Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
plant IDs
In message , K
writes Stewart Robert Hinsley writes In message , K writes Stewart Robert Hinsley writes My preferred references for identification at the moment are Garward and Streeter (illustrations and field marks) Is that the Collins one? No - coffee table size book published by Midsummer Press, bought from a remainder book shop. I couldn't find it on Google or Amazon Sorry - my eyesight isn't very good in poor light - it should have been Garward. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Wild-Flowers.../dp/1900732033 But I only paid a tenner. and Sterry (photographs, field marks and portable, but lacking complete coverage). Sterry I've seen but didn't like, but not sure why Sterry is the (a?) Collins publication. It's generally well thought of, isn't it? Must be irrational prejudice on my part ;-) I have the impression that Collins as an imprint was well thought of (Mitchell on Trees I believe was very well thought of), but I can't speak of this particular book. I've put this, and the field edition of Clapham, Tutin and Warburg, down as the books to carry with me, when I bother to carry books with me. For photos, I've got some of the little books by Roger Philips, all sadly out of print now and very hard to come by. I'd forgotten I had a copy of Philip's Wild Flowers of Britain. It's in I haven't got that one. But he did a little series "mountain and moorland" "Roadsides and waste places" "weeds" "coastal" etc. The pictures are better than his big book. Like the big book, they're arranged in approximate order of flowering, which can be handy when you haven't a clue where to start. "Weeds" has pictures of the seedlings too - ideal for the gardener! I don't particularly care for the Wild Flowers book - ordering the plants by flowering might be useful if you've no idea what the plants are, but not if you do. And I'd prefer photographs in life position. I think I've just cracked the difference between Myosotis arvensis and Myosotis sylvatica Ah ... arvensis has smaller 'grey blue' flowers compared with larger 'sky blue' flowers. Arvensis flowers are slightly concave ("saucer shaped") whereas sylvatica are flat. Arvensis is usually annual, sylvatica is perennial. Sylvatica calyx is flightly flared at the top to reveal the nutlets. Situation slightly complicated by existence of garden forms of sylvatica and a shade subspecies of arvensis - is that about what you gleaned? M. sylvatica (at least garden forms) isn't reliably perennial. Apart from that, that's more than I've got. Flower size can be unreliable - forget-me-nots can produce smaller than usual flowers, and I have the impression that M/ sylvatica has a tendency to do so late in the flowering season. The foliage differs as well. M. arvensis has a grayish tinge overall, as well as in the flowers, and it has narrowly oblong leaves, while M. sylvatica leaves are somewhat spoon shaped. M. ramosissima has ovate leaves. Stace does use calyx characters in the key, but they're not easy to use on plants that you just happen to pass while walking. which leaves the other terrestrial species around here as Myosotis ramosissima. Smaller flowers, flowering stem has very short leafy section and very long flowery section? And all the same colour, which distinguishes it from M. discolor. My alternative to a hand lens is a macro photograph, but it doesn't always focus properly. I've got a 'supermacro' on my camera, but without flash. So I need good light for fast shutter speed. And the focusing is difficult if the flower is delicate - too easy to focus on the background not the flower. Piece of paper (or a hand) behind the flower can help, by bringing the background to the flower. That's my experience as well. Part of the knack is learning to see differences between plants and to use more traits than just the flowers. I know. I was browsing through the Stace key for Geranium and noticing that shining geranium, which is recognisable at 20 paces with or without flowers, doesn't key out until almost the end. And I irritate my husband by pointing out flowers to him and having to confess that actually, they're not in flower yet, it's just the leaves, but they *will* look beautiful in a couple of months time ;-) (Fruits are useful with trefoils and crucifers.) I had a great time in S Portugal earlier this year looking at legume seed pods. Some really strange ones. Another technique is learning field marks, which is why books with field marks are handy. What are field marks? The shining leaves of Geranium lucidum is one. A field mark is an individual trait (or small number of traits) that allows you to identify a species. Sterry gives the field marks in italic text. If you have a hand lens, the number of stamens (5) is a field mark for Geranium pusillum (most Geraniums have 10). -- Stewart Robert Hinsley |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Plant IDs - please | Plant Science | |||
Two plant IDs please | United Kingdom | |||
Plant IDs please - worrisit ? | United Kingdom | |||
Tropical Plant IDs | Gardening | |||
websites for plant photos / ids | United Kingdom |