difference between C. corsicus from C. imperati 'de Jagar'?

gentiaan bulborum bulborum@gmail.com
Mon, 08 Mar 2010 13:27:04 PST
Crocus imperati ‘de Jager’ is a clone

Crocus minimus is smaller as corsicus
and minimus is flowering before  corsicus
minimus also grows on Sardinia  corsicus not
and minimus grows from seashore till 400 meter
corsicus from 300 to 2000 meter


Roland
bulborum@gmail.com


2010/3/8 Jim McKenney <jimmckenney@jimmckenney.com>

> Rimmer asked about the difference between Crocus imperati ‘de Jager’ (note
> the spelling of the name and see below for another comment on the name) and
> Crocus corsicus.
>
>
>
> It’s simple, Rimmer. Crocus corsicus has 2N=18, Crocus imperati has 2N=26!
>
>
>
> OK, that was a joke.
>
>
>
> Before I get into trying to explain the differences I know, note that C.
> imperati de Jager is almost certainly a clone and thus varies little,
> whereas C. corsicus is a sexually reproducing wild crocus, a species, and
> as
> such shows variation. One consequence of that is that it is relatively easy
> to describe or recognize C. imperati de Jager, but much less easy to define
> or recognize C. corsicus. Also, as crocuses go, these two species are
> closely related and share many characteristics.
>
>
>
> There are two ways in which these are relatively distinct: for one, as I
> know them the flower of C. imperati ‘de Jager’ is larger than that of C.
> corsicus. If one of the two blossoms you have is noticeably larger than the
> other, it’s probably C. imperati ‘de Jager’. The other difference is the
> time of bloom:  C. imperati ‘de Jager’ is a winter blooming form (here
> typically in early January if the weather allows; this year the weather
> definitely did not allow!) whereas C. corsicus blooms much later.
>
>
>
> Can you send some pictures?
>
>
>
> It’s worth noting that the old firm of Peter de Jager listed this variety
> (at least in the fall 1966 catalog)  as ‘DE JAGERS VAR’ (sic).  Also, I
> have
> long believed that this cultivar ‘de Jager’ is the modern incarnation of
> the
> plant Bowles knew as monophyllus. Can anyone confirm this? This cultivar
>  is
> deliciously scented (probably because it is a form or hybrid of what was
> once called C. suaveolens, a species noted for its fragrance; Mathew made
> C.
> suaveolens a form of C. imperati, thus the continued use of the name C.
> imperati for this plant).
>
>
>
> Jim McKenney
>
> jimmckenney@jimmckenney.com
>
> Montgomery County, Maryland, USA, 39.03871º North, 77.09829º West, USDA
> zone
> 7
>
> My Virtual Maryland Garden http://www.jimmckenney.com/
>
> BLOG! http://mcwort.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
> Webmaster Potomac Valley Chapter, NARGS
>
> Editor PVC Bulletin http://www.pvcnargs.org/
>
>
>
> Webmaster Potomac Lily Society http://www.potomaclilysociety.org/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> pbs mailing list
> pbs@lists.ibiblio.org
> http://pacificbulbsociety.org/list.php
> http://pacificbulbsociety.org/pbswiki/
>


More information about the pbs mailing list