I visited Acorn Bank (NT) up in Cumbria towards to the end of April, and
came across a plant that I couldn't place. I'm not sure whether it was
meant to be there, or arrived under it's own steam.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27317581@N06/3613702404/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27317581@N06/3613702154/

Anyone recognise it?

There was also in the woodland garden there (and I presume wild) a
marginal plant that is reasonably common, but which I've never pinned
down.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27317581@N06/3613702244/

While I'm asking questions, there's also this aquatic plant photographed
in a canal backwater last month.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27317581@N06/3525917881/
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley

On Jun 10, 11:01*am, Stewart Robert Hinsley
wrote:
I visited Acorn Bank (NT) up in Cumbria towards to the end of April, and
came across a plant that I couldn't place. I'm not sure whether it was
meant to be there, or arrived under it's own steam.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/2731758...06/3613702154/

Anyone recognise it?

There was also in the woodland garden there (and I presume wild) a
marginal plant that is reasonably common, but which I've never pinned
down.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27317581@N06/3613702244/

While I'm asking questions, there's also this aquatic plant photographed
in a canal backwater last month.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27317581@N06/3525917881/
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley

They are tough so I cannot help much; 1 looks just like Chrysosplenium
oppositifolia in habit but the petals are way too big. It is a
common native in damp woodlands. 3 could be a Callitriche which are
common aquatics in steams and ditches and are buggers to tell apart.

In message
, Des
Higgins writes
On Jun 10, 11:01*am, Stewart Robert Hinsley
wrote:
I visited Acorn Bank (NT) up in Cumbria towards to the end of April, and
came across a plant that I couldn't place. I'm not sure whether it was
meant to be there, or arrived under it's own steam.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/2731758...p://www.flickr.
com/photos/27317581@N06/3613702154/

Anyone recognise it?

There was also in the woodland garden there (and I presume wild) a
marginal plant that is reasonably common, but which I've never pinned
down.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27317581@N06/3613702244/

While I'm asking questions, there's also this aquatic plant photographed
in a canal backwater last month.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27317581@N06/3525917881/
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley

They are tough so I cannot help much;

I hope I can manage the easy ones myself :-)

1 looks just like Chrysosplenium
oppositifolia in habit but the petals are way too big.

Chrysosplenium oppositifolium is reasonably common in woodlands around
here. I did wonder whether it was the another golden saxifrage (e.g.
Chrysosplenium alternifolium, which I've never seen, but may have
overlooked as the former), but not only are the petals too big, but the
flower structure is wrong - 5? sepals, 5 petals, 10 stamens, 1 carpel vs
4 sepals, 0 petals, 8 stamens, 2 carpels.

The number of stamens is wrong for a Lysimachia (compare creeping jenny
and yellow pimpernel) as well.

It is a
common native in damp woodlands. 3 could be a Callitriche which are
common aquatics in steams and ditches and are buggers to tell apart.


I know of a couple of locations for Myriophyllum locally. I haven't been
able to tell those apart either - I suspect I have parrot's feather, but
can't prove it. I'll bear the suggestion of Callitriche in mind - I may
catch it flowering when passing another day.

Thanks.
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley

Stewart Robert Hinsley writes
The number of stamens is wrong for a Lysimachia (compare creeping jenny
and yellow pimpernel) as well.

And the leaves look too fleshy. It may be me misreading the pic, but the
leaves seem to be of similar fleshiness to ivy-leaved toadflax - is that
impression right? - it's certainly more the fleshiness that you'd
associate with some of the saxifrages.
--
Kay

In message , K
writes
Stewart Robert Hinsley writes
The number of stamens is wrong for a Lysimachia (compare creeping
jenny and yellow pimpernel) as well.

And the leaves look too fleshy. It may be me misreading the pic, but
the leaves seem to be of similar fleshiness to ivy-leaved toadflax - is
that impression right? - it's certainly more the fleshiness that you'd
associate with some of the saxifrages.

I'd say that the leaves are fleshier than Cymbalaria, but then I don't
find the leaves of Cymbalaria to be particularly fleshy. (But they're
variable; the local stately home has a population which is less
trailing, with fleshier leaves, than those I've seen growing wild.)

But now that you mention toadflax and saxifrage, I open Stace, and find
a decription of Celandine Saxifrage (Saxifraga cymbalaria), which is
what it appears to be. (Now I look at the photograph of the flower I see
that it does have a second carpel, which I had overlooked, causing me to
discount somewhat Saxifragaceae.)

