Muscari ... and some relatives 2009

[Hans J]

here a Muscari is flowering ( received from a nice friend )....has anybody a suggestion for a name of this species ?

[Carlo]

I don't know myself, but the Kisil-Dagh provenance should be a help...

[Sinchets]

Thanks again Oron. I have had H.heldreichii from 2 sources in the past- maybe my other plant is more of an intermediate.

[Oron Peri]

Yes Simon it probably does, H. heldreichii is easy to distinguish by having only two leaves, one much bigger than the other.

Hans, in my opinion what you have there is a beautiful M. anatolicum [Cowley & Ozhatay],
a relatively new species [ 1994] from Center and S. Anatolia.
It has this pronounced open, white 'mouth', Very Nice one!!!

[Hans J]

Oron ,

Many thanks for your identification  - I'm really gratefull ....

In meantime I have looked a bit , for M.anatolicum is given Sultan Daghi ....thats not far away from Kisil Dagh ...

I will try to make seeds !!!

[Jim McKenney]

here a Muscari is flowering ( received from a nice friend )....has anybody a suggestion for a name of this species ?

Hans, what a nice, crisp photo - and the color harmony in those flowers is super!

[Mark Griffiths]

I only grow one Muscari at the moment and that is macrocarpum. I have the "normal" form which has yet to flower and a number of years back I bought "Golden Fragrance" which seems to have greener leaves but has done very well for me.

[Hans J]

Hans, what a nice, crisp photo - and the color harmony in those flowers is super!

Thanks Jim 

I'm glad if you like it !

[ashley]

Exquisite Hyacinthella heldreichii forms Simon; may I ask where you got them?  I have the 'split' H. lazulina coming along but it's a year or two off flowering yet.

What lovely muscari Hans and Mark.  You're lucky: both times I bought 'Golden Fragrance' it turned out to be riddled with virus, so now I'm trying M. macrocarpum from seed instead.

[Sinchets]

Exquisite Hyacinthella heldreichii forms Simon; may I ask where you got them?  I have the 'split' H. lazulina coming along but it's a year or two off flowering yet.

Ashley this one came from PC Rare Plants, maybe 5 or more years ago.

[ashley]

Apologies Simon; you had already mentioned the sources of these plants (in reply #125). 
That dark H. glabrescens (reply #122) is particularly nice.

[Sinchets]

No problem Ashley the first posting I wasn't too sure about, but this one had been left with its label. There should be a few more flowering soon, and by the time they are over Hyacinthella leucophaea will also be flowering in the wild.

[Ezeiza]

"GPS-data would really be even better."

Gote, GPS readings can be a bomb and must be very carefully handled. In recent years description of new species if published or available in the Internet, never include useful location data, on puprpose. To see it you have to go to the Herbarium and see it for yourself (if they let you in). Needless to say, it is to avoid that information be available to plunderers. Among very many, the example of Sternbergia candida, wiped out from the wild in a couple of years since publication is foremost. It is not an easy species in cultivation and lots of those wild bulbs plundered for sale were lost in a few years.

Besides those bulb merchants that are nice people, and basically plant lovers, you have these creeps that have no second thoughts when they know of a new or uncommon species. See the case of the Czech that was caught on the spot with hundreds of Oncocyclus plants dug from the wild for sale. This was very recent but one can't help but wonder how many times he did that before and how many people bought those wild collected plants over the years.

Our love for plants is absorbing but we are perhaps the last generation capable of doing something positive to save species. In the future, species will just disappear flooded by the population explosion. Making public strategic locations could only speed the destruction of unique plants.


Alberto

[Jim McKenney]

Alberto, your mild rebuke to Göte really should have been directed to me - it was I who introduced this controversial topic.

I would like to tell two stories from my childhood and university days which touch on this issue.

As a youngster I lived in a suburban neighborhood which still included patches of undeveloped woodland. I spent my time there with my dog, collecting plants and animals. One day in my early teens, as I was returning from the woods with that day's booty, I spotted one of my adult neighbors who I knew had an interest in plants (he was a Department of Agriculture employee). I held up one of my finds, and triumphantly told him "I got the last one". He didn't say much, but the intense look of disgust he turned on me really made a very sour impression. I was disappointed and confused, and left.  At that age I was largely clueless about conservation - like most people back then, I took the attitude that the world was there for my plucking. The adult had made no effort to turn this into a teaching experience for him and a learning experience for me: opportunities missed for sure.
As an adult, when I remember this day, any regrets I might have about collecting "the last one" are assuaged by the fact that the site in question has been under concrete for decades.

