a few photos of the gardens to be featured on next year's trek. 

These are some of the gardens that will be available for tours at this year's convention.

Judy Hollingworth, whose husband Bob is a contributor to this blog and a famous hybridizer of Siberian irises, has created this Eden.

Hollingworth Garden

Hybridizers send their creations to gardens where the Conventions will take place, and growers and hybridizers take care of them, sometimes for several years, to assure a spectacular bloom and a wonderful show of new varieties for the convention attendees.

Guest Irises at the Kaufmann Garden

This is not your father's siberian iris!  Look at the incredible colors being created by iris hybridizers.

'Salamander Crossing' (SIB Schafer/Sacks 1999) 

Novel colors and forms of irises are on display at convention gardens.

'Lakeside Ghost' (SPEC I. laevigata Harris 2012)

Astonishing new color combinations are being developed.

'Tipped In Blue' (SIB Schafer/Sacks 2010)

Hollingworth Garden

This is just a taste of the beauty awaiting you.  We hope to see you at the Convention in June 2013.  

Siberians that the World Overlooked

By Bob Hollingworth

'White Amber'

For any iris, winning awards is a matter of both worthiness and luck. Luck is always an element in the recognition equation:  an iris might put on a particularly impressive display at an iris convention where many judges see it. Or it may put on a great show of bloom, but a week before the convention visit. It may have been planted on a rock, or at the corner of a sunless bed that missed water and fertilizer. In other cases, a worthy iris may never get to the convention for various reasons, perhaps there is not enough stock, for instance. Over the many years that we have sent Siberians to conventions we have seen all these things happen. We have also been lucky when an eye-catching plant showed itself off like a fashion model just as the visitors came. So here I would like to start a series that recognizes fine Siberians, that for one reason or another, never seem to have received the recognition they (to me at least) deserve.  

'White Amber' (Photo by Brock Heilman)

I don’t understand why Marty Schafer and Jan Sack’s 'White Amber', introduced in 2001, has never received any AIS award; not even an Honorable Mention. Maybe they have so many good introductions that some just get overlooked in the crowd, but 'White Amber' for me is one of their finest.  It grows very well for us, blooms early and reliably produces masses of bloom held so that the clump effect is near-perfect. The colors of the flower are novel and satisfying.

It comes from a complex background involving 'Reprise', 'Mad Magenta, 'Isabelle', 'Silver Illusion' and 'Snow Prince'. Surely 'Snow Prince' must have had a significant role because the flowers are relatively small, though compact and nicely ruffled, and the plant generally has a “sibirica” appearance.  Maybe Isabelle helps with the yellow base. The color is perfectly captured by the name – a smooth, warm, milky amber color on the falls that comes from combining yellow and light lavender–pink and which intensifies towards the hafts. The standards are near white and the style arms are mainly yellow. It is certainly in the top dozen Siberians I would take if banished to that proverbial desert island.

Another in the characteristic of a great iris is that it is a fine parent. Again it seems 'White Amber' has been overlooked. The AIS Iris Register lists no named progeny. That is until this year when we introduced an iris called 'Lemon Mousse' which is from 'White Amber' x 'See Ya Later' (Hollingworth, 2006). That cross gave irises in a variety of colors and patterns with several being good enough to take to the next stage for consideration.
I used 'White Amber' because it had such pleasing growth and flowering habits and because I was interested in the combination of yellow and lavender or red shades in Siberians. 'See Ya Later' comes from that kind of background too. So it’s rather ironic that 'Lemon Mousse' has no trace of red. It opens light yellow and fades to pure white with a yellow heart. The flowers are larger than 'White Amber', but produced in the same profusion. Another iris in this cross (05R1B15) did show the lavender and yellow combination along with striking yellow style arms. This too would have been introduced if not for a bunch of white grubs that ate the roots off in a dry summer several years ago. That’s when we discovered that European Chafer grub populations were rapidly on the rise here in Michigan.

10J13B3  (No. 1)

10J13B7  (No. 2)

The results of this cross were so pleasing that I decided to do another similar one using 'White Amber' and our 'Gem Quality' (2008), a seedling from 'See Ya Later' x the yellow 'Smiley Face'. And again the results have been fascinating – tremendously varied and some quite surprising, with all flowering vigorously. Here are three of them  The first, 10J13B3, in which red-violet is combined with yellow to give orangey shades (the photo is less than ideal I’m sorry to say), and the second one (10J13B7) combining blue-purple and yellow to give some brown tones on the style arms and falls, may not be so unexpected, but where did the third (and most interesting) one come from? 

10J13A1 (No. 3)

Reddish on top and blue below, 10J13A1  probably gets its bright gold signal from 'Gem Quality'. I expect that one or two of these may eventually be introduced if they continue to grow well and our control measures keep the grubs at bay.

So to me 'White Amber' is an under-appreciated gem. I still vote it for an HM every year though I suppose its time is now past. Irises are never technically out of the running for an HM, but not being listed on the ballot now is a killer. It seems that some irises just can’t get lucky, but if you want to add a fine Siberian to your collection, do keep it in mind.