Hi again everyone, Pinkbroms, on your last posting - well put, I couldn't agree more. Lisa, you asked the question "what do you say if you want to tell someone "I grow over 500 different _______ of bromeliads"? At that time I suggested that "varieties" in the common sense would be the most easily understood by the layman. Can you think of a better term, Paul?" (ie a better term if we ditched the term "variety") It's a good question isn't it? All very nice for me to rabbit-on theorising, but this is where the rubber really hits the road. Well, the reason I've taken so long to reply is that I've been puzzling over it all day, trying different terms to fill the space and not being able to come up with something that works, until it finally occurred to me that the situation that I was trying to describe (how many broms someone might have) is actually something that is quite complex when you get into it, as shown in this discussion, and probably different in every single case. So, what I finally realised I was tring to do was to describe a complex, variable situation accurately with a single word that everybody would understand. When I put it like that, I came to the conclusion that try as I might, it just ain't gonna happen. The only way I can think of to deal with a situation like that is to just use simple everyday words that only have a single meaning and completely ditch the terminology, including ditching everyday words that are also used as terminology, then take the time to explain it simply to the level of detail that suits the situation. Something like "Hey, I have about 2,500 brom plants in my front yard. There are 30 different ones, and all the rest are Aechmea gamosepala" .... person 2: "Wow, what do you do with all of those Eekmee whats-its?" ... me: "Not much, but the deer like pulling their flowers out and it takes their attention away from the other ones" ....person 2: "Cool, what about the other 30?" ....me: "Well, there are a few different Vrieseas with different leaf patterns, and the rest are mainly Neoregelias, some of them are quite different, but most of them look pretty similar with only small differences between them" ....person 2: "Hey, those Vrieseas sound interesting - what are they like?" ....me: "Well, three of them are different clones of Vriesea fosteriana, which means that they have lots of fine purple squiggly lines on the leaves and these are arranged in broader bands, but the different ones have big differences in the amounts of white between the bands and they stay like that in the pups they produce ......." And so on, and on, for as long as needed. I did sneak one bit of terminology in there - "clones" - but I needed to immediately explain exactly what I meant by it in this context, in simple everyday words. I really can't think of any other way to deal with this sort of situation. Having gone through this has made me realise that with a lot of these sorts of things, maybe we just get so involved and interested and close to it that we start to take it for granted and forget just how complex it all really is. Then, when we try to describe it simply with a single word, it just does not work. What do you think? Please pull apart my little explanation - I'd love to hear any other thoughts on the matter. Hope this helps. Cheers, Paul

Steve, you have me scracting my head and thinking more now going back to what i was trying to ssy but have hard time finding proper way. So DNA can change ? I go back now to wonder say a Mission fig if could be traced to be from its roots oversea's and then another growing here that was brought here and can be said for absolute what would the DNA markers say there realted close or maybe exact match? I go back and copy and paste what i said about this as if i try to type it again it might mean something different so .... i tend to lean this way-- DNA may say 2 types are very close and related but not the same, could tree have evolved elsewhere and somehow change to that climate making some markers not exactly alike as if grown i different area's same tree accimilated to the soil and therfore fruit color and leaf color are different-Example as its often heard here that 2 same types grown in different area's have a different leave or slightly different fruit color or even shape. I will be able to see if this is true along with others here as have sent 1 particular tree across country and up as far as Canada, so maybe in 3 or 4 years they can be compared to 1 another, a DNA test of that tree and mine i wonder what would show up in say 50 years from now if both trees survived just a thought that i wll never know answer too. END So i truly wonder if we are now seeing this in the fig world where tree's are very close match as UCDavis studies have found in some types, there was a discussion about how Dark Portuguese and i believe but could be wrong as its been a while since i read that post and Sals were very close i think it was Sals but not sure which. Perhaps this is slowloy happening or maybe just hogwash on my part of thinking? Martin

