Crocus January 2016

[Yann]

Crocus hyemalis, from the Carmel Mountain Park, Israel.
Crocus caricus, from our friend Janis.

[Yann]

Crocus isauricus, TK, Gunei, it smells so good i've brought it in my desk.
Crocus biflorus pseudonubigena, playing with light

[WimB]

Crocus isauricus, TK, Gunei, it smells so good i've brought it in my desk.

Oh no, it's highly addictive....withdrawal symptoms are seeing flying Crocusses everywhere and wanting to travel to the mediterranean...

[Yann]

I've the gut feeling that each year i catch the same illness 
I draw crosses on the walls waiting for spring, the plane is already booked for 2 destinations...

[ruben]

Stunning crocusses Yann! A very good start of the new year 

Here is Crocus biflorus ssp. stridii in flower and also Crocus biflorus ssp. isauricus

[Janis Ruksans]

Here is ... Crocus biflorus ssp. isauricus

Such crocus was for a long regarded as C. isauricus, but recently Kerndorff, Pasche & Harpke, showed that true C. isauricus comes from more Eastern locality near Sertavul and looks quite different.
The main features of flower are
Flowers – of a very bowl-shape with segment-proportion of outer segments 2.2. (see attached pictures)
Flower segments – Inside all segments are invariably white without any markings.
Outer segments –22-26-33 mm long and 9-12-14 mm wide, outside predominantly very finely speckled light bluish violet, without dark basal blotches.
Those from localities situated west were described as several new species, and on your pictures could be some of those, something resembles C. mawii or C. concinnus. Most likely one of those was selected by O. Erol et al. as type of C. isauricus, but there are some features on attached original herbarium of Siehe (his gatherings were used as type for description of C. isauricus), which force me to follow HKEP opinion, and namely it is dimensions of flower segments. In C. concinnus (if I correctly identified it): “The segment proportion of outer segments is 3.4 signalising comparatively strap-like segments”. But in crocus from Sertavul: “Segment-proportion of outer segments very low (2.2) which signalises a very bowl-shaped flower”. Flowers on published herbarium sheet are distinctly bowl-shaped (segment proportion ~ 2.1-2.5), so they more match with specimens from Sertavul. I would not name C. concinnus flower segments as “strap-like” but its flowers certainly are not bowl-shaped, too.

[ruben]

Thanks a lot for explanation janis!
It becomes really difficult for us as amateur growers to identify a plant correctly...

But if i look to this picture the lower one is very similar to Crocus concinnus (http://crocusmania.blogspot.be/2015/01/crocus-concinnus-kerndorff-pasche.html)

[Janis Ruksans]

Thanks a lot for explanation janis!
It becomes really difficult for us as amateur growers to identify a plant correctly...

You are wrong if you think that for me it is easy... So many still unidentified stocks in collection. We had minus 19 last night and after a week offered minus 26... brrrr

[WimB]

You are wrong if you think that for me it is easy... So many still unidentified stocks in collection. We had minus 19 last night and after a week offered minus 26... brrrr

I wish, here temps stay above +5°C constantly, and until the 11th at least the minimal temp. will stay above 5°C. We don't want a winter like yours, Janis...but something akin to a winter would be agreeable.

[Janis Ruksans]

It is still only late evening but outside is already minus 20 and almost no snow. For tomorrow offered heavy snowing, some warming and from Tuesday again minus 20. But it is good time to study flower pictures, literature, herbariums and time for unexpected discoveries and one more species was identified just sitting at table and computer.
Amazingly, but this happened when I started to compare original description with published pictures and found some discrepancies. Looking on my plants under slightly wider concept, and taking in account sometimes quite freely noted localities of locus classicus, was possible to attach correct name (I'm certain for 99%) to another one acquisition, still grown under number and it was
Crocus katrancensis
Pictures from wild and from greenhouse attached. The one with chaotically positioned flowers is included only to show great variability of this species.

[YT]

It is early evening and outside is still +11°C and cloudy. For tomorrow will be sunny/cloudy and +6 to 15°C, get chilly from Friday down to +2°C in the morning through next weekend

Crocus rujanensis from Janis. Their flower colour is deeper and sepals are broader than C. rujanensis, JJA 351.100.

[ruben]

Only just opened but promising:
 Crocus sieberii 'Spartacus'
 Crocus biflorus ssp. nubigena JP 8604
 Crocus ushakiensis (former Crocus crysanthus 'Ushak Orange')

[Yann]

lucky Ruben mine 'Spartacus' avorted 

[Janis Ruksans]

 Crocus biflorus ssp. nubigena JP 8604

I suppose that JP 8604 could be regarded as nubigena. It is from Lesbos, but other "nubigenas" from Samos, Ikaria, Karpathos and Turkey - most likely will be another different species, at least they are separable by morphology, without special DNA. May be another one will be selected as typical nubigena, I don't know. That "nubigena" from Goktepe in Turkey was named as C. antherotes (I at least suppose that, as plant from there looks perfectly matching description).
I hope that HKEP will publish them (nubigena series review) sooner or later, I don't want to enter there and I only can agree that - may be soon will be requested DNA certificate attached to each purchased corm... , although I described more than 20 new taxa, but I always looked for clear features to identify even without DNA. I quite recently got reply from one famous Crocus specialist when I asked about possible identity of some of mine acquisitions - "As I told you often before, the final proof can be made only by DNA." I don't think that it is the best. And I can't agree to thesis that for identifying are needed at least 30 randomly selected plants to get average values for features. It is good for description, I agree, but not for identifyuing. I don't think that thesis in key like "filaments 6.5 mm long..." versus "filaments 5.4 mm long..." are the best features for identifying of species if you have 1-3 plants in your pot.
Janis

[Janis Ruksans]

But if i look to this picture the lower one is very similar to Crocus concinnus (http://crocusmania.blogspot.be/2015/01/crocus-concinnus-kerndorff-pasche.html)

This one could be concinnus and I attached to this (most likely) that name, but it could be C.mawii, too. I still didn't made final decision about identity of my acquisitions from this region where both species are growing. Unfortunately "locus classicus" mentioned in original description covers too large area, to be helpful. It is one of the greatest problems with many new varieties published by HKEP. We simply must trust and can't to make cross-checking...