Thanks, Kerry! Olive seems to be growing them better than I am. ;-)

As to names, most of them don't have one, but the first Bill looks like the one I'm calling Encore. There were a bunch of fairly nice ones in that grex, but I don't believe in naming or propagating a whole bunch of similar-looking clones. I'll usually pick out the 2 or 3 most distinctive ones and get rid of the rest. Same with the Aechmea and xCanmea crosses. I do have named selections of some of those now, but I was just in the early stages of propagating them when they came to visit, so the ones they took home were most likely culls.

I am planning to name that Ae. c-a x Bert cross, but I haven't done so yet. There were 4 different clones, but at least 3 of them are so similar I can't really tell them apart, so I think I'll just name the grex and number them.

Sorry I can't be of more help, and I realize this is why you should never release anything without a name, but with some of these things the culls are too nice to just toss on the trash pile, so if somebody wants to give me cash for them am I going to tell them no? I don't think so..... ;-)

Thanks for that interesting information, Lisa.

Now I understand better why some of our special imports of various hybrids do not look quite the same as those supposed same broms photographed by the original source, or country of origin - quite a revelation, and admittedly, somewhat disappointing for me. The term 'superior clone', used by some importers, now makes more sense.

I fully understand your situation, and, if offered cash for tagged 'culls', I would probably sell them too. It's just a pity we don't get the full story here by the sellers. BUT, better to have inferior stock, than none?.....

Cheers,
Kerry

Yeah, they're really not that "inferior". If they were, I'd throw them out. It's really difficult to decide what to do when you get a bunch of nice ones but they're not that distinct. I don't want to register them all, but I hate to just throw all that hard work down the drain too. I know we've already talked about this ad nauseum, but I don't think the issue is ever going to go away, just for practical and economic reasons.

Looking at that second Bill now, it looks like some of the seedlings that I grew of Domingos Martins. They were self-pollinated but there was still quite a bit of variation-- some greener, some blacker, some with a pinkish tinge like the one above, some more spotty or less, with varying degrees of silver banding. Since DM selfs so easily and sets up so quickly it's hard to resist collecting seeds from it, but so far none of them has ever been quite as nice as the original, so I always put "F2" on the tag, even though it's a species. I know I tagged everything that Olive and the others bought from me, so if it was a cross with something else it would say so.

lisa i know what a F2 is but what do you mean when you said "so I always put "F2" on the tag, even though it's a species". the part that through me was the "even though it's a species". if you could explain i would love it.

Phil, the term F2 is usually used to mean a hybrid that has been self-pollinated. This rescrambles the genetic material from the various species that make up its background, so the resulting seedlings will not be identical to the parent. The more complex the parentage of the hybrid is, i.e. the more different species involved, the more diversity you will get from the F2 generation.

With a species, on the other hand, there is no diversity in its background, so a self-pollination should produce a fairly uniform population. A selfed seedling of B. vittata is still B. vittata, so there's no need to add F2 to the name. Domingos Martins is a cultivar of B. vittata (not a hybrid), so theoretically it should come pretty true too, but none of my seedlings look exactly like the parent. Pretty close, but I would be disappointed if I bought one expecting it to look exactly like the original. That's why I add F2 to the tag so people will know it's not the same clone.

I don't know what the official rules are in cases like this, but a cultivar is supposed to be a distinct and recognizeable clone that has been propagated vegetatively (by pups), so it doesn't seem right to call a variable seed-grown population all 'Domingos Martins'. They're still all B. vittata, but there are other forms of vittata too, so that didn't seem like enough either. If anyone here is fluent in the rules of botanical nomenclature, please chime in!

I'm not fluent on the rules of botanical nomenclature, Lisa, but I see your point in using F2 in this extenuated case.
I'm sorry for using the word "inferior" for your culls - you know I think those that Olive has are wonderful :)
Perhaps I should have used the cumbersome term "not distinctive enough"?

Yes, Olive did say that the D.M. F2 bill was tagged as such. I particularly like the slight pink flush, and when I finally get to purchase one, I will think of it as a superior cull :)

Cheers,
Kerry

No need to apologize, Kerry, I didn't take it that way at all. Until I have named them I don't really consider them "my hybrids" anyway. After all, it wasn't me who combined the DNA, I'm just the one who makes the selections!