Siberian irises are superb landscape plants! Their
persistently neat, stiff, grasslike foliage is an asset to the
perennial border throughout the entire growing season.
Individual Siberian iris varieties bloom for a period of about
seven to twenty-one days. The foliage, however, should be
attractive for 150 to 180 days.
The garden judging section of the Handbook for Judges and Show
Officials assigns 40 points to the plant. This is divided as 15
points for garden effect, vigor, and stamina; 10 points for
foliage; and 15 points for stalk, buds and branching. However,
our catalogs and checklists place almost exclusive emphasis on
the the flowers, with very little mention of the quality of the
cultivar in the landscape. Although garden judges can and do
make significant efforts to include landscape qualities in
considering plants in the AIS awards system, it is often only on
extended observation of a variety that a home gardener can get
any idea of its specific vigor and growth habits.
A reasonable approach may be to adopt some sort of rating
system. Other plant societies have set a precedent; e.g., the
American Rhododendron Society rates flowers and foliage on
separate 1-5 scales. Ratings have the advantage of being easily
compared and the disadvantage of being taken to mean other
things than they actually do. Also, providing additional
information in any form always carries with it the risks of
error, misjudgment, and evaluations that pertain to conditions
that differ from where the plant is finally grown.
Nevertheless, those of us who have gotten to know the habits of
many Siberian irises have developed a body of knowledge about
their behavior which could be of great value to home landscapers.
The ideal rating system should be both simple and unambiguous.
Providing a single number from 1-5 would be a step forward and
simple, but would not tell much about the plant and what earned
it a high or low rating. Writing detailed descriptions of each
plant's habits could allow thorough evaluations, but could
consume extensive space and time, of both raters and readers.
The system described here is based on 1-5 ratings in three
areas: plant vigor and clumping, foliage habits, and bloom
habits.
Plant vigor and clumping: Vigorous plants that quickly
establish well-formed clumps rate a 5. Slower growing plants
that may take longer to reach good form and may also go longer
before division are represented by lower numbers. Some
gardeners who are eager to avoid the rampant growth of some
varieties may seek out those rated as 4 and 3.
Foliage habits: Clean, stiffly upright foliage is rated 5.
Foliage that arches slightly but stands up well through the
season is rated 4, and may be preferred by some for its grace.
Lower numbers indicate greater arching, tendency to collapse in
late summer, and/or greater than average susceptibility to
foliage problems.
Bloom habits: Varieties that hold their flowers above the
foliage, preferably on branched stalks that distribute the bloom
attractively, receive the higher numbered ratings in this
category.
Such a rating is not intended by any means to be complete in
itself, but instead to complement the information that is
already available, which usually includes AIS awards received, a
good description of the flower, the height, the ploidy, the
season of bloom, and whether there is a tendency to repeat
bloom.
One of the most challenging aspects of reporting these
characteristics is the variation that results from different
growing environments. At the national convention in Portland,
for example, some varieties were clearly much more vigorous than
they are in Maryland. Consequently, there is a very legitimate
question about whether a home landscaper would be best served by
a single rating for each variety, perhaps coordinated by an SSI
panel, or if it is better to depend instead on independent
evaluations done by a nearby grower.
A first effort at rating 60 of the varieties in the Draycott
Gardens catalog has been completed over the last two years. It
is based entirely on local conditions and at present makes no
attempt to include information from other regions. We welcome
all levels of reactions to the experiment--if the initial
ratings correspond to others' experiences, if this system could
be improved upon, and if the idea is worthwhile.