Vero, The link between K and nm is for blackbody radiation. This is the distribution of light given off by a warm or hot object, and the peak wavelength in nm is exactly related to the temperature in K. Fluorescents give off a different distribution of wavelengths but it is averaged out and then labelled with the temperature of the most similar blackbody radiation. Manufacturers make bulbs with different spectrums to look better (or cheaper but not so good) for humans. All fluorescents are not made with the same exact same red and blue phosphors, but the vast majority of compact fluorescents are made with the exact same three red, green, and blue phosphors, and are called triphosphor lamps. The proportions are varied to produce a more reddish or more bluish light. Straight fluorescent tubes are more easily available with different phosphors. The oldest design called halophosphors do not produce a very nice light for humans, it distorts colours (low CRI around 50), doesn't show reds very well, and tends to make everything look grey. A better design was produced and labelled deluxe (CRI around 80). Many straight tubes and virtually all domestic compact fluorescent now use the triphosphor phosphors (CRI 80-85). Using special (ie. expensive) blends of phosphors, fluorescents can be produced with CRI above 90 and these are used where colours must be shown accurately, for shop displays, design workshops, etc. They are also marketed for domestic use for hobbies like sewing and for use on plants. The benefits of high CRI for plants, other than making flowers look the right colour, are still debated. The Gro-Lux fluorescent range is made with different phosphors that are better suited to plants but no so visible to humans, hence they look dim although they are producing about the same amount of light. The CRI is ridiculously low since the light looks nothing like a continuous white spectrum. Which spectrum is best for plants? Are they all the same? There is reason to think that some wavelengths of light are better for plants than others. Plants photsynthesize best with certain wavelengths of red and blue light, although they also use other wavelengths. In addition, aspects of plant growth like height, leaf size, and flowering, are controlled by some types of blue light and particularly by the ralative levels of red and far red light. Fluorescent phosphors are mostly designed to be good for humans to see and thes happen not to be the best wavelnegths for plants. The Gro Lux designs try to produce the best wavelengths for plants. In the scheme of things, many people have tried to calculate which type of fluorescent is best for plants, with many different results. There clearly isn't a massive difference, but there does seem to be a difference. Back to your original question about which tube to use. The Octron bulbs are clearly design for people. The Eco 32W tube is designed to produce the right amount of light for a typical domestic fluorescent application but using 32W instead of the 40W that such tubes used to use. The Supersaver Eco goes one step further and only uses 30W, but notice it produces fractionally less light and a slightly lower CRI. For plants you want maximum light so you can ignore the Supersaver Eco. The T12 produces more light because it uses more power, but you should be aware that the tubes are 50% thicker and so the light is less intense. Depending on your application, it is probably better to use the T8s, and use more of them if you need more light. You have noticed that the mean lumens is lower on the T12. Fluorescent tubes get dimmer as they get older, typically by 20% to 30% over the life of the tube. Mean lumens is the brightness you should expect at 40% of the life of the tube. The best fluorescent tubes now decrease by less than 10% over their life and you can see this with the Octron tubes. Standard practive used to be to throw out the tubes after a couple of thousand hours and replace them with a new bright tube, but this is not really necessary if you use a tube like the Octron that keeps its brightness. The Octron, btw, is a triphosphor tube. I would suggest choosing the 4100K, although you can mix and match if you like. If you want to widen your search, it is possible to find a few true 40W T8 tubes, but check that they produce around 3500 initial lumens or you might be buying an old design that just uses more electricity and doesn't produce any more light. The Gro Lux, as I mentioned before, look dim because they are designed for plants, not people. Looking dim to people means less lumens because thats what lumens measure, but they do produce just as much light for plants. I can't tell you whether Gro Lux is definitely best. I don't use them, I get good results growing cactus and succulent seedlings under a mix of 6500K and 3000K triphosphors. Other people use Gro Lux and swear they are the greatest. Very few people grow side by side with the two types and really that is the only way to know which is best. You sound like you have an inquisitive mind, maybe you could do that and we would love to hear the results :)

A couple of notes because the rest is going to be rather long and involved: Lynda, I have the Vitex marked for you and in your baggie! And thank you for the marigolds! They will be very interesting with my others! Dessie I would be more than happy to receive your little helper's seed packets! I think it's great! Wendy Try some Chai Spice tea, it works wonders in helping clear up colds and flu. I always add a dollop of honey to help sooth the throat. It's a staple in our house and really does help. Alright, here is my take on this.. I can understand how many were hoping that the two swaps would not coincide, but, we all knew there was a fair chance of that happening. For myself, I know that I continued to update my list, even well after Patty's swap's mailing deadline. I did my updates using the same method we did for Patty's swap- using an updated date. Even had I not, I knew there was a good chance the two swaps would overlap. I joined this one knowing full well- according to the guidelines posted for it- that I may NOT receive as many as I sent in. That I would receive as many as were sent in FOR me, up to five packets of the SAME item. I recall there being some issue with this and a member who became very rude in their comments about this fact. Yes, my package from the What's Left swap is in the second batch to go out. No, I did not keep strict record of what I sent to those who were in the What's Left swap. I did keep better records of what I'm sending for this swap. I also know that a lot of people will be sending in baggies of seeds marked as extras- not dedicated for anyone, but to add in when it's seen those items are on someone's list. No, these may not be some of the rarer or more exclusively wanted items on someone's list. But if someone has some of those rarer or more specific items to share, I'm sure they would have put them into your baggie before they mailed. So, I don't see that anyone would be missing out on anything. The only way I could see having updated one's list further as complicating Patty's swap would be if someone had removed things from their list. Updating and adding items would not have conflicted. Because if there were any extras of what you were wanting, Patty would have included them. So, I guess I'm not really understanding how there is such a need to update the lists just because one is in both swaps. If I receive duplicates, wonderful! Because the things on my list are things I want! If I don't receive something on my list, then no one had it to share. If I receive so many of something that I can't plant it all, then I can bless someone else by offering it up for a trade. So, perhaps I'm being dense here, but how would one not receive something sent in specifically for them (up to FIVE packets of the same item!) that was on their wants list in this swap? Everyone has the chance to see your wants as posted and you have had the option to add to that list, as many including myself have this whole time. The only thing I could really see the two swaps happening almost simultaneously possibly affecting would be one's have's list. I'm sorry, I don't mean to upset or offend anyone. I'm just honestly trying to understand why this is such an issue. So please don't take this as meaning to offend or as pointed to anyone in particular. This is just me trying to understand why so many are upset about this. If you prefer to email me privately and help me understand it, I would be pleased with that and please do! Perhaps there are aspects and issues with this that I'm not readily seeing and should consider. I don't want to keep the thread off track by my question becoming a debate here. Perhaps there can be some adjustments of dates if this swap happens in the late summer or again next winter, but for this year it is as it is and personally, I'm really enjoying it! Nancy, I hope you don't decide to drop out, because I know that I should have at least a couple of things from your list, perhaps more. But I'll respect your choice and be your Garden Buddy either way :) Fran, you have a real job ahead of you and I don't know how those like you and Patty do it! Leave me hosting my "pair em up and let em go" or true RR type swaps! I think those of you that host this kind of swap are awesome! Angela, you have been a wonderful help to Fran and all of us in this swap! I know the time it can take to code pages like that, though updates are easier once the initial work is done, and I want to say THANK YOU for the time and work you are putting in on this swap for everyone's benefit! Kathy~ heading off to stuff more little baggies and envelopes.