Gaz Posted March 21, 2014 Report Share Posted March 21, 2014 (edited) Somehow seem to have lost the label and record for this Ping, can anybody help me with an ID please. The colour of the flower is slightly deeper than it appears in the photos. Thanks for any suggestions. Edited March 21, 2014 by Gaz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcus Vieweg Posted March 22, 2014 Report Share Posted March 22, 2014 Hi Gary, it P. ehlersiae {Ixmiquilpan, Hidalgo, Mexico} I think. The lobes and the curved spur is pretty unique. Cheers Marcus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz Posted March 22, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 22, 2014 Thank you Marcus, now I can put a label on it. and it's a beautiful little plant too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kisscool_38 Posted March 23, 2014 Report Share Posted March 23, 2014 That's P. ehlersiae but you cannot give him a location. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Evans Posted March 25, 2014 Report Share Posted March 25, 2014 Why, how many places does P. ehlersiae occur at? I'm not aware of more than a couple of locations... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kisscool_38 Posted March 26, 2014 Report Share Posted March 26, 2014 You can't exclude that this species hasn't been introduced from more sites than are today in culture. Someone could have introduced spécimens from another location, this location name could simply have been lost. It's just like cultivars, without a correct traceability, you can't give a cultivar (here a location) name back to a plant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Evans Posted March 26, 2014 Report Share Posted March 26, 2014 Kisscool, that doesn't really make much sense to me... What new locations for a species are being distributed without the new locations? Seriously, who is going to travel to Mexico, drive and hike around for days collecting seeds and not bother including the location data??? I know it "could happen", but we should discount real data on the off chance a new location isn't going to be mentioned??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kisscool_38 Posted March 27, 2014 Report Share Posted March 27, 2014 I wasn't talking about new locations (I know people are now much more sensible to location data), but on old locations that were introduced into culture. The mere fact that it "could happen" as you said is just enough to justify the precautionary principle: without a strict traceability, you cannot give back a location name to a plant that hasn't. Also, could you assume that this plant was produced by a cutting from the original plant or was it produced by seed made of a crossing of 2 different ecotypes? We have to be cautious and not presume what has been done before. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Evans Posted March 27, 2014 Report Share Posted March 27, 2014 Actually, I think you're doing a fair amount of presuming... Again, why wouldn't someone label their seedlings? My presumption is that the main reasons location data is dropped is because it is superfluous or the grower made a mistake. In the cases it is superfluous, the differences are generally easy to see/notice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.