I think it's some type of Antirrhinum (flowers in spikes - therefore not
Cymbalaria; flowers spurless (and leaves broad) - therefore not
Linaria).

Photographed at the end of September

http://www.stewart.hinsley.me.uk/Images/IMG_6380a.JPG
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley

On 10/12/2011 19:51, Stewart Robert Hinsley wrote:
I think it's some type of Antirrhinum (flowers in spikes - therefore not
Cymbalaria; flowers spurless (and leaves broad) - therefore not
Linaria).

Photographed at the end of September

http://www.stewart.hinsley.me.uk/Images/IMG_6380a.JPG

Not sure, but a bit confused.

Subject is "Labiate ID". But if it's an Antirrhinum, then it's
Plantaginacae (or a Scrof in £.s.d...), not a labiate (Lamiacaea).

Or have I got that completely wrong?

--

Jeff

In message , Jeff Layman
writes
On 10/12/2011 19:51, Stewart Robert Hinsley wrote:
I think it's some type of Antirrhinum (flowers in spikes - therefore not
Cymbalaria; flowers spurless (and leaves broad) - therefore not
Linaria).

Photographed at the end of September

http://www.stewart.hinsley.me.uk/Images/IMG_6380a.JPG

Not sure, but a bit confused.

Subject is "Labiate ID". But if it's an Antirrhinum, then it's
Plantaginacae (or a Scrof in £.s.d...), not a labiate (Lamiacaea).

Or have I got that completely wrong?

Sorry - thinko - I meant Lamiales.
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley

On 10/12/2011 20:30, Stewart Robert Hinsley wrote:
In , Jeff Layman
writes
On 10/12/2011 19:51, Stewart Robert Hinsley wrote:
I think it's some type of Antirrhinum (flowers in spikes - therefore not
Cymbalaria; flowers spurless (and leaves broad) - therefore not
Linaria).

Photographed at the end of September

http://www.stewart.hinsley.me.uk/Images/IMG_6380a.JPG

Not sure, but a bit confused.

Subject is "Labiate ID". But if it's an Antirrhinum, then it's
Plantaginacae (or a Scrof in £.s.d...), not a labiate (Lamiacaea).

Or have I got that completely wrong?

Sorry - thinko - I meant Lamiales.

OK.

I thought it might actually be a Cymbalaria, but believe you are right
that it isn't one. The likely suspects here
http://luirig.altervista.org/flora/cymbalaria.htm have the wrong leaf
form (never mind the flowers!).

--

Jeff

On Dec 11, 9:37*am, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 10/12/2011 20:30, Stewart Robert Hinsley wrote:





In , Jeff Layman
*writes
On 10/12/2011 19:51, Stewart Robert Hinsley wrote:
I think it's some type of Antirrhinum (flowers in spikes - therefore not
Cymbalaria; flowers spurless (and leaves broad) - therefore not
Linaria).

Photographed at the end of September

* * * *http://www.stewart.hinsley.me.uk/Images/IMG_6380a.JPG

Not sure, but a bit confused.

Subject is "Labiate ID". But if it's an Antirrhinum, then it's
Plantaginacae (or a Scrof in £.s.d...), not a labiate (Lamiacaea).

Or have I got that completely wrong?

Sorry - thinko - I meant Lamiales.

OK.

I thought it might actually be a Cymbalaria, but believe you are right
that it isn't one. *The likely suspects herehttp://luirig.altervista.org/flora/cymbalaria.htmhave the wrong leaf
form (never mind the flowers!).

--

Jeff- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

This is haunting me, I feel I should know it.
Fleshy leaf making me think it grows in a fairly dry area.
Hairs to prevent to much water loss by wind.
Low growing, an exposed habitat?

In message
, Dave
Hill writes
On Dec 11, 9:37*am, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 10/12/2011 20:30, Stewart Robert Hinsley wrote:





In , Jeff Layman
*writes
On 10/12/2011 19:51, Stewart Robert Hinsley wrote:
I think it's some type of Antirrhinum (flowers in spikes - therefore not
Cymbalaria; flowers spurless (and leaves broad) - therefore not
Linaria).

Photographed at the end of September

* * * *http://www.stewart.hinsley.me.uk/Images/IMG_6380a.JPG

Not sure, but a bit confused.

Subject is "Labiate ID". But if it's an Antirrhinum, then it's
Plantaginacae (or a Scrof in £.s.d...), not a labiate (Lamiacaea).

Or have I got that completely wrong?

Sorry - thinko - I meant Lamiales.

OK.

I thought it might actually be a Cymbalaria, but believe you are right
that it isn't one. *The likely suspects
herehttp://luirig.altervista.org/flora/cymbalaria.htmhave the wrong leaf
form (never mind the flowers!).

--

Jeff- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

This is haunting me, I feel I should know it.
Fleshy leaf making me think it grows in a fairly dry area.
Hairs to prevent to much water loss by wind.
Low growing, an exposed habitat?

The nearest match I've found is Antirrhinum pertegasii, but that has
blunt or emarginate leaf apices. If I hadn't seen Antirrhinum
sempervirens in the Alpine House there I might have thought that was it.

That assuming that I'm not missing something when identifying it as an
Antirrhinum, but I doesn't seem to fit Cymbalaria, Linaria, Asarina or
Maurandya, and nothing else comes to mind as an alternative.
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley

Showing my ignorance here. Are there any antirrhinum that colour?
Must admit I'd have gone for Cymbalaria, though leaves are wrong for any which occur wild in UK. Where was it?

In message , kay
writes

'Jeff Layman[_2_ Wrote:
;943682']On 10/12/2011 19:51, Stewart Robert Hinsley wrote:-
I think it's some type of Antirrhinum (flowers in spikes - therefore
not
Cymbalaria; flowers spurless (and leaves broad) - therefore not
Linaria).

Photographed at the end of September

http://tinyurl.com/d54f4fo-

Not sure, but a bit confused.

Subject is "Labiate ID". But if it's an Antirrhinum, then it's
Plantaginacae (or a Scrof in £.s.d...), not a labiate (Lamiacaea).

Or have I got that completely wrong?


Showing my ignorance here. Are there any antirrhinum that colour?
Must admit I'd have gone for Cymbalaria, though leaves are wrong for
any
which occur wild in UK.

Cymbalaria was my first thought. I found photos of half the species
(muralis, pallida, aequitriloba, hepaticifolia) and the foliage doesn't
match any of those. More importantly, fide Wikipedia, Cymbalaria has
"flowers borne singly rather than in dense erect spikes".

Where was it?

In a rockery in a botanic garden.

--
kay

--
Stewart Robert Hinsley

Could be almost anything then ;-)
I've looked through my Mediterranean floras and not found it. That doesn't really help, does it? Please let us know if you find out what it is.

On Sat, 10 Dec 2011 19:51:43 +0000, Stewart Robert Hinsley
wrote:

I think it's some type of Antirrhinum (flowers in spikes - therefore not
Cymbalaria; flowers spurless (and leaves broad) - therefore not
Linaria).

Photographed at the end of September

http://www.stewart.hinsley.me.uk/Images/IMG_6380a.JPG

I think it's ivy-leaved toadflax, a common wild flower.

Pam in Bristol

In message , Pam Moore
writes
On Sat, 10 Dec 2011 19:51:43 +0000, Stewart Robert Hinsley
wrote:

I think it's some type of Antirrhinum (flowers in spikes - therefore not
Cymbalaria; flowers spurless (and leaves broad) - therefore not
Linaria).

Photographed at the end of September

http://www.stewart.hinsley.me.uk/Images/IMG_6380a.JPG

I think it's ivy-leaved toadflax, a common wild flower.

It's not Cymbalaria muralis (ivy-leaved toadflax): I not only know that
species, but have it growing as a weed in my garden and allotment.

One reason for it not being a Cymbalaria was given above. Apart from
that the leaves are wrong for Cymbalaria muralis. (It's close enough to
a Cymbalaria to cause one to consider that genus.)

When you read the rest of the thread you'll find that it was identified
as Chaenorhinum origanifolium (Malling toadflax), a rare wild and
infrequent garden plant.

Pam in Bristol

--
Stewart Robert Hinsley