Directional cross

Seed PL-148 → Pollen PL-150 · Vein contrast with basal-sinus architecture

Vein contrast with basal-sinus architecture

Proposed not yet attemptedDirection: Seed to pollen

A proposed pairing does not establish compatibility, inherited traits, a completed attempt or future availability. Each direction is evaluated separately.

The research intention

The labelled Crystal Red/Michelle and forgetii-related selections motivate a phenotype combination, not a single-gene expectation; verify tags before choosing.

Feasibility assessment: Compatibility, flower phase and fertility unconfirmed
Recorded attempts: 0
Recorded cohorts: 0
Observed outcomes: No PPS outcomes recorded
PPS next step: Authenticate the parent identities and record readiness before any attempted pollination.
Commercial availability: Not yet offered
Last recorded update: Unknown

What remains uncertain · 4

Compatibility unconfirmed
Offspring characteristics unconfirmed
No PPS pollination attempt or offspring outcome recorded
Source candidates are not physically authenticated breeding parents

Proposed sources

Seed-source candidate

Photo pendingNo approved photograph is available for this record yet.

crystal red 12 x Michelle 1

Provisional collection recordMature by recorded assessmentUnresolved

Development: Mature by recorded assessment
Breeding role: Long term candidate

Pollen-source candidate

Photo pendingNo approved photograph is available for this record yet.

docblock 43 x 57 forgetii

Provisional collection recordMature by recorded assessmentUnresolved

Development: Mature by recorded assessment
Breeding role: Long term candidate

Evidence and applicability

Block attributes emerging red foliage and a persistent red petiole junction to long selection and uses dominant-genetics language.Marketing/anecdotal claim · Applicability: related lineage · PL-148
Evidence reference
RE-9a5d32b8838cd4012704f92f
Source type
marketing/anecdotal claim
Applicability
related lineage · PL-148
Studied material
Crystal Red dominance wording
Organ
leaf/lineage unless specified
Generation
See claim/source; not PPS-verified
Inheritance
unresolved
Limits
No locus, segregation counts or controlled reciprocal data are provided. Store dominance as an attributed breeder claim, not a supported genetic model.
Contradictions
Unknown
Supporting source location
See linked source passage locator
Offspring evidence
Not reported; see sample notes in primary package
Confidence rationale
Traceable source content; limited applicability and no exact PPS segregation model
Supporting sources
DocBlock’s Crystal Red
Author
Dr. Jeffrey Block
Source date
2025-09-13
Accessed
2026-10-11
Access
opened text
Supporting location
Byline/date line 49; descriptive paragraph lines 55–57
Studied material
Direct breeder color-selection claim, not a genetic study.
Organ
see linked claim
Generation
see linked claim
Study design
Breeder narrative, patent or original product description; see claim
Sample information
See claims; no exact PPS progeny dataset
Denominator
Unknown
Read cited source (opens a new tab)
Breeder's Red Crystal 12 × Michelle 1 page identifies 12 as seed parent and characterizes the combination as crystallinum and magnificum.Traceable observational record · Applicability: same numbered parent-label combination; not documented sibling · PL-148
Evidence reference
RE-b645efaee691d75620d527e7
Source type
traceable observational record
Applicability
same numbered parent-label combination; not documented sibling · PL-148
Studied material
12 × 1
Organ
leaf/lineage unless specified
Generation
See claim/source; not PPS-verified
Inheritance
unresolved
Limits
Breeder uses Red Crystal here; PPS/RPF uses Crystal Red. Treat naming alignment as source-backed candidate, not a tag correction.
Contradictions
Unknown
Supporting source location
See linked source passage locator
Offspring evidence
Not reported; see sample notes in primary package
Confidence rationale
Traceable source content; limited applicability and no exact PPS segregation model
Supporting sources
Anthurium ‘DocBlock Red Crystal®’ ’12’ x ‘Michelle®’ ‘1’
Author
Anthuriums by DocBlock
Source date
Unknown
Accessed
2026-10-11
Access
opened text
Supporting location
Title and first paragraph, lines 5–8
Studied material
Breeder label and parent characterization; preserve naming difference Red Crystal versus Crystal Red.
Organ
see linked claim
Generation
see linked claim
Study design
Breeder narrative, patent or original product description; see claim
Sample information
See claims; no exact PPS progeny dataset
Denominator
Unknown
Read cited source (opens a new tab)
The study records fruiting spadices, germination and flowering progeny separately; GroupV interspecific outcomes were131 pollinations,59 fruiting spadices and38 flowering progenies.Controlled genetic study · Applicability: related lineage · Velvet-leaf collection: process design, not exact PPS pair prediction.
Evidence reference
RE-21da39ed089cbf83686a59f2
Source type
controlled genetic study
Applicability
related lineage · Velvet-leaf collection: process design, not exact PPS pair prediction.
Studied material
University of Hawaii species collection
Organ
reproduction; progeny
Generation
self/interspecific offspring
Inheritance
unknown unless explicitly stated
Limits
Historical grouping, selective availability and sampled offspring constrain extrapolation.
Contradictions
No contradictions recorded
Supporting source location
Table2 p712
Offspring evidence
1592 pollinations; abstract56 species, Methods57; germination sample25 seeds/cross;8 seedlings/cross grown onward.
Confidence rationale
Original Methods and outcome table available.
Supporting sources
Cross Compatibility in the Genus Anthurium
Author
["R. D. Sheffer", "H. Kamemoto"]
Source date
1976-11
Accessed
2026-10-11T19:30:36.371253+00:00
Access
Original article full text read in ResearchGate OCR reproduction; publisher inaccessible.
Supporting location
JASHS101(6):709–713; Methods; Table2; p712 reciprocal-cross paragraph.
Studied material
University of Hawaii species collection
Organ
reproduction; progeny
Generation
self/interspecific offspring
Study design
Controlled crosses; availability-constrained matrix; historical taxonomy.
Sample information
1592 pollinations; abstract56 species, Methods57; germination sample25 seeds/cross;8 seedlings/cross grown onward.
Denominator
Unknown
Read cited source (opens a new tab)

Documented milestones

No dated milestones are supplied here yet

Attempts, cohort progress and offspring observations will remain separate records. No maturation or release countdown is inferred.

Offspring availability

No offspring release is listed here yet

Future prices, quantities, traits and timing are unconfirmed.

Loading the recorded collection

We are retrieving this view. No plant status or saved choice has changed.

The research intention

The labelled Crystal Red/Michelle and forgetii-related selections motivate a phenotype combination, not a single-gene expectation; verify tags before choosing.

Feasibility assessment

Compatibility, flower phase and fertility unconfirmed

Recorded attempts

Recorded cohorts

Observed outcomes

No PPS outcomes recorded

PPS next step

Authenticate the parent identities and record readiness before any attempted pollination.

Commercial availability

Not yet offered

Last recorded update

Unknown

What remains uncertain · 4

Compatibility unconfirmed
Offspring characteristics unconfirmed
No PPS pollination attempt or offspring outcome recorded
Source candidates are not physically authenticated breeding parents

Proposed sources

Seed-source candidate

Photo pendingNo approved photograph is available for this record yet.

crystal red 12 x Michelle 1

Provisional collection recordMature by recorded assessmentUnresolved

Development: Mature by recorded assessment
Breeding role: Long term candidate

Pollen-source candidate

Photo pendingNo approved photograph is available for this record yet.

docblock 43 x 57 forgetii

Provisional collection recordMature by recorded assessmentUnresolved

Development: Mature by recorded assessment
Breeding role: Long term candidate

Evidence and applicability

Block attributes emerging red foliage and a persistent red petiole junction to long selection and uses dominant-genetics language.Marketing/anecdotal claim · Applicability: related lineage · PL-148

Evidence reference: RE-9a5d32b8838cd4012704f92f
Source type: marketing/anecdotal claim
Applicability: related lineage · PL-148
Studied material: Crystal Red dominance wording
Organ: leaf/lineage unless specified
Generation: See claim/source; not PPS-verified
Inheritance: unresolved
Limits: No locus, segregation counts or controlled reciprocal data are provided. Store dominance as an attributed breeder claim, not a supported genetic model.
Contradictions: Unknown
Supporting source location: See linked source passage locator
Offspring evidence: Not reported; see sample notes in primary package
Confidence rationale: Traceable source content; limited applicability and no exact PPS segregation model

Supporting sources

DocBlock’s Crystal Red

Author: Dr. Jeffrey Block
Source date: 2025-09-13
Accessed: 2026-10-11
Access: opened text
Supporting location: Byline/date line 49; descriptive paragraph lines 55–57
Studied material: Direct breeder color-selection claim, not a genetic study.
Organ: see linked claim
Generation: see linked claim
Study design: Breeder narrative, patent or original product description; see claim
Sample information: See claims; no exact PPS progeny dataset
Denominator: Unknown

Read cited source (opens a new tab)

Breeder's Red Crystal 12 × Michelle 1 page identifies 12 as seed parent and characterizes the combination as crystallinum and magnificum.Traceable observational record · Applicability: same numbered parent-label combination; not documented sibling · PL-148

Evidence reference: RE-b645efaee691d75620d527e7
Source type: traceable observational record
Applicability: same numbered parent-label combination; not documented sibling · PL-148
Studied material: 12 × 1
Organ: leaf/lineage unless specified
Generation: See claim/source; not PPS-verified
Inheritance: unresolved
Limits: Breeder uses Red Crystal here; PPS/RPF uses Crystal Red. Treat naming alignment as source-backed candidate, not a tag correction.
Contradictions: Unknown
Supporting source location: See linked source passage locator
Offspring evidence: Not reported; see sample notes in primary package
Confidence rationale: Traceable source content; limited applicability and no exact PPS segregation model

Supporting sources

Anthurium ‘DocBlock Red Crystal®’ ’12’ x ‘Michelle®’ ‘1’

Author: Anthuriums by DocBlock
Source date: Unknown
Accessed: 2026-10-11
Access: opened text
Supporting location: Title and first paragraph, lines 5–8
Studied material: Breeder label and parent characterization; preserve naming difference Red Crystal versus Crystal Red.
Organ: see linked claim
Generation: see linked claim
Study design: Breeder narrative, patent or original product description; see claim
Sample information: See claims; no exact PPS progeny dataset
Denominator: Unknown

Read cited source (opens a new tab)

The study records fruiting spadices, germination and flowering progeny separately; GroupV interspecific outcomes were131 pollinations,59 fruiting spadices and38 flowering progenies.Controlled genetic study · Applicability: related lineage · Velvet-leaf collection: process design, not exact PPS pair prediction.

Evidence reference: RE-21da39ed089cbf83686a59f2
Source type: controlled genetic study
Applicability: related lineage · Velvet-leaf collection: process design, not exact PPS pair prediction.
Studied material: University of Hawaii species collection
Organ: reproduction; progeny
Generation: self/interspecific offspring
Inheritance: unknown unless explicitly stated
Limits: Historical grouping, selective availability and sampled offspring constrain extrapolation.
Contradictions: No contradictions recorded
Supporting source location: Table2 p712
Offspring evidence: 1592 pollinations; abstract56 species, Methods57; germination sample25 seeds/cross;8 seedlings/cross grown onward.
Confidence rationale: Original Methods and outcome table available.

Supporting sources

Cross Compatibility in the Genus Anthurium

Author: ["R. D. Sheffer", "H. Kamemoto"]
Source date: 1976-11
Accessed: 2026-10-11T19:30:36.371253+00:00
Access: Original article full text read in ResearchGate OCR reproduction; publisher inaccessible.
Supporting location: JASHS101(6):709–713; Methods; Table2; p712 reciprocal-cross paragraph.
Studied material: University of Hawaii species collection
Organ: reproduction; progeny
Generation: self/interspecific offspring
Study design: Controlled crosses; availability-constrained matrix; historical taxonomy.
Sample information: 1592 pollinations; abstract56 species, Methods57; germination sample25 seeds/cross;8 seedlings/cross grown onward.
Denominator: Unknown

Read cited source (opens a new tab)