Identify this plant...

[Chuck Gadd]

Founds lots and lots of what I think is some Echinodorus species
during a hike today.

Here's a picture of a bunch:
http://dev1.cfxc.com/chuck/plant.jpg

Hard to tell from the pic, but the pictured plant was about 2 feet
tall. The flower stalks look just like the flower stalks I've seen
from Echinodorus in my tanks.

The hike wasn't an area that I would have expected to find aquatic
plants. There were hundreds and hundreds of these growing in a
mountain meadow, about 11,000 feet. They were usually next to tiny
mountain brooks, but some of them were in the middle of the field, no
were near the water.




Chuck Gadd
http://www.csd.net/~cgadd/aqua

[~Vicki ~]

I don't know. Before looking at the picture I was thinking primrose as
these are just as happy wet or dry. But it is not any primrose I know
of. Someone may know a little more about alpine plants who live in that
type of area. I don't sell that stuff at my husbands store.

Vicki

[Ghazanfar Ghori]

You didn't happen to take a closeup of its flower did you?

"Chuck Gadd" > wrote in message
...
> Founds lots and lots of what I think is some Echinodorus species
> during a hike today.
>
> Here's a picture of a bunch:
> http://dev1.cfxc.com/chuck/plant.jpg
>
> Hard to tell from the pic, but the pictured plant was about 2 feet
> tall. The flower stalks look just like the flower stalks I've seen
> from Echinodorus in my tanks.
>
> The hike wasn't an area that I would have expected to find aquatic
> plants. There were hundreds and hundreds of these growing in a
> mountain meadow, about 11,000 feet. They were usually next to tiny
> mountain brooks, but some of them were in the middle of the field, no
> were near the water.
>
>
>
>
> Chuck Gadd
> http://www.csd.net/~cgadd/aqua

[tcbiii@NOSPAMearthlink.net]

> The hike wasn't an area that I would have expected to find aquatic
> plants. There were hundreds and hundreds of these growing in a
> mountain meadow, about 11,000 feet. They were usually next to tiny
> mountain brooks, but some of them were in the middle of the field, no
> were near the water.
> Chuck Gadd
> http://www.csd.net/~cgadd/aqua

It's not what you think. Grab a plant list of apline plants of CO.
You'll find it. There's not too many plants that live at 11,000ft.
So that should narrow it down and it's a big old monocot.
Regards,
Tom Barr

[tcbiii@NOSPAMearthlink.net]

> The hike wasn't an area that I would have expected to find aquatic
> plants. There were hundreds and hundreds of these growing in a
> mountain meadow, about 11,000 feet. They were usually next to tiny
> mountain brooks, but some of them were in the middle of the field, no
> were near the water.
> Chuck Gadd
> http://www.csd.net/~cgadd/aqua

It's not what you think. Grab a plant list of apline plants of CO.
You'll find it. There's not too many plants that live at 11,000ft.
So that should narrow it down and it's a big old monocot.
Regards,
Tom Barr

[Philippe Lemaire \(remove all D's\)]

Alisma plantago-aquatica or Alisma lanceolatum ?

Philippe


" > wrote in message om...
| > The hike wasn't an area that I would have expected to find aquatic
| > plants. There were hundreds and hundreds of these growing in a
| > mountain meadow, about 11,000 feet. They were usually next to tiny
| > mountain brooks, but some of them were in the middle of the field, no
| > were near the water.
| > Chuck Gadd
| > http://www.csd.net/~cgadd/aqua
|
| It's not what you think. Grab a plant list of apline plants of CO.
| You'll find it. There's not too many plants that live at 11,000ft.
| So that should narrow it down and it's a big old monocot.
| Regards,
| Tom Barr