The British Hosta and Hemerocallis Society



Jagged Sweetness’ (‘Lacy Knitter’ x ‘Jordyn Casper’)
‘Touch of Linda’ (‘Strippled Statement’ x ‘Red Friday’)

Jagged Daylilies
by Jerzy Bodalski Łódź, Poland
The history of breeding jagged daylilies is an example of a sequence of events where the appearance of one seemingly insignificant and originally undervalued morphological trait of a flower sparks a new, dynamically developing trend for breeding.
I assume that the emergence of the jagged endings on petals over forty years ago in Howard Hite’s garden did not herald any revolution in breeding daylilies. The variety with jagged petals that he registered in 1973 as ‘Creepy Crawler’ (fig. 1) did not make a big impression on anyone. Sometime later the gene that determines this feature has become conspicuous in the garden of Reckamp and Klehm, who in the last two decades have registered 18 varieties representing jagged petals. Two among those varieties ‘My Sunshine’ (Reckamp-Klehm,1978) and ‘Techny Peach Lace’ (Reckamp-Klehm, 1988) and a few other by other breeders: ‘Startle’ (Belden, 1988), ‘Enchanted April’ (Trimmer, 1993), ‘Forestlake Ragamuffin’ (Harding-F.,1993) and ‘Baracuda Bay’ (Salter, 1996) paved the way for an innovative, highly attractive, and dynamically developing direction in breeding at the end of the last century. Suffice it to say that in two decades between 1973 and 1992, from the first AHS record for a jagged daylily, there have been 15 varieties representing this particular feature, and in 2011 there were 52 such varieties.https://liliowce.net/pl/liliowce-strzepiaste/rejestr-liliowcow-strzepiastych/
Fig. 1 ‘Creepy Crawler’ (Hite, 1973)
![]() |
![]() |
Fig. 2 Fringed Tulips
For the flower related nomenclature, the term “jagged daylilies” is new, unknown, and not compulsory. I am using it in here intentionally for the purpose of this paper to identify a group of daylilies that are the subject of this article. I have used terminology that is in force in the tulip classifica-tory system, in which flowers with ragged sepal edges constitute a sepa-rate group of plants and are defined as “Crispa” tulips (curly/crispate, ragged, fringed, fig. 2). I have not come across any formal postulates to isolate a group of daylilies with fringed sepal edges into a stand-alone category of plants in any reference materials on the subject; however, there is evidence that this group is seen as a different quality which calls for special attention and differentiation. Good evidence for the last statement is a popular blog by Sandy and Mike Holmes: “Daylily Blog on Teeth Hybridizing”:http://daylilytrader.com/riverbend/wordpress/ English terminology has no uniform name for this category of daylilies. The name “teeth daylilies” is somehow imprecise. Increasingly more daylilies that become registered under this name have flowers, which due to a change in their anatomical features have ceased to resemble teeth a long time ago. The name “jagged” has a universal meaning and encompasses all kinds of petal structure, whose outer edges horizontally and in relation to their surface, make numerous more or less deep and sharp “fractures”. A closer look at the anatomical structure of jagged daylilies reveals that this feature is most probably due to some genetic conditioning. It is not uniform and it comes in at least two basic variants. Those two variants are historically the oldest ones and with a high degree of probability it can be assumed that they were the starting point for further anatomical modifications in the external edges of the flowers that appeared after years of breeding. The first variant (fig. 3) is an ana-tomical extension of the petals’ smooth surface, arranged with numerous palisade-like structures, and rounded outgrowths. It appears in varieties that are grand-parents of jagged daylilies - ‘Yuma’ (Whatley, 1979) and ‘Charlie’ (Reckamp-Klehm, 1993). These were also the first to appear in the long history of jagged daylilie.![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Fig.3 ‘Charlie’ (Redkamp-Klehm, 1993) ‘Aliquippa’ (Baxter, 2004) ‘Tickle Me Elmo’ (Pickles, 2009)
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Fig.4 ‘Robes for the Queen’(Salter, 2003)‘Bristling Fury’(Benz, 2008)‘Eagles Gift’(Petit, 2008)
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Fig.5 ‘Deadliest Catch’ (Polston, 2011) ‘Eyelash Viper’ (Lambertson, 2012) ‘Fangs of Fury’ (Polston, 2013)
The second variant (fig. 4) displays anatomically different petal endings - they are toothed and resemble saw-teeth. After a historical review of daylilies it can be safely assumed that the ancestors of this anat- omical variant were ‘Lin Wright’ (Morss, 1991) and ‘Mort’s Master-piece’ (Morss, 1995). In recent years, we have seen another unknown, anatomical variant with long, thread-like outgrowths (fig. 5). This was probably due to a mutation of a gene or genes responsible for the anatomical structure of the external edges of petals. The significant rise of interest in jagged daylilies in recent years proves that decorative plant lovers have fully appreciated their value. Many emi-nent breeders have undertaken works that are to arrive at new varieties of those daylilies.
Seedling 230-3 ‘Panorama Raclawicka’ (‘Cosmic Sensation’ x ‘Fantastic Fringe’)
Jerzy Bodalski Liliowce
![]() |
![]() |
‘Skarbiec Jasnej Góry’ (‘Forestlake Ragamuffin’ x ‘Outer Limits’) | Seedling 411-3 (‘Mary Lena’ x ‘Hip Hop Music’) |
![]() |
![]() |
‘Miss Polonia’ (‘Rosy Spiketail’ x ‘Red Friday’) | ‘Black Angel’ (‘Brookie Bug’ x ‘Venus Fly Trap’) |
![]() |
![]() |
‘Ks. Jerzy Popieluszko’ (‘Glowing Quasar’ x ‘Interview with Vampire’ | ‘Flight to the Future‘ (‘Mary Lena’ x ‘Venus Fly Trap’) |
Seedling 492-2 (‘Forestlake Ragamuffin’ x Sdlg)
Jerzy Bodalski Daylilies
![]() |
![]() |
Seedling 467-2 (‘Eleanor’s True Passion’ x ‘Casper’s Revenge’) | ‘Children’s Dreams (‘Ruckus’ x Unknown) |
![]() |
![]() |
Seedling 259 S) (Sdlg x Sdlg) | Seedling 134-6 (‘Heavenly Pink Fang’ x ‘Mary Lena’) |
![]() |
![]() |
Seedling 471-2 ) (‘Wild Hair’ x ‘Voracious Vixen’) | Seedling 125-1 ‘Found Treasure’ (‘Lee Pickles’ x ‘Ruckus’) |