So, thanks - you nudged me in the right direction.
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley

K writes
Stewart Robert Hinsley writes
The number of stamens is wrong for a Lysimachia (compare creeping
jenny and yellow pimpernel) as well.

And the leaves look too fleshy. It may be me misreading the pic, but
the leaves seem to be of similar fleshiness to ivy-leaved toadflax - is
that impression right? - it's certainly more the fleshiness that you'd
associate with some of the saxifrages.

Try Saxifraga cymbalaria - certainly that would tie in with the leaf
similarity to ivy-leaved toadflax (Cymbalaria muralis). Introduced
nursery and garden weed.
--
Kay

On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 11:01:51 +0100, Stewart Robert Hinsley
wrote:

I visited Acorn Bank (NT) up in Cumbria towards to the end of April, and
came across a plant that I couldn't place. I'm not sure whether it was
meant to be there, or arrived under it's own steam.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27317581@N06/3613702404/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27317581@N06/3613702154/

Anyone recognise it?

There was also in the woodland garden there (and I presume wild) a
marginal plant that is reasonably common, but which I've never pinned
down.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27317581@N06/3613702244/

While I'm asking questions, there's also this aquatic plant photographed
in a canal backwater last month.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27317581@N06/3525917881/

I know the first one as Golden Saxifrage, which, for me, is a good
enough name for it. It appeared in my garden a few years ago and now
seeds itself everywhere, but as it is so pretty I largely leave it
alone.
The second I think is what I call starweed, which becomes a menace
when it gets established on top of pots.
Can't give botanical names.

Pam in Bristol

Stewart Robert Hinsley writes
In message , K
writes
Stewart Robert Hinsley writes
The number of stamens is wrong for a Lysimachia (compare creeping
jenny and yellow pimpernel) as well.

And the leaves look too fleshy. It may be me misreading the pic, but
the leaves seem to be of similar fleshiness to ivy-leaved toadflax -
is that impression right? - it's certainly more the fleshiness that
you'd associate with some of the saxifrages.

I'd say that the leaves are fleshier than Cymbalaria, but then I don't
find the leaves of Cymbalaria to be particularly fleshy. (But they're
variable; the local stately home has a population which is less
trailing, with fleshier leaves, than those I've seen growing wild.)

But now that you mention toadflax and saxifrage, I open Stace, and find
a decription of Celandine Saxifrage (Saxifraga cymbalaria), which is
what it appears to be. (Now I look at the photograph of the flower I
see that it does have a second carpel, which I had overlooked, causing
me to discount somewhat Saxifragaceae.)

So, thanks - you nudged me in the right direction.

And as you see from my other post, I went in exactly the same direction,
in my case via Fitter, Fitter and Blamey ;-)

It interests me our different approaches - you via the detailed
botanical structure, me by my gut feeling and similarities to things I
already know well. You will, of course, always get to the correct answer
while I can go spectacularly wrong, but just occasionally I may get
there more quickly albeit less rigorously.

Which is why I am now trying to consolidate my wildflower knowledge by a
better understanding of the underlying taxonomy.
--
Kay

In message , K
writes
Stewart Robert Hinsley writes
In message , K
writes
Stewart Robert Hinsley writes
The number of stamens is wrong for a Lysimachia (compare creeping
jenny and yellow pimpernel) as well.

And the leaves look too fleshy. It may be me misreading the pic, but
the leaves seem to be of similar fleshiness to ivy-leaved toadflax -
is that impression right? - it's certainly more the fleshiness that
you'd associate with some of the saxifrages.

I'd say that the leaves are fleshier than Cymbalaria, but then I don't
find the leaves of Cymbalaria to be particularly fleshy. (But they're
variable; the local stately home has a population which is less
trailing, with fleshier leaves, than those I've seen growing wild.)

But now that you mention toadflax and saxifrage, I open Stace, and
find a decription of Celandine Saxifrage (Saxifraga cymbalaria), which
what it appears to be. (Now I look at the photograph of the flower I
see that it does have a second carpel, which I had overlooked, causing
to discount somewhat Saxifragaceae.)

So, thanks - you nudged me in the right direction.

And as you see from my other post, I went in exactly the same
direction, in my case via Fitter, Fitter and Blamey ;-)

It interests me our different approaches - you via the detailed
botanical structure, me by my gut feeling and similarities to things I
already know well. You will, of course, always get to the correct
answer while I can go spectacularly wrong, but just occasionally I may
get there more quickly albeit less rigorously.

I suspect that you would find that our approaches are not all that
different. (What I didn't mention was that after referring to Stace I
went to Google Image Search to confirm the appearance of the plant.)

