Bill Valvanis "Dwarf Japanese maple" - any idea what cultivar?

[AcerAddict]

Bro...upload your molecular science diploma.

(In my best Pawn Stars voice) "Best I can do is a GED and the 'Picture This' plant identification app."

 

[Emanon]

And now, to beat a dead horse even more severely... I randomly came across a post in a different, unrelated thread by the great @Leo in N E Illinois. It shaded my understanding of the consensus here, so I thought I'd share. It appears that historically, whether a tree was an instance of a particular cultivar has been determined in different ways. Like so many other shifts in naming/thinking, before the shift is not necessarily better than the after -- we always have to ask why the change... (Was the change done, not for the sake of some notion of accuracy, but so that one Monsanto-like company could lay claim to the entirety of a cultivar? Were nursery industry lobbyists involved? Etc.)

Anyway, had the original poster been asking what category (cultivar) his or her tree fell into based on its observed characteristics, this would not have been a wholly inappropriate question, right? In at least one place, at one time, more emphasis was placed on shared characteristics than the presence/evidence of a label at a nursery.

Hopefully, @Leo in N E Illinois doesn't mind me copying and pasting? My apologies if I'm breaking with convention...

"Prior to 1970, Japanese horticulture did not follow the same rules as European-American horticulture. In the USA-EU hort, a cultivar name in single quotes refers to a single clone, a single seedling, of a species. For example Acer palmatum 'Bloodgood' refers to a single seedling of Japanese maple. It was propagated by grafting and meristematic tissue culture to produce literally millions of plants, but they are all genetically identical, they came all from a single seed.​

​

Prior to 1970, Japanese horticulture did not follow this naming convention. If a group of seedlings all happened to have the same important traits, they would often get the same name. For example dwarf flowering quince of genus Chaenomeles, there are a group of clones from a region that as they age beyond 25 years, develop corky bark. These cork bark varieties got the name 'Chojubai'. The best small handful were propagated, but this is the reason that there are 'Chojubai' with scarlet orange flowers, there are clones with much redder flowers, there are a few clones that produce cork bark somewhat younger than the others. There is even a white flowered 'Chojubai'. Since 1970 Japan has adopted the EU-USA naming conventions. Now a days you can buy 'Chojubai Red', Chojubai White', and so on."​

 

[Mikecheck123]

this would not have been a wholly inappropriate question, right?

Exactly. The notion that even wondering about the cultivar is always wrong is just silly.

I ided my yard tree as a sawa chidori and bought another one. And it WAS!

But lots of people in this thread want to tell me that ackshually I have one sawa chidori and one unknown tree. Lol!

But if tomorrow or ten years from now I find a label on the back of the original tree, then it magically and instantaneously becomes a sawa chidori.

It's almost a debate about metaphysics or religion at that point.

 

[Mikecheck123]

And I do want to thank the late Mr. vertrees for his id guide. Couldn't have done it without that in a million years.

You can scream at that thought all you want. But it doesn't change reality: it was right and useful information.

 

[Paradox]

OH MAN! I missed the entire ride. Where have I been?

Lol I saw the first couple of pages when it was started but missed the rest....wow

 

[Leo in N E Illinois]

Thank you @Emanon for quoting me complete enough that the meaning of my post was not altered.

@Mikecheck123 and others, you are missing the point. Provenance is the issue. If I have a registered champion German Shepherd dog, I might sell puppies for $1000 a puppy if sire is also a registered champion. Same dog, if she runs away, and somebody picks her up off the street, no matter how good the puppies look, can't sell them for anything other than mutts, because there is no provenance.

Yes , provenance is arbitrary, but it is a big deal when it comes to pricing cultivars. I deal with orchids. An awarded clone of a orchid cross will be worth hundreds or even thousands when it is a one of a kind. It's value is as propagation stock or as breeding stock for future hybrids. If you loose the name tag, provenance is lost. That thousand dollar orchid becomes no more valuable than a ten dollar grocery store orchids.

So once provenance has been broken. It is unscrupulous, basically dishonest, to falsely relabel a tree with unverified or unprovable name. No reputable nursery would do so. As hobby growers we should not do so. Just accept the fact that we own some lost tag trees. To do anything else would be dishonest.

With bonsai, the appearance of the tree at the exhibit is more important than the genetics of the tree. So for bonsai, the discussion of provenance is not all that important because cultivar information rarely plays any roll in judging the appearance of a bonsai. Only nurserymen and those propagating stock for sale really need to be concerned about provenance.

 

[Mikecheck123]

"can't sell them". RIGHT! That's the entire ball of wax!

But there are more purposes for iding cultivars than selling. I'm not selling!

I'm buying! And curious. For those purposes, iding is ok. And fun!

Why is that such a controversial statement?

 

[Leo in N E Illinois]

"can't sell them". RIGHT! That's the entire ball of wax!

But there are more purposes for iding cultivars than selling. I'm not selling!

I'm buying! And curious. For those purposes, iding is ok. And fun!

Why is that such a controversial statement?

The controversy is because, many of us who have been around the orchid and the bonsai community and the conifer collecting community, there's always somebody new coming along, who is less than careful with names, terminology and labeling, and next thing you know they are selling mislabeled plants. So we take the time to get them to be more correct in handling provenance. Saves time later trying to sort out incorrectly ID'd plants. There's some orchid screw ups that are still resurfacing 75 years after the initial screw ups.

You might not be selling now, but who knows, your heirs might have to sell your trees and not know to warn buyers of the false provenance.

 

[Paradox]

"can't sell them". RIGHT! That's the entire ball of wax!

But there are more purposes for iding cultivars than selling. I'm not selling!

I'm buying! And curious. For those purposes, iding is ok. And fun!

Why is that such a controversial statement?

So how would you feel about buying tree that was labeled as some rare or special cultivar and possibly paying more for it because it was rare or special only to find out later that it was just another run of the mill plant that was neither rare nor special.

That is false advertising. I don't know about you, but I'd be pretty pissed.

Not sure why you're so angry about your plant not being a named cultivar when Bill V himself said its an unnamed cultivar? It otherwise looks like a nice healthy tree that can be made into bonsai. Just enjoy it for what it is?

Keep looking for a Koto Hime that is verified if you really want one. Bill V does sell them that are labeled at times.

 

[Mikecheck123]

So how would you feel about buying tree that was labeled as some rare or special cultivar and possibly paying more for it because it was rare or special only to find out later that it was just another run of the mill plant that was neither rare nor special.

That is false advertising. I don't know about you, but I'd be pretty pissed.

Not sure why you're so angry about your plant not being a named cultivar when Bill V himself said its an unnamed cultivar? It otherwise looks like a nice healthy tree that can be made into bonsai. Just enjoy it for what it is?

Keep looking for a Koto Hime that is verified if you really want one. Bill V does sell them that are labeled at times.

The horse is dead. Selling=bad.

I'm not angry at all. It's a very cool plant. And knowing its non-provenance is very satisfying. I'm glad I asked!

 

[Paradox]

The horse is dead. Selling=bad.

I'm not angry at all. It's a very cool plant. And knowing its non-provenance is very satisfying. I'm glad I asked!

If some day you choose to sell it, you absolutely can, as an unnamed cultivar.

 

[Mikecheck123]

If some day you choose to sell it, you absolutely can, as an unnamed cultivar.

I can also sell it as a kotohime. But I won't.

 

[Lorax7]

I can also sell it as a kotohime. But I won't.

Suppose you put a label on the tree that says kotohime. You don’t sell it, but it gets sold nonetheless to pay for the nursing home bill when you’re 85 and got dementia and, at that point, even you don’t remember anymore that it’s not really a kotohime.

Or maybe you don’t put a label on it, but someday your neighbor asks you, “Can I have a few cuttings from your kotohime?” You oblige and they plant the cuttings. Unbeknownst to you, they stick labels on the trees grown from those cuttings since they’ve always heard you call the tree your “kotohime” without any suggestion that it’s not really a kotohime; it just looks like one. Your neighbor moves away and sells the house to someone who happens to be in the nursery business and they propagate the heck out of those trees for sale.

Do you see why it’s problematic to call it a named cultivar without being certain that it is, in fact (not just in your imagination), that named cultivar?

 

[Bonsai Nut]

Why is that such a controversial statement?

Exactly. I'm not sure why you are struggling with this basic concept. A clone is a clone. Anything not a clone is not a clone. If you don't know whether something is a clone or not, the way you check is not by eye-balling it. Heck, in many cases (like commercial agriculture) different cultivars can be visually IDENTICAL but have very different growth characteristics, resistance to diseases, etc. If I show you two soybean plants - one of which is a GMO immune to Roundup, and the other of which is not, but they are otherwise identical, are you going to ID them for me?

You keep beating this dead horse... and I'm not sure why. Speaking of dead horses, remember Dolly the sheep? First ever mammal cloned from an adult cell. Release Dolly in a field with a bunch of biological siblings. Oops! Which one is Dolly? Dolly cost $100's of millions of dollars... her biological siblings are worth $50. I'll just eyeball them and guess. This one sure LOOKS like Dolly... so it must be her! Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds?

I ided my yard tree as a sawa chidori and bought another one. And it WAS!

You don't know that. You think that. And you will never know - unless you have it tested (here is one example of commercial plant DNA testing). I don't think it is worth the cost... but you can always do it if you are so hung up on determining whether you have a clone... or not.

I have some very interesting trees with unique features that don't have cultivar names. It doesn't bother me. If you find out that the tree in your yard was a seedling... would it become less beautiful to you? I have a friend who has some adult JM in his landscape that he has grown from seed. They are his favorite trees because he selected them when young because they had unique characteristics that were appealing to him. They are more special than cultivars... because they are unique. Maybe think of your tree from Bill Valavanis this way and you will get over the "not a cultivar" hump. Bill hand-selected your tree out of a field of random seedlings. Doesn't that make it uniquely special to you?

And why do I find myself returning to this thread and repeating myself over and over? I don't want someone to come to this site, read part of this thread, and come away with incorrect information on what is a basic tenet of horticulture. You CANNOT visually identify a cultivar.

 

[Mikecheck123]

Exactly. I'm not sure why you are struggling with this basic concept. A clone is a clone. Anything not a clone is not a clone. If you don't know whether something is a clone or not, the way you check is not by eye-balling it. Heck, in many cases (like commercial agriculture) different cultivars can be visually IDENTICAL but have very different growth characteristics, resistance to diseases, etc. If I show you two soybean plants - one of which is a GMO immune to Roundup, and the other of which is not, but they are otherwise identical, are you going to ID them for me?

You keep beating this dead horse... and I'm not sure why. Speaking of dead horses, remember Dolly the sheep? First ever mammal cloned from an adult cell. Release Dolly in a field with a bunch of biological siblings. Oops! Which one is Dolly? Dolly cost $100's of millions of dollars... her biological siblings are worth $50. I'll just eyeball them and guess. This one sure LOOKS like Dolly... so it must be her! Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds?


You don't know that. You think that. And you will never know - unless you have it tested (here is one example of commercial plant DNA testing). I don't think it is worth the cost... but you can always do it if you are so hung up on determining whether you have a clone... or not.

I have some very interesting trees with unique features that don't have cultivar names. It doesn't bother me. If you find out that the tree in your yard was a seedling... would it become less beautiful to you? I have a friend who has some adult JM in his landscape that he has grown from seed. They are his favorite trees because he selected them when young because they had unique characteristics that were appealing to him. They are more special than cultivars... because they are unique. Maybe think of your tree from Bill Valavanis this way and you will get over the "not a cultivar" hump. Bill hand-selected your tree out of a field of random seedlings. Doesn't that make it uniquely special to you?

And why do I find myself returning to this thread and repeating myself over and over? I don't want someone to come to this site, read part of this thread, and come away with incorrect information on what is a basic tenet of horticulture. You CANNOT visually identify a cultivar.

Since this has now become the Deceased Horse Whipping Club, my response will be the same from here on out:

It is possible, and I've done it.

 

[Bonsai Nut]

Since this has now become the Deceased Horse Whipping Club, my response will be the same from here on out:

It is possible, and I've done it.

No it's not... and you haven't. What you have done is looked at a tree and said "wow this looks like a Sawa chidori". I can walk down my neighborhood street and do as much... "wow all of these trees look like Bloodgoods".

There is a world of difference between looking like something, and BEING something.