Now fast forward to my undergraduate years. In the past there were bogs scattered here and there in this area. Most quickly disappeared to agriculture and other development. But there was one which survived, and its location was a more-or-less open secret. It was a tiny bog, and thus knowing the approximate location was hardly enough to get you in.
One day, some of my botanists friends and I decided to visit the bog. We sought help in locating the bog from one of the botany professors. He refused to help us in any way. With that option closed, we sought out some topographical maps and charted our own route. And we did eventually find the bog.
Several years later a massive road construction project took place in the area of the bog. Run-off from the construction silted the bog, the surface level was forever changed. After the extent of the damage became apparent, a weak last-minute "save-the-bog" effort was launched; this resulted in a chain-link fence being erected around the remains of the bog - a fence soon to be broached and partially torn down by free-spirited sorts who regarded the bog as part of their personal legacy. The situation was a mess. I blame all of those who prided themselves on keeping the bog a secret for much of this. There is no doubt in my mind that had the bog been publicized and people had the chance to realize what a treasure was there, a huge public outcry might have saved it.
There is even more irony to this story. Much of the secrecy surrounding the bog was intended to prevent plunderers from collecting a certain plant there. The irony is that this plant was evidently introduced to the bog and did not grow there in the distant past.   

Alberto, when you wrote "Our love for plants is absorbing but we are perhaps the last generation capable of doing something positive to save species" it reminded me a little bit of something Simon said in a recent post and of something I am beginning to think about. Simon suggested that it would ge great if more field botany could be funded (I hope I've said it right, Simon). I think it would be great if governments would set up programs to propagate native plants (either domestically or by outsourcing)  likely to be of interest to avid collectors. Modern micropropagation techniques might make it possible to get thousands of such desirable plants into commerce within a few years, thus taking off the pressure on wild populations and removing much of the incentive for plunderers.
I'm convinced that wild plants need to be in the wild to be preserved; in particular, for insect pollinated plants, once you take them from their natural environment, they begin to drift genetically unless propagated only as a clone. But the standards for horticulture needn't be so high, and I'll bet many of us would be glad to have such propagated material for our gardens.

How many of you, as I did, stepped into this thinking it had something to do with gardening, only to find out that it had a lot more to do with politics?

[Sinchets]

Alberto and Jim- I have to say I agree with both of you. I hadn't heard that Sternbergia candida had been collected to  extinction in the wild- and if this is true it is appalling, as it has undoubtably been collected by people local to its wild  range for sale, I guess mainly, to western Europe. The same applies to the area mentioned on another forum where a forumist describes the flowering sized bulbs of Fritillaria alburyana vanishing in the short time between his 2 visits to the site. I am sure that a lot of the  large scale digging that goes on is by sellers with large nurseries back at home who can't  spare the time it would take to grow from seed and bulk up and so take all they can find in the wild. Some of the responsibily must lie locally though with people who hadn't even thought anything of these 'wild flowers' until they become aware that 'westerners' will pay a fortune for them. That's economics for you and this leads into politics. I wonder how much press the Pilous story got in Turkey and whEther this has resulted in even more people realising that silly money can be made from Oncocyclus Irises. I say this based also on experiences of my one order from a certain nursery, which supplies plants which are frequently misnamed and often not even in the same genus as the plant that was ordered. I will not order again, as I was left with the sinking feeling that none of these were  nursery grown plants, but were more the products of some distant hillside, where someone had been sent with a shopping list.
I agree with Jim that GPS is useful, but maybe kept to an area in a country rather than a metre quadrant. Collection data is useful not only to be bale to plot any variation in a species, but also to know what conditions any garden grown plants may be willing to take. Following from this what we then need are responsible people who do not use these sites as resources but are able to keep an eye on them as stewards.
Having lived near Sites of  Special Scientific Interest near Manchester- now under motorways- I do understand how you feel Jim, about losing wild areas to  development- but sadly against Politics, Conservation never wins. We once lived near a road that was widened, completely obliterating a large population of Dactylorhiza purpurella (Nothern marsh orchid). Of course no one there to remove them to a safe site because of the convoluted laws involved. They aren't rare in Britain, but such a large population is not exactly common either. Still the town has a dual carriageway now- and maybe the orchids set enough seed to move further away from the road.
By the way Jim are we allowed to ask what 'the last one' was?