My preferred references for identification at the moment are Garward and
Streeter (illustrations and field marks) and Sterry (photographs, field
marks and portable, but lacking complete coverage). In the case of
Saxifraga cymbalaria, I don't think I have any works which illustrate
it. (Keble-Martin only mentions it in the text.)

I can be wrong as well - working from the manuals only works if you
start in the right place.

And, I'm slowly training myself to identify plants in the field.

Which is why I am now trying to consolidate my wildflower knowledge by
a better understanding of the underlying taxonomy.

--
Stewart Robert Hinsley

In message , Pam Moore
writes
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 11:01:51 +0100, Stewart Robert Hinsley
wrote:

I visited Acorn Bank (NT) up in Cumbria towards to the end of April, and
came across a plant that I couldn't place. I'm not sure whether it was
meant to be there, or arrived under it's own steam.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27317581@N06/3613702404/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27317581@N06/3613702154/

Anyone recognise it?

There was also in the woodland garden there (and I presume wild) a
marginal plant that is reasonably common, but which I've never pinned
down.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27317581@N06/3613702244/

While I'm asking questions, there's also this aquatic plant photographed
in a canal backwater last month.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27317581@N06/3525917881/

I know the first one as Golden Saxifrage, which, for me, is a good
enough name for it. It appeared in my garden a few years ago and now
seeds itself everywhere, but as it is so pretty I largely leave it
alone.
The second I think is what I call starweed, which becomes a menace
when it gets established on top of pots.
Can't give botanical names.

Did you mean the 3rd, which Des suspects of being a water-starwort?
Unfortunately the predominant meanings of starweed - if one believes
Google - are Stellaria media (chickweed) and Plantago triandra (a New
Zealand plantain).

Pam in Bristol

--
Stewart Robert Hinsley

On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 17:46:06 +0100, Stewart Robert Hinsley
wrote:

In message , Pam Moore
writes
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 11:01:51 +0100, Stewart Robert Hinsley
wrote:

I visited Acorn Bank (NT) up in Cumbria towards to the end of April, and
came across a plant that I couldn't place. I'm not sure whether it was
meant to be there, or arrived under it's own steam.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27317581@N06/3613702404/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27317581@N06/3613702154/

Anyone recognise it?

There was also in the woodland garden there (and I presume wild) a
marginal plant that is reasonably common, but which I've never pinned
down.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27317581@N06/3613702244/

While I'm asking questions, there's also this aquatic plant photographed
in a canal backwater last month.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27317581@N06/3525917881/

I know the first one as Golden Saxifrage, which, for me, is a good
enough name for it. It appeared in my garden a few years ago and now
seeds itself everywhere, but as it is so pretty I largely leave it
alone.
The second I think is what I call starweed, which becomes a menace
when it gets established on top of pots.
Can't give botanical names.

Did you mean the 3rd, which Des suspects of being a water-starwort?
Unfortunately the predominant meanings of starweed - if one believes
Google - are Stellaria media (chickweed) and Plantago triandra (a New
Zealand plantain).

Pam in Bristol

Oh dear, well I got that wrong, but it's what I've always called it,
not having reference books to refer to. Yes I did mean the 3rd photo,
but the second plant!

Pam in Bristol

In message , Pam Moore
writes
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 17:46:06 +0100, Stewart Robert Hinsley
wrote:

In message , Pam Moore
writes
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 11:01:51 +0100, Stewart Robert Hinsley
wrote:

I visited Acorn Bank (NT) up in Cumbria towards to the end of April, and
came across a plant that I couldn't place. I'm not sure whether it was
meant to be there, or arrived under it's own steam.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27317581@N06/3613702404/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27317581@N06/3613702154/

Anyone recognise it?

There was also in the woodland garden there (and I presume wild) a
marginal plant that is reasonably common, but which I've never pinned
down.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27317581@N06/3613702244/

While I'm asking questions, there's also this aquatic plant photographed
in a canal backwater last month.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27317581@N06/3525917881/

I know the first one as Golden Saxifrage, which, for me, is a good
enough name for it. It appeared in my garden a few years ago and now
seeds itself everywhere, but as it is so pretty I largely leave it
alone.
The second I think is what I call starweed, which becomes a menace
when it gets established on top of pots.
Can't give botanical names.

Did you mean the 3rd, which Des suspects of being a water-starwort?
Unfortunately the predominant meanings of starweed - if one believes
Google - are Stellaria media (chickweed) and Plantago triandra (a New
Zealand plantain).

