Spikeys Listing

[Rick Goodenough]

Has anyone seen a recent listing of spikeys or be willing to post such a list here? This is an April 2015 shot of one I grow, G. 'Windmill'.

Thanks in advance,

Rick

[Brian Ellis]

Not a list of Spikeys, but two of the most amazing - 'The Alburgh Claw' and 'Boyd's Double' are listed and shown amongst these:
http://www.srgc.net/forum/index.php?topic=11041.msg287818#msg287818

Immediate thoughts are also 'Irish Green' and 'Jade Feather' but the brain is still waking up

[Rick Goodenough]

Not a list of Spikeys, but two of the most amazing - 'The Alburgh Claw' and 'Boyd's Double' are listed and shown amongst these:
http://www.srgc.net/forum/index.php?topic=11041.msg287818#msg287818

Immediate thoughts are also 'Irish Green' and 'Jade Feather' but the brain is still waking up

Many thanks Brian. Great to see the listing you compiled. What a collection that would make! I know spikeys are not appreciated by all, but I do think they have their place, if only as a curiosity. Not sure what I can contribute, but I am willing to help with compiling a known spikeys listing here if there is interest.

By the way, this most recognizable listing is an incredible photo resource for many of us who have not seen many of them except in the random photograph. Thank you again for your efforts.

Rick

[Maggi Young]

Quite agree with Rick about the  usefulness of that thread - have set it "sticky" so it's easier to find.

[Brian Ellis]

Many thanks Brian. Great to see the listing you compiled. What a collection that would make! I know spikeys are not appreciated by all, but I do think they have their place, if only as a curiosity. Not sure what I can contribute, but I am willing to help with compiling a known spikeys listing here if there is interest.

By the way, this most recognizable listing is an incredible photo resource for many of us who have not seen many of them except in the random photograph. Thank you again for your efforts.

Rick

Thanks Rick but it was a combined effort by many members, most of whom seem to have moved to FB

[loes]

Oh yes, a spikies list! I would love that.
There's Fuzz, Luke, Anglesey's double spiky,Cockatoo, Ermine Spiky, Windmill, Raggamuffin


And fb is great

[Rick Goodenough]

Thank you Loes for getting us moving on it. Before we get too far out of the gate, it will be helpful for some consensus on what is in and what can be included and what should not be included on this list.

One of the challenges in putting a spikey list together is the definition of spikey doubles. Here is a snippet of what the John Grimshaw, Matt Bishop and Aaron Davis Snowdrops book says on keying them out from the more typical normal doubles. P.120 section F. Abnormal Doubles is broken into two sub categories, F1., those that are Intermediate doubles such as G. nivalis ‘Blewbury Tart’ and F2., Spikey doubles such as G. nivalis ‘Irish Green’. “The majority of plants in the intermediate division (F1) are constant, while the majority of spikey doubles (F2) are not; exceptions are indicated where relevant.”

There are other clarifying comments in this and in another section of the book, so please reference that if you can. Because these categories are both considered Abnormal doubles, does it make sense to compile a combined listing, or would the preference be to only list the spikey doubles (F2) here?  It is interesting to note that G. nivalis 'Walrus' is in the category of normal double so would not be included in either of these abnormal sections. This might be fun.

Comments please.

Rick

[Rick Goodenough]

Thanks Rick but it was a combined effort by many members, most of whom seem to have moved to FB

Brian, thanks for clarifying and I had read your many attributions to so many others within the string. Nicely done. Regarding Face Book, I am laughing as there are pros and cons for participating in both, but clearly each currently has some features the other lacks. Searching in Facebook is quite difficult if one goes back over a few weeks, but specific document can be placed in the "Files" folder for easy reference. This Forum format lends itself to cumulative knowledge. In contrast, Face Book seems to be rather focused on the here and now and the flash of a photo which quickly disappears behind new posts.

Relative ease of posting photos on Face Book is a huge draw in that it requires no re-sizing. Conversely, the Forum format requires re-sizing and one must take a few extra minutes in order to post a photo. Face Book is good for both experienced galanthophiles as well as newbies with the experience levels often at a less experienced level on Face Book. This is perfect for America as there are relatively few experienced galanthofiles here. The Forum platform seems to cater to users who are further seasoned in the science and art of the sport. Certainly not universal truth, but just my personal take in experiencing both formats.

So I do not see it as either/or, but for me to happily move from one to the other is to experience a wider range of information to see photos of these fine plants.

Rick

Rick

[Alan_b]

Immature doubles often appear spikey, or more spikey than their mature form.  So if you see something that you think might have the makings of a spikey double it's particularly important to observe it for a few years.

[Brian Ellis]

Brian, thanks for clarifying and I had read your many attributions to so many others within the string. Nicely done. Regarding Face Book, I am laughing as there are pros and cons for participating in both, but clearly each currently has some features the other lacks. Searching in Facebook is quite difficult if one goes back over a few weeks, but specific document can be placed in the "Files" folder for easy reference. This Forum format lends itself to cumulative knowledge. In contrast, Face Book seems to be rather focused on the here and now and the flash of a photo which quickly disappears behind new posts.

Relative ease of posting photos on Face Book is a huge draw in that it requires no re-sizing. Conversely, the Forum format requires re-sizing and one must take a few extra minutes in order to post a photo. Face Book is good for both experienced galanthophiles as well as newbies with the experience levels often at a less experienced level on Face Book. This is perfect for America as there are relatively few experienced galanthofiles here. The Forum platform seems to cater to users who are further seasoned in the science and art of the sport. Certainly not universal truth, but just my personal take in experiencing both formats.

So I do not see it as either/or, but for me to happily move from one to the other is to experience a wider range of information to see photos of these fine plants.

Rick

Rick

I see your point Rick, I would hope that others would also  take your point and post in both too... or perhaps they do?  I understand that the big drawback of FB is the ability to search which is so useful on Scottish Rock, especially when an unknown name appears and you want to see what it is really like.

Others to add to F2 'Frank Turner', 'Ragamuffin' and (I think?) 'The Bogeyman'

[Rick Goodenough]

Thank you, Brian. Not sure that most folks post in both, in fact, I think it is too often either/or. I can attest to your point on finding esoteric plants, that this forum is the only place to go and I hope it will not be diminished over time due to FB only posts.

Rick

[Maggi Young]

Rick, folks like yourself are in the minority for posting in both places - your dedication is noted and MUCH appreciated.

There is emphasis placed on  SRGC being present in the various social media  - on the grounds that  this is "modern" or  "more likely to appeal to younger people"  and I certainly devote plenty time to attempting to achieve that on Facebook and Twitter  for the Club - but I am not at all convinced of the true value.  Yes, picture sharing is simple, yes, it's all easy from your  smart phone ( or so I'm told!!)  but what we have here in the forum is  something that is open to all, building, along with our website, a wonderful resource and archive of information. Too often, even on FB where longer texts are possible, any really useful info just disappears into a closed group. Even in a public group, info is  terribly hard to find, even after only an hour or so, let alone years. The information gathered here in the forum on any number of subjects, is immense - and worth the existence of this place, even without considering the  meeting place for  plant lovers that it has provided all these years. What the future holds is a mystery to us all but at least  the likes of you and others have  made a lasting contribution here to plant knowledge and the exchange of experience.

[Rick Goodenough]

OK folks, here is an initial listing of the (F2) Spikey Doubles. Please know that each entry has not been verified or corroborated and that is why we are calling it a working list until we reach some consensus. Likely none of us have experience growing all of these and so we need to gather your input as to whether any or all should be included on this listing. Also, please comment on other spikeys not on this initial list so that we can round it out in the coming weeks. Is anyone aware of a spikey double specialist who could give considerably more guidance on this topic than I am able to provide?

The purpose is to:

identify named spikey doubles (F2) in existence
help to confirm those on the list are in fact in the correct (F2) category
create a resource for access to all interested


Initial Working List of Proposed Category F2 Spikeys as of December 19, 2016 (as updated December 20, 2016)
Scottish Rock Garden Club

‘Alburgh Claw’
‘Anglesey's Double Spikey’ – is this the actual name? (December 19, 2016 confirmed by Brian Ellis as correct based on his records)
‘Boyd’s Double’
‘Broske’
‘Bunch’
‘Cockatoo’
‘Ermine Oddity’ – is this the actual name? Does it exist?
‘Ermine Spikey’
'Frank Turner'
‘Fuzz’
‘Hedgehog’
‘Irish Green’
‘Jade Feather’
‘Looking Around’
‘Lovely Rika’
‘Luke’
‘Narwhal’
‘Ragamuffin’
'Samantha'  (added December 19, 2016 by Emma Thick)
‘Spanish Swan’
'The Bogeyman'
'Tinus'
‘Tutu’
‘Windmill’
‘Woozle’

[Rick Goodenough]

Rick, folks like yourself are in the minority for posting in both places - your dedication is noted and MUCH appreciated.

There is emphasis placed on  SRGC being present in the various social media  - on the grounds that  this is "modern" or  "more likely to appeal to younger people"  and I certainly devote plenty time to attempting to achieve that on Facebook and Twitter  for the Club - but I am not at all convinced of the true value.  Yes, picture sharing is simple, yes, it's all easy from your  smart phone ( or so I'm told!!)  but what we have here in the forum is  something that is open to all, building, along with our website, a wonderful resource and archive of information. Too often, even on FB where longer texts are possible, any really useful info just disappears into a closed group. Even in a public group, info is  terribly hard to find, even after only an hour or so, let alone years. The information gathered here in the forum on any number of subjects, is immense - and worth the existence of this place, even without considering the  meeting place for  plant lovers that it has provided all these years. What the future holds is a mystery to us all but at least  the likes of you and others have  made a lasting contribution here to plant knowledge and the exchange of experience.

Thank you, Maggi and the points you and Brian raise on the encyclopedic resource nature of this forum is accurate and it is truly an invaluable tool. SnapApp is the new Face Book for much of the younger crowd and it has even less capacity for data storage/retrieval, in fact the photos/data vanishes intentionally within a minute or so. So people will always need a repository for useful research. Do you happen to know if the developer of the netware that this forum runs on is making further developments to this platform? I hope so, as it would be a shame for certain functionality limitations to reduce participation due to the technology alone.

Please let me add my thanks to you for your tireless and likely too often unappreciated efforts in managing this forum. It is a pleasure indeed to participate.

Rick

edit by maggi : thanks Rick - yes we hope and expect that SMF will continue to make improvements that we can use in this forum.

[Brian Ellis]

‘Anglesey's Double Spikey’ – is this the actual name?

That's what I have it as.  I'm sure it's right.