A couple mystery plants today on the bike ride

1. some rose http://home.att.net/~rhhardin5/w55.jpg
(which apparently is not multiflora rose because it doesn't
look like this http://home.att.net/~rhhardin5/w60.jpg )

by a field and river.

2. unknown flower with unusual leaf
http://home.att.net/~rhhardin5/w59.jpg flower
http://home.att.net/~rhhardin5/w59a.jpg leaf

I found some blue and some white, several miles apart.

--
Ron Hardin


On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

Ron Hardin wrote:
A couple mystery plants today on the bike ride

1. some rose http://home.att.net/~rhhardin5/w55.jpg
(which apparently is not multiflora rose because it doesn't
look like this http://home.att.net/~rhhardin5/w60.jpg )

by a field and river.

2. unknown flower with unusual leaf
http://home.att.net/~rhhardin5/w59.jpg flower
http://home.att.net/~rhhardin5/w59a.jpg leaf

I found some blue and some white, several miles apart.

Ron,
Your "rose"is in the genus Rubus, not Rosa. It's a blackberry or
dewberry. Not sure of the exact species.

"Malcolm Manners" wrote in message
news:gr6eg.6618$U_2.3076@trnddc05...
Ron Hardin wrote:

A couple mystery plants today on the bike ride

1. some rose http://home.att.net/~rhhardin5/w55.jpg
(which apparently is not multiflora rose because it doesn't
look like this http://home.att.net/~rhhardin5/w60.jpg )

by a field and river.

Ron,
Your "rose"is in the genus Rubus, not Rosa. It's a blackberry or
dewberry. Not sure of the exact species.

But of course Rubus is indeed a member of the rose family,
and not too very distant from Rosa. It's to his credit
that he recognized the clear 'family resemblance'.

2. unknown flower with unusual leaf
http://home.att.net/~rhhardin5/w59.jpg flower
http://home.att.net/~rhhardin5/w59a.jpg leaf

I found some blue and some white, several miles apart.

It looks to be a species of Phacelia, not sure which
[there are many, but most won't look much like yours].
Compa

http://www.missouriplants.com/Blueal...ides_page.html
http://dcdj.ifrance.com/dcdj/fonds_ecrans/phacelia.jpg
http://www.ownbyphotography.com/newpage61.htm

cheers

mel turner wrote:
2. unknown flower with unusual leaf
http://home.att.net/~rhhardin5/w59.jpg flower
http://home.att.net/~rhhardin5/w59a.jpg leaf

I found some blue and some white, several miles apart.

It looks to be a species of Phacelia, not sure which
[there are many, but most won't look much like yours].
Compa

http://www.missouriplants.com/Blueal...ides_page.html
http://dcdj.ifrance.com/dcdj/fonds_ecrans/phacelia.jpg
http://www.ownbyphotography.com/newpage61.htm

cheers

That's a good clue. Now I can use the index of Newcomb's Wildflower
Guide under phacelia, and come up with the most likely candidates
(he edits the probabilities for me)

Miami Mist P. pursii
Small flowered Phacelia P. dubia (nice name, no fringe)
Fern Leafed Phacelia P. bipinnatifida

the winner being Miami Mist, a very good match.

If only his classification entry system were always as good.

--
Ron Hardin


On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

Ron Hardin wrote:
Miami Mist P. pursii

purshii

--
Ron Hardin


On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

Ron, I'm really enjoying your great photography. Few people stop to
admire the beauty of wild roadside plants. Of course, on foot or
bicycle one has a far better chance of seeing them at all!

Your web page could be a good resource for identifying roadside
flora of northeastern US and adjacent parts of Canada. Adding the
scientific name of the plants would make it far more valuable, since
common names not only differ geographically, but the same name is
used to describe completely different plants in different areas.
You could also indicate whether they are natives or aliens. Not
to be too critical, but many of the plants you've photographed
would be more accurately called wildflowers than weeds. The
technical term for herbaceous (non-woody) plants other than
grasses is forbs.

Have you spotted any columbines yet (Aquilegia canadensis)? Since
you're a few weeks ahead of us here, I'd expect they'd be in bloom
there soon, if not already. They like semi-shade.

wrote:

Ron, I'm really enjoying your great photography. Few people stop to
admire the beauty of wild roadside plants. Of course, on foot or
bicycle one has a far better chance of seeing them at all!

Your web page could be a good resource for identifying roadside
flora of northeastern US and adjacent parts of Canada. Adding the
scientific name of the plants would make it far more valuable, since
common names not only differ geographically, but the same name is
used to describe completely different plants in different areas.
You could also indicate whether they are natives or aliens. Not
to be too critical, but many of the plants you've photographed
would be more accurately called wildflowers than weeds. The
technical term for herbaceous (non-woody) plants other than
grasses is forbs.

Have you spotted any columbines yet (Aquilegia canadensis)? Since
you're a few weeks ahead of us here, I'd expect they'd be in bloom
there soon, if not already. They like semi-shade.

It's actually just something I'm doing between Dobermans, Annie
http://home.att.net/~rhhardin/annie.html having died of kidney failure
in April and Vicki http://home.att.net/~rhhardin/vicki.html (not there yet)
coming on Tuesday.

I'm not all that sure of the identifications in any case and willing to
change any of them ; mostly I use Newcomb's Wildflower Guide, which has
a great indexing scheme for most but not all wildflowers, the ``not all''
meaning the cases where they're in the book but you can't find them,
not that the thing isn't in the book.

He does, however, have an index by both informal and official names,
if in desperation to find out what I think I'm identifying.

I think a couple of them I identified from my copy of _Ontario Weeds_.

No Columbines; I'd surely have noticed one, but they just may not be
on one of my regular bike routes. I notice pretty big population
differences based on route.

--
Ron Hardin


On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

mel turner wrote:


But of course Rubus is indeed a member of the rose family,
and not too very distant from Rosa. It's to his credit
that he recognized the clear 'family resemblance'.



Mel, I quite agree. Did not mean to indicate a lack of relationship
Malcolm