Pam in Bristol

Oh dear, well I got that wrong, but it's what I've always called it,
not having reference books to refer to. Yes I did mean the 3rd photo,
but the second plant!

Pam in Bristol

You're not necessarily wrong - it may be that you're using a local name.
Unfortunately starweed doesn't mean anything to me.

[Golden Saxifrage is in widespread use for plants of the genus
Chrysosplenium, so using it for Saxifraga cymbalaria is potentially
confusing. However the Americans use Golden Saxifrage for both
Chyrsosplenium and Saxifraga chrysantha. Stace uses Celandine Saxifrage
for Saxifraga cymbalaria, which is not a bad name; Keble-Martin doesn't
give any vernacular names.]
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley

Stewart Robert Hinsley writes
I suspect that you would find that our approaches are not all that
different. (What I didn't mention was that after referring to Stace I
went to Google Image Search to confirm the appearance of the plant.)

So did I ;-)

My preferred references for identification at the moment are Garward
and Streeter (illustrations and field marks)

Is that the Collins one?

and Sterry (photographs, field marks and portable, but lacking
complete coverage).

Sterry I've seen but didn't like, but not sure why

In the case of Saxifraga cymbalaria, I don't think I have any works
which illustrate it.

It's illustrated in Fitter, Fitter and Blamey. That's the fat one, which
also covers grasses and ferns. It's drawings, which I like - Margaret
Blamey is quite good at getting all the key features, if you screw your
eyes up and peer closely (it helps to be short-sighted). And it has
distribution maps, which is a cheating way of narrowing down the search!

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 can be wrong as well - working from the manuals only works if you
start in the right place.

:-)

That's my trouble with keys. I know the genus and can work straight from
the genus key I'm fine. But if I haven't a clue even as to family,
starting from the main key I find very tough.

And, I'm slowly training myself to identify plants in the field.

It is slow, isn't it? You can't go at it all at once (ie identify all
the flowers in the little patch of land you're standing on), as there's
too much to learn. For most things I'm confident only to genus level,
and am trying to extend it by looking at the weeds in our garden - spent
most of yesterday lunchtime peering at a forget-me-not with a hand lens.

--
Kay

Stewart Robert Hinsley writes
In message , Pam Moore
writes

The second I think is what I call starweed, which becomes a menace
when it gets established on top of pots.
Can't give botanical names.

Did you mean the 3rd, which Des suspects of being a water-starwort?
Unfortunately the predominant meanings of starweed - if one believes
Google - are Stellaria media (chickweed) and Plantago triandra (a New
Zealand plantain).

It doesn't look like the star-wort that we have in the ponds at the
nature reserve - that looks much more cross-like in pattern and is
nearer the surface. Colour is right, though.

Could the other one possibly be greater spearwort? - see, for example
http://www.map-reading.co.uk/wildflo...les/sl7117.htm
--
Kay

In message , K
writes
Stewart Robert Hinsley writes
I suspect that you would find that our approaches are not all that
different. (What I didn't mention was that after referring to Stace I
went to Google Image Search to confirm the appearance of the plant.)

So did I ;-)

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.

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.

In the case of Saxifraga cymbalaria, I don't think I have any works
which illustrate it.

It's illustrated in Fitter, Fitter and Blamey. That's the fat one,
which also covers grasses and ferns. It's drawings, which I like -
Margaret Blamey is quite good at getting all the key features, if you
screw your eyes up and peer closely (it helps to be short-sighted). And
it has distribution maps, which is a cheating way of narrowing down the
search!

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 can be wrong as well - working from the manuals only works if you
start in the right place.

:-)

That's my trouble with keys. I know the genus and can work straight
from the genus key I'm fine. But if I haven't a clue even as to family,
starting from the main key I find very tough.

And, I'm slowly training myself to identify plants in the field.

It is slow, isn't it? You can't go at it all at once (ie identify all
the flowers in the little patch of land you're standing on), as there's
too much to learn. For most things I'm confident only to genus level,
and am trying to extend it by looking at the weeds in our garden -
spent most of yesterday lunchtime peering at a forget-me-not with a
hand lens.

I think I've just cracked the difference between Myosotis arvensis and
Myosotis sylvatica which leaves the other terrestrial species around
here as Myosotis ramosissima. My alternative to a hand lens is a macro
photograph, but it doesn't always focus properly.

Part of the knack is learning to see differences between plants and to
use more traits than just the flowers. (Fruits are useful with trefoils
and crucifers.) Another technique is learning field marks, which is why
books with field marks are handy.
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley