Galanthus for ID

[mark smyth]

I'm sure there are people out there who would like their snowdrop/s identified. That includes me. I havent had a problem with labels going missing but now some are.

Does anyone know this snowdrop? It has plicatus genes. The margins are only slightly turned over.

[Paddy Tobin]

Sorry, Mark. I can be of no help. Paddy

[Martin Baxendale]

I'm sure there are people out there who would like their snowdrop/s identified. That includes me.

Trouble is, it's always dodgy trying to name snowdrops just from a photo on the forum, especially if the owner doesn't even know for sure whether it's a named cultivar. If someone's lost a lable and thinks they know what a 'drop might be and want a second opinion that's one thing, but it's so easy to mis-identify and create yet another imposter if someone says 'I've no idea what this might be. Anyone  got any suggestions?' with no other information. So many snowdrops look like other snowdrops, and from years of raising seedlings I know that many of the seedlings I've raised could easily be mistaken for named cultivars. So I hope everyone will forgive me if I often seem reluctant to rush into identifications and keep making dubious, cautionary sounds in these situations. I'm not being curmudgeonly, just cautious. The history of snowdrops is littered with mis-identifications, sometimes by even the most knowledgeable growers.

 

 

[mark smyth]

I need to start keeping records again.

[Martin Baxendale]

I need to start keeping records again.

Me too!!  As I mentioned on another thread, I just found a snowdrop in the garden ('Robert Berkeley') I didn't even know I had!   

[Anthony Darby]

I need to start keeping records again.

Me too!!  As I mentioned on another thread, I just found a snowdrop in the garden ('Robert Berkeley') I didn't even know I had!  

So that's where I left it!?

[Martin Baxendale]

I need to start keeping records again.

Me too!!  As I mentioned on another thread, I just found a snowdrop in the garden ('Robert Berkeley') I didn't even know I had!  

So that's where I left it!?

Finders keepers!!!

[mark smyth]

This is an example why I tell beginners to only buy distinctive snowdrops.

[Alan_b]

I think the test of any snowdrop, identified or not, should be the merits it has.  Is it particularly, large, small, neat, prolific, hardy, early-flowering, late flowering or unusual and are the flowers (and/or the leaves) particularly attractive?  Perhaps there should be a rating form so you could give a snowdrop marks out of 10 in each category? 

In terms of classification, am I right in thinking it should be somewhere in class N1b of the Book, i.e. Hybrid snowdrop with inner segments with a single mark on the apical half or less, vernation one or more margins explicative?  That would narrow the choice of named snowdrops down to 40 or so and many of those could be quickly eliminated because the mark is less extensive than in Mark's example.       

[Brian Ellis]

I havent had a problem with labels going missing but now some are.

I know it's shutting the stable door after the horse is bolted, and you don't want to use net pots, but using net pots means you can also put a label in the base of the pot so if the one above ground is lost to birds etc, there is still a failsafe.  I know people who use sheeps eartags (the left one if my memory serves me rightly as it has a hole in it) these can be bought already impressed with numbers.  The hole is used for attaching to wire made into a hook so that it can be plunged into the soil  in the middle of the clump (obviously when replanting to avoid damage).  This is an excellent use for old wire coat hangers.  A master index is kept in book form, and, should you wish to show your collection to friends, visitors etc, labels can be temporarily inserted using the Master key so people can easily see which they are.  Not my idea, but one I am toying with.

[Maggi Young]

I think the test of any snowdrop, identified or not, should be the merits it has.  Is it particularly, large, small, neat, prolific, hardy, early-flowering, late flowering or unusual and are the flowers (and/or the leaves) particularly attractive?  Perhaps there should be a rating form so you could give a snowdrop marks out of 10 in each category? 

In terms of classification, am I right in thinking it should be somewhere in class N1b of the Book, i.e. Hybrid snowdrop with inner segments with a single mark on the apical half or less, vernation one or more margins explicative?  That would narrow the choice of named snowdrops down to 40 or so and many of those could be quickly eliminated because the mark is less extensive than in Mark's example.       

Alan! Wonderful, a man with a reasoned approach to identifying the blessed thing! Thank you!

[Martin Baxendale]

In terms of classification, am I right in thinking it should be somewhere in class N1b of the Book, i.e. Hybrid snowdrop with inner segments with a single mark on the apical half or less, vernation one or more margins explicative?  That would narrow the choice of named snowdrops down to 40 or so and many of those could be quickly eliminated because the mark is less extensive than in Mark's example.       

But is Mark sure it came to him with a name, or was it an un-named snowdrop that someone gave him because they'd found it in a garden? The point I was trying to make is that not every snowdrop has a name and we should only try to put a definite name to an unidentified snowdrop if there's good reason to think it is a named cultivar and not just an un-named seedling (unless it's a very distinctive un-named seedling, in which case it needs a new name).

I appreciate what Mark says about people wanting to know if their 'find' is a named snowdrop, perhaps a rare and valuable one; it's a natural desire. But I wouldn't want to encourage people to reach straight for the snowdrop monograph every time they find an un-named snowdrop in a garden and start using the naming system to try to idnetify it unless they have some provenance to suggest the snowdrop is a named form. Identification keys work fine (most of the time!) for species, but much less so for garden varieties, where the distinctions can be far more minute than those between species, and where any number of garden seedlings may exhibit very similar features to named forms.

Again, I'm not tryi ng to be curmudgeonly, and I'm all in favour of trying to correctly id snowdrops where possible. Just trying to sound a note of caution.

[Brian Ellis]

I wouldn't want to encourage people to reach straight for the snowdrop monograph every time they find an un-named snowdrop in a garden

Particularly so as, good as it is, it is far from complete and could do with Volume 2 covering some of the others

[mark smyth]

I heard a whisper last week about vol. 2. Martin this snowdrop is named but it doesnt really matter if I dont get the name again.

[Martin Baxendale]

Martin this snowdrop is named but it doesnt really matter if I dont get the name again.

I wasn't saying we shouldn't try to id your snowdrop, especially if you know it's a named one and have just lost the label. I was just using it as an example to make a wider point about us all needing to be careful about encouraging people to try to slap names on any and every snowdrop they might find in gardens with no label. Many of them may be seedlings which never had names but bear some resemblance to a named snowdrