Clone numbering system

[linuxman]

Hi,

Is there any system for clone numbering? For example to take one of Mike King's clones described as:

F27A All red form, Blackwater State Forest Park.(W).

Does everyone use this number or does each new collection start their own system? Would sure be easier if F27A (for instance) meant the same everywhere! What do others think?

Regards,

[LJ]

I'm not sure it would be easier if everyone used these codes - some big growers have already labelled their plants and wouldnt rename them to suit someone else's codes, plus they will have some plants that are different and wouldnt fit with the original codes. Codes are handy so the plant can be tracked back to Mike King. I dont have a code system for my plants but I do keep a note of the sellers code if they have one. I wouldnt use the same one as someone else though, they're more useful when people have seperate ones IMO, unless you have a massive colletion there no real need. May be handy if you have the same plants from different sources or even lots of seedlings you need to distinguish between - I get round the problem by keeping a list of my plants and making sure all the relevant info is on the label such as the sellers details then I can easily ID them, sometimes labelling clone A, B, C etc......

[Phil Green]

Yeh, everyone tends to use their own system.

Johns De-confusifier should help some.

http://www.johnjearrard.co.uk/plants/sarra...onfusifier.html

[linuxman]

Hi,

You're probably right LJ that no one's going to use somebody else's system. But like you say getting similar plants from different growers and not knowing if they're the same can be frustrating. I've started my own numbering system but with a mixture of MK, andycpuk, Matthew Soper etc numbers it's getting rather confusing and I anticipate difficult to maintain. I am keeping a list of the plant ID and origin though.

Phil, great link. Someone's got too much time on his hands ;-)

Regards,

[keefy]

Linuxman, I think i know were you are coming from it is indeed confusing, i have plants that i have ordered and look nothing like what they are suposed to later on, with a system all the plants would follow the code so everyone knows what the plant is, where it came from, parents etc, i am sure Rose growers wouldn't put up with it, when i started growing CP'S i think we had 7 species of Sarracenia and around 25+ hybrids, now over the years of every one having ago of crossing one with another, never mind the plants from named areas we have hundreds of species and god knows how many hybrids. and new ones coming every year.

Looking art Phil's link and thinking i would print it out for a handy reference would take me to over 115 pages, which i will do a few pages at a time.

[linuxman]

Wow, didn't realise there were that many pages!

I think like most people I started my own list numbering system based on the order I obtained plants. But I reckon I'll give up on this and like LJ just include all the details from the seller that I can. I'm sure that'll end up in duplicates but hey, what you gonna do? At least I won't be adding to the confusion

Cheers,

[Phil Green]

I think like most people I started my own list numbering system based on the order I obtained plants. But I reckon I'll give up on this and like LJ just include all the details from the seller that I can.

You may be better sticking to creating your own numbering system, to make it easy to keep track of things when your collection gets rather large.

It makes lables very easy to just put your code on. But YES, keep all the details you can on the plant in a main data base (grow list). I always pass on plants with the main code I got it as, rather my own (which is for my use). Unless it was a seed grown plant with no previous code or one of my own seedlings.

I don't think you'll regret it, but you may regret not doing so in the future, if you have to start coding everything from scratch.

Edited August 15, 2010 by Phil Green