Monday, February 14, 2022

Novelty Irises: A Lace Story

by Sylvain Ruaud

We can't say that 'Chantilly' (David Hall, 1943) is a very pretty flower. For color, its okay. A light lavender iris, with shoulders clearly marked with yellow that infuses the heart. But for the shape, it is rather mediocre, with recurved and drooping sepals (falls). In fact, what catches the eye are the edges of the floral pieces that are finely curved, like lace. Hence the name, CHANTILLY, which does not refer to cream, but to the famous activity of which the eponymous French city has long been proud. As soon as it appeared, this iris became popular thanks to this frizzled flower edge, original for it's time.

'Chantilly' photo by Mikey Lango

However, the serrated edges were not entirely new in the 1940s, because this aspect had appeared for more than ten years in the seedlings of the Sass brothers. The brothers considered it more of an anomaly. But the visitors to their nursery found it pretty; and Hans Sass eventually decided to register two curly varieties, 'Midwest Gem' in 1936, and then 'Matula' in 1935. Several iris hybridizers seized the opportunity to start development of this ornament. Especially Agnes Whiting, who used 'Matula' extensively to pass on the lace factor to her descendants. She registered several lacy varieties, such as 'Gold Lace', 'Mirabelle', 'Etude' and especially 'Pathfinder' (R. 1948). Tell Muhlestein, on the other hand, used 'Midwest Gem' instead and ended up with 'Gold Ruffles'. Dr. Phillip Loomis went another way to develop the curly edges of his flowers. He found that his pink orchid 'Morocco Rose' (1937) was able to transmit the relevant factor. 

'Pathfinder' scanned from the 1955 Schreiner's catalog 

'Morocco Rose' scanned from the 1937 Quality Gardens catalog

But was David Hall, breeder of 'Chantilly' and great hybridizer, particularly of pink iris, who reached a really and deeply serrated iris. After 'Chantilly' his efforts led to introduction of 'Limelight' (1952) then 'June Bride' (1952). However it was another variety, the medium pink 'May Hall' (1954), not frankly cut, which proved to be the best for the transmission of lace. Although we don't know why, pink irises propagate this phenomenon well. From this variety, breeders like Orville Fay and Nate Rudolph introduced characteristic lacy edges in their irises. This is the case for 'Truly Yours' (Fay, 1949), a soft yellow iris. The yellow becomes white the closer one gets to the edges, which are finely laced. Iris judges did not fail to appreciate the progress of 'Truly Yours' and awarded it the Dykes Medal in 1953. The same award honored 'Rippling Waters' (Fay, 1961) in 1966, a mauve variety with nicely chiseled edges. It has become one of the pillars of modern hybridization. Rudolph's rose-colored irises have identical features; notably, the delicate soft pinks 'Pink Ice' (1962), 'Pink Fringe' (1967), and 'Pink Sleigh' (1970).

'Pink Fringe' scanned from 1977 Schreiner's catalog

'Pink Sleighphoto by Christine Cosi

Of course both origins, 'Chantilly' and 'May Hall', not to mention 'Morocco Rose', have been crossed, directly or via their descendants, to obtain remarkably embroidered petals. Gordon Plough used this route to introduce lacy irises into his lines. Opal Brown did the same. We owe Plough, for example, for 'Butterscotch Kiss' (Plough, 1957), not only very curly, but also marking the appearance of a new hue barium yellow, among yellow irises; 'Rainbow Gold' (Plough 1960), a golden yellow iris which we find in the pedigree of many well-known varieties like 'Bride's Halo' (H. C. Mohr, 1973), 'Milestone' (Plough 1965), 'Starring Role' (D. Palmer, 1973) and 'Trader's Gold' (Plough, 1982). Opal Brown got 'Buffy' (1969) and its offspring 'Queen Of Hearts' (1974). 'Queen Of Hearts' the latter just missed the Dykes Medal in 1981.

'Starring Role' photo by Mary Hess, Bluebird Haven Iris Garden

'Queen Of Hearts' photo by Sylvain Ruaud

Schreiners Gardens also reacted to lacy possibilities by crossing 'Midwest Gem' and 'Chantilly'. From this union were born, a few generations later, quality curly varieties like 'Lime Fizz' (Schreiner, 1969) and the famous, splendid, ultra-curly 'Grand Waltz' (Schreiner, 1970).

'Grand Waltzphoto by Christine Cosi

Serrated edges are now very common in large irises. Common features also include widely-branched stems, soft undulations, and sepals (falls) that widen at the base. 'Grand Waltz' (Schreiner 1970) is no stranger to this expansion. Its' children and grandchildren are numerous and often reproduce the ornaments of their illustrious ancestor. One of the most cut out is—without question—the famous 'Laced Cotton' (Schreiner, 1980) which could very well have been added to the American Dykes Medals awarded to the products of the firm of Salem, Oregon. It missed the supreme distinction in 1986. Paradoxically, 'Song Of Norway' won the most votes from accredited judges. It is a stiff variety and rather stingy in curls! 'Laced Cotton', a pure white self, is entirely bordered in very fine serrations, and this character interested a great number of hybridizers. 

'Laced Cotton' photo by Christine Cosi

Schreiner's subsequent crosses not only produced 'Queen Of Angels' (1995) with its jagged edges, but also 'Carte Blanche' (1996) and 'Arctic Age' (1999). 'Mystic Lace' (Aitken, 1990) takes from 'Laced Cotton' the delicate curls of its petals, and from 'Mystique' (Ghio, 1975) its pretty indigo blue gradient. 'Pure As The' (Innerst, 1989) is also an abundantly frizzled white. 'Rhonda Fleming' (Mullin, 1993) is a superb bright mauve flower with a white center, both frizzled and wavy; 'Lady Bird Johnson' (Mahan, 1996) combines the of qualities of refined pale blue color and perfect shape with frizzling and waviness. The same goes for the lavender blue 'Fancy Stuff' (O. Brown, 2001). 

'Queen Of Angels' photo by Christine Cosi

'Mystique' photo by Mary Hess, Bluebird Haven Iris Garden

'Pure As Thephoto by Klaus Burkhardt

Outside of the United States, 'Laced Cotton' has been used extensively. It is the star parent of the Slovak Ladislaw Muska who has produced many interesting embroidered cultivars such as his fetish bicolor 'Don Epifano' (R. 1989) and the aptly named lavender 'La Dentelle' (1995) which can be described as frizzy. 'Oedipussi' (1990) is the contribution of the German Harald Moos to the glory of 'Laced Cotton' and its cut petals. 'Zlatohlavek' (Seidl, 1997), is the yellow - and Czech - version of 'Laced Cotton'. Finally, let's not forget 'Cumulus' (Cayeux, 2001), a lavender neglecta, which includes in its genealogy the prestigious names of 'Laced Cotton', of course, but also those of 'Condottiere' and 'Silverado'.

'Cumulus' photo by Christine Cosi

'Laced Cotton' is, however, only one of the descendants of 'Grand Waltz' with its heavily embroidered edges. Rick Ernst's products, all cousins, are part of this large family. They include 'Different World' (1991), 'Rainbow Goddess' (1994) or 'Tracy Tyrene' (1988). Let's also mention 'Ruffles And Lace' (Hamblen, 1982), whose name says it all; 'Lilac Breeze' (Tompkins, 1987), a lovely bluish pink; and many Schreiner products, such as 'Fabulous Frills' (1976), really crepey; 'Michele Taylor' (1984), and her cousin 'Prettie Print' (1980), a pure soft mauve wonder gracefully bubbled with bright mauve lace.

'Different World' photo by Christine Cosi

'Tracy Tyrene' photo by Christine Cosi

Today, lace-edged irises are fairly common. 'Chantilly', with such a well-chosen name, has greatly inspired hybridizers from all countries. They have abundantly exploited its performances and offered to the public more and more beautiful flowers whose standards and falls are adorned with the most charming ornaments.

Wednesday, February 9, 2022

IRISES: The Bulletin of the AIS - Winter 2022 Edition

By Andi Rivarola

A warm welcome to those who are seeing IRISES, the Bulletin of The American Iris Society for the first time. If you are a member of The American Iris Society I hope you enjoy this new issue.

The Winter 2022 issue of the AIS Bulletin already available online, accessible via the Emembers section of the AIS website. The print copy has been mailed via the U.S. Post Office. On the cover, Pacific Coast Native Iris, 'Marriage Proposal' (by Joe Ghio, 2006), a picture by Kathy Oldham (California), Winner of the 2021 AIS Photo Contest – Close Up.


Note: to access this area of the website, you must have a current AIS Emembership. (AIS Emembership is separate from the normal AIS membership.) Please see the Electronic Membership Information are of the AIS website for more details.



The Bulletin starts with the 2021 AIS Tall Bearded Iris Symposium on pages 2 and 3. There are many images related to this subject and the list continues on pages 16 through 19.

This issue also features the Winners of the 2021 AIS Photo Contest, on pages 20 through 23, and then it continues on page 54. 

Always great information featured on Section Happenings, find the many activities of AIS Sections on pages 24 through 26. 

Read about the 2022 AIS Membership Drive that may benefit your iris club or AIS Section on page 27.

A plea for AIS Directors on Why You Should Be an AIS Director, on page 28.

The AIS Foundation announces the Ackerman Youth Essay Contest, on page 29.

Spuria is St. Louis is a surprising article, on the slim, tall beauties. Read and see all the pictures featured, on pages 30 and 31. 

An Iris Paradise in Savannah, is a lovely article from Savannah, Georgia that will delight you and may entice you to take a trip to the coastal city. On pages 32 through 41.

Don't miss the back cover picture of Iris laevigata variegata, by Willy Hublau (Belgium) another winner of the AIS 2021 Photo Contest.

There's a lot more to see and read in this edition of IRISES, either in digital or print formats. 

Not a member of the American Iris Society? Please see our website for information about becoming one: http://irises.org/

Happy Gardening!

Monday, February 7, 2022

The Iris X-Files

by Bob Pries

Botanical names for hybrid irises are written Iris x species. They have more in common with the TV program X-Files than just the X. The television series dealt with FBI agent Molder investigating files that the department did not wish to touch, because they contained paranormal phenomena that could destroy the reputations of serious investigators. The botanical “X-files” have the same danger. In this regard it probably puts my credibility at risk to discuss my collection of “X-files,” but here goes.

The Kew Checklist of Botanical Names lists almost 200 hybrid binomials. For your consideration I have compiled a list, here, in the Iris Encyclopedia under “Botanical Nomenclature for Hybrids.” On inspection there are several that are relegated to just a few synonyms and these have interesting back stories.



Iris x violipurpurea and Iris x vinicolor

The first group I will mention brought about the fall of a giant in botany at the time. John Kunkel Small was a celebrated botanist. He had completed a flora of the Eastern United States and easily knew more about its flora than anyone else. The herculean task he accomplished cannot be denied. But he took a fateful train ride into the swamps of Louisiana. Looking out the window he saw scores of irises like he had never seen. He came back and collected a truckload that was sent back to the New York Botanical Garden to be grown and studied. He and his colleague Edward Johnston Alexander ultimately published a paper proclaiming about 110 species of irises in the Southern United States.



Iris brevicaulis, Iris giganticaerulea, and Iris fulva, the three parental species of Iris x volipurpurea

The botanical world was shocked! It was soon demonstrated by Percy Viosca that most of these irises were not new species but hybrids of Iris fulva, Iris giganticaerulea, and Iris brevicaulis.  The Kew lists reflects this by changing 61 of these names to hybrid names rather than accepting them, except as synonyms of one master name for this parentage of three parent species (Iris x violipurpurea). One other hybrid name was accepted as the name for just Iris fulva and giganticaerulea crosses (Iris x vinicolor).  So all of those names that Small thought were different enough to be separate species, were essentially lost. But this diversity could still be recognized as cultivar names.



Iris x volipurpurea "cultivars" 'Chrysophoenicia' and 'Chrysaeola' are similar to about 60 others that were originally considered species but were later classified as hybrids

Horticulturalists often complain about how botanical names continually change. This is because they denote evolutionary relationships. As the understanding of these relationships changes, so do the names. Horticultural ‘cultivar’ names are meant only to distinguish the types of plants and are usually unchanging. So these rejected species of Small became cultivars such as ‘Aurilinea’, ‘Chrysophoenicia’ and ‘Rosipurpurea’ etc. and were published as such in the 1939 American Iris Society Alphabetical Iris Check List. (The rule that cultivars could not have Latin names came later.) These cultivar names replace the botanical hybrid names.

Of course, when the world reacts it often overreacts. Viosca admitted that he was only referring to the irises that Small named in Louisiana. But many botanists immediately assumed that the irises that Small described from Florida were also hybrids. Dr. Phil Ogilvie championed more investigation into these irises and pointed out that each seemed to be relegated to its own river system in Florida. Henderson recognized Iris savannarum from Florida in The Flora of North American and relegated those other species as synonyms of savannarum. Today some botanists take an extreme view that all these irises are examples of the same species using the name Iris hexagona. So the pendulum swings.

Even botanists using some modern techniques claim Iris nelsoni as nothing but a hybrid Iris x nelsoni. But this stance puts a very rare group of irises from around the Abbeville, Louisiana area at greater risk because how much support can you gather to protect a hybrid versus a species? No one contests that in the past it developed as a hybrid from Iris fulva; but its ecological requirements today are very different, and it certainly plays a different role in the ecosystem. Other species have been shown to have been developed through hybridization, such as Iris versicolor from Iris setosa and Iris virginica.



Iris pallida and Iris variegata the two species that were parents of diploid tall-bearded "species"

Iris x amoena and Iris x squalens two irises resulting from the above cross

Another big group of botanical hybrid names (55) are those relegated to synonymy with Iris x germanica. Sir Michael Foster convincingly showed that a number of diploid tall bearded iris that had previously been called species probably formed as the result of the two diploid species Iris pallida and Iris variegata. The Kew Checklist gives Iris x germanica as the hybrid name for this parentage. When one sees Iris x squalens, Iris x amoena, Iris x neglecta, etc. This seems perfectly reasonable. But there are two other groups that do not fit well in this hypothesis.


“Grandma's Old Blue Iris” a sterile triploid

First is the iris that is widely grown and called Iris germanica. Unfortunately it has no other name to distinguish it except “Grandmas Old Blue Iris” It is often referred to as triploid, and seems totally sterile. Unlike the other “Germanicas” it is an intermediate iris. It is said to have 44 chromosomes. Pallida and Variegata have 24 chromosomes. Many believe it is the product of a 40-chromosome parent (20 chromosome gamete) and a 24-chromosome parent with an unreduced gamete. Iris albicans and Iris florentina share a similar type of background, and are sterile; but presumably come each from a different 40-chromosome parent.

The other group being referred to Iris x germanica are presumably 48-chromosome tall bearded irises. Murray was troubled by the fact that modern tall bearded irises were tetraploid while the earlier TBs were diploid so he proposed a new name Iris x altobarbata, which in Latin means tall-bearded. The Kew Checklist does not accept this name probably on a procedural technicality. Another attempt to name the tetraploid “germanicas” was made by Henderson with his Iris x conglomerata (a name not mentioned in the Kew list. Henderson’s argument was that many species have gone into the TBs including Iris pumila, hence the conglomerate. This name did not follow all the rules of publication.


'Amas', a tetraploid I. germanica

Despite two attempts, no satisfactory name has emerged for this group.  I have yet to see strong evidence that the tetraploids emerged from the combination of Iris pallida and Iris variegata which is how I. x germanica is being defined. There have been several “species” that have been defined as I. germanica. One of the key iris to be added to the pallida/variegata mix that precipitated tetraploid offspring was ‘Amas’ which is probably best viewed as a cultivar. Itself of hybrid origin it did not produce pods but its pollen changed the face of tall-bearded irises by fathering the new tetraploid I. germanica cultivars.

There are a number of irises that were essentially cultivars, and expressed here as botanical hybrids but could be candidates for the name of the 48-chromosome species that are relegated to Iris x germanica if one does not buy into the parentage as resulting from the two diploids  I. pallida and I. variegata.

Like the X-files of TV, the data can be debated. I have just pointed out two botanical hybrid names (Iris x germanica and Iris x violipurpurea) that account for half of the list of 200. There are still many x-names that function admirably to identify groups that originate from a given set of species. And there are also many more that have not been included in the list. But perusing what is listed may widen ones knowledge of various lineages. As agent Molder would say “The truth is out there.” Take a look at the X-Files, here.

Monday, January 31, 2022

Photo Essay: Kleinsorge Browns

by Mike Unser

Dr. Rudolph E. Kleinsorge introduced his creations from 1929 to 1962. He was renowned for his brown and brown-blended irises, many of which were instrumental in the development and advancement of later varieties. In this photo essay, I share a selection of his brown varieties that I grow. They are listed alphabetically with year of introduction in parenthesis.

'Aztec Copper' (1939) displays colors of smoky violet blended with copper.


'Beechleaf' (1955) has a brown self pattern overlaid with violet.


'Black and Gold' (1943) with striking variegata pattern.


'Bryce Canyon' (1944) is named for displaying similar colors to the rock formations in the National Park in Utah.

'Buckskin' (1939) with namesake tan color.


'Calcutta' (1938) has delicate tones of cocoa-brown.

'Crown Prince' (1932) is a variegata with orange-yellow standards and dark, red-brown falls.


'El Paso' (1949) has a luminous, golden-brown color.

'Fortune' (1941) with lively old-gold coloration. 


'Gypsy' (1944) with delicate coppery-gold standards and solid chestnut brown falls.


'Oregon Trail' (1943) was named to honor the 100th anniversary of the Oregon statehood.


'Pretty Quadroon' (1948) in coppery tan with brown beards.


'Thotmes III' (1950) was named for a pharaoh who sent an expedition to gather plants, which included irises.
 

If you would like to learn more about Dr. Kleinsorge, I created a video presentation about his life and legacy in irises.



Monday, January 24, 2022

Let the Iris Buyer Beware

By Bryce Williamson 

There is an old Latin saying, caveat emptor, meaning "let the buyer beware." This phrase reminds us that the buyer assumes risk that a product may fail to meet expectations or have defects. This certainly applies when buying irises, or any plant in general. For that reason, this post will have only one image. It is an image that I detest, though it appears every once in a while usually with one of two comments: "It is real?" or, "Where can I buy this iris?"

This image has been manipulated in a computer to alter the flower's appearence

For the record, the answer to either question is “no.” No iris of this color existsit is a classic example of a “Photoshopped” or computer-manipulated image. Hybridizers would die and go to iris heaven to have a flower of this color. I’ve seen this non-iris offered for as little as $5.00 per plant. Sellers were not only located in the United States of America, but also in many other countries around the world. If you order it, and if it arrives (a very big if), and if it finally blooms, you WILL be disappointed.

Which leads me to another “let the buyer beware” issue that often is a topic on iris sites: Does the iris live up to its picture? The answer to that question is a bit complicated. First, buyers should be aware that images always approximate the flower you will see when the plant blooms. No matter how hard a nursery tries, there are too many factors that affect flower color when it blooms in the garden. These factors include cultural conditions, like soil pH. There are also numerous variables which affect image color when physically printed or uploaded to the World Wide Web. Long ago I had a color cataloguea catalogue printed by one of the top Japanese companiesand images would look different year to year when printed from the same color separations. That talk of color separations will tell you that it was in a different century.

However, a savvy iris buyer can do two things to help himself/herself exercise good judgement. First, learn to recognize a computer-manipulated image. I have firsthand experience with a larger grower that uses images which have little to do with the actual plant. The grower advertises ‘Disco Music,’ an iris I hybridized, registered, and introduced in the 1970’s. The plant sold as ‘Disco Music’ by the larger grower is NOT the iris I introduced. I see numerous complaints from gardeners about this firm shipping poor quality stock, sending the wrong plants; and if they bloom, that flowers have no resemblance to the image in the catalogue. I advocate for having the good sense to spend money at a reliable iris grower: the prices are lower and the quality of the plants is better. If you are new to the iris world, you can reach out to a local iris society (listed by region) or the Iris Lovers group on Facebook and ask for recommendations. 

The second thing to consider is how satisfied you were with a prior purchase. If you do buy irises year after year from one grower and find the images rarely look like the flower when it blooms, then quit being foolish and buy elsewhere. This can also work in reverse--one of the highlights of my last two bloom seasons was a new variety that I would never have bought based on the color image.

That brings me to the final points of this tirade. Pay attention to where you buy. Plant materials are, in theory, inspected, which is especially important for plant material moving between countries. There are many horror stories about plant material from outside a country bringing diseases and unwanted insects into the country. 

A tourist returning from Latin America destroyed many ornamental fuchsias by bringing home a cutting that introduced Aculops fuchsiae, commonly known as fuchsia gall mite. It feeds on fuchsia plants, causing distortion of growing shoots and flowers. It is a horticultural pest. Actually pest is not a strong enough term, but I digress.

Southern California is now fighting the Huanglongbing (HLB) disease which is caused by bacteria spread by insects like the Asian citrus psyllid. HLB is fatal to citrus trees and thousands are being destroyed to prevent its spread beyond quarantine boundaries. I fear that sooner or later, some foolish person will buy a citrus tree in Southern California and bring it, and HLB, into Northern California.

Regulations and quarantines are intended to keep our plants as healthy as possiblebut they only work if we adhere to them. Recently iris nurseries in Australia, where they have a strict and expensive process for importing irises, have found growers buying from out of the country, circumventing the quarantine protocol, and potentially bringing in new diseases and pests. This isn’t responsible behavior, and consequences could be disastrous (as they have been for fuchsias and citrus).

If customs or the various agricultural agencies find seeds and plants brought into the country without the correct certifications, they destroy those items. When asking for a PayPal refund, try explaining, "I was illegally importing plants/seeds and want my money back."

As I wrap this up, please keep in mind the adage, “let the buyer beware”; and “if is too good to be true, most likely it is not true.” I will now step off my soapbox and go back to trying to figure out how to come up with a turquoise iris the hard wayby making lots of crosses. 

Monday, January 17, 2022

Miniature Dwarf Bearded Irises: A Starter Kit

By Tom Waters

This time of year, most gardeners in the northern hemisphere are patiently (or not) waiting for spring to come. If you are a bearded iris enthusiast like me, that probably means you are anticipating the earliest blooming of them all: the delightful miniature dwarfs. 

In the American Iris Society classification system, miniature dwarf bearded (MDB) include bearded irises up to 8 inches (20 cm) in height. Often overshadowed by their larger relations, the standard dwarf bearded (SDB), the MDBs nevertheless offer something special to the iris garden. Many of them bloom before the SDBs, when there is little else in flower. Their daintiness gives them an added charm: some iris enthusiasts are fascinated by tiny flowers and enjoy the surprise of encountering an unexpected bloom in some little corner of the garden. If you try growing an MDB, you'll be glad you did!

But how to get started? Many commercial growers only offer the larger bearded irises, and those that do sell MDBs may have just a few. With SDBs so outnumbering the MDBs, it can take a little extra effort and attention to seek out these tiny gems. In this post, I make a suggestion of a "baker's dozen" MDBs for someone looking to get started. This is not just a list of personal favorites; the irises in the list have been chosen because they represent the full range of the class, in terms of color, form, climate adaptability, genetic type, and historical era. This is important because not all MDBs are alike. Only by sampling a full range of types can you get a good feeling for what the class has to offer and discover your own preferences. All the irises on the list have been available commercially in recent years and are widely grown in gardens where MDBs are found. They should not be too difficult to obtain. 

In addition to the obligatory hybridizer and year, I have also included the ancestry type of each iris in the list. Type I MDBs come from SDB breeding, type II from crosses between SDBs and the species Iris pumila, and type III are pure I. pumila. For a basic introduction to these types, see my earlier blog post Dwarfs for Every Garden. For a more thorough, technical explanation, see my article The Miniature Dwarfs, which first appeared in the 2019 edition of the Dwarf Iris Society Portfolio.

‘Alpine Lake’ photographed by Tom Waters

'Alpine Lake' (A. and D. Willott 1981, type II) is a much-loved classic MDB with crystal white standards and falls with a pastel blue spot. Virus sometimes makes the falls a bit splotchy, depending on weather; but it is still one of the best.

‘Beetlejuice’ photographed by Tom Waters
'Beetlejuice' (P. Black 2013, type I) is a unique plicata with distinctive "whisker" lines on the falls. It sometimes sends up stalks that push the height limit of the class, but the compact shape of the flowers preserves its "dwarf" look.

‘Cinnamon Apples’ photographed by El Hutchison
'Cinnamon Apples' (P. Black 1990, type I), one of Paul Black's earlier creations, is notable for its rich reddish brown color in a class where blue, purple, yellow, and white tend to predominate.

‘Ditto’ photographed by Barbara-Jean Jackson
'Ditto' (B. Hager 1982, type I) is not only a delightful little iris with its cream color and bluish red spot, but it also reblooms in some climates.

‘Dollop of Cream’ photographed by Tom Waters
'Dollop of Cream' (P. Black 2006, type I) is a personal favorite. Earlier than most type I MDBs, it often ushers in the season here. I also appreciate the pastel color and the tasteful ruffling that is not too overdone.

‘Gecko Echo’ photographed by Jeanette Graham
'Gecko Echo'
(B. Kasperek 2007, type I) is unmistakable for its deep mustardy fall spot.

‘Gold Canary’ photographed by Tom Waters
'Gold Canary' (A. and D. Willott 1981, type II) really lights up the garden in early spring. 

‘Hobbit’ photographed by Tom Waters
'Hobbit'
(L. Miller 2004, type III), a tiny (4.5 inches!) blue pumila from Lynda Miller, is one of the best of this type.

‘Icon’ photographed by Tom Waters
'Icon' (Keppel 2008, type I) is a real zinger with its intense orange color and contrasting spot. Also an early bloomer here.

‘Little Drummer Boy’ photographed by Tom Waters
'Little Drummer Boy'
(A. and D. Willott 1997, type III), a striking pumila with deep navy blue spots is an enduring favorite.

‘Royal Wonder photographed by Tom Waters
'Royal Wonder' (C. Coleman 2013, type III) is a robust, floriferous purple pumila - incredible impact for such a little iris.

‘Small Token’ photographed by Tom Waters
'Small Token' (L. Miller 2014, type II) is a rich and subtle red color on a very diminutive plant. Unique!

‘Zipper’ photographed by Jeannette Graham
'Zipper'
(D. Sindt 1979, type II) is a standout with its deep yellow petals and electric violet beards. A true classic.

If you haven't tried the miniature dwarfs, I hope this "starter kit" gives you a good taste of what the class has to offer. If you already grow some, maybe this list will inspire you to pick up a few more and diversify your collection. Mine usually start blooming the last week of March here in northern New Mexico. I'm counting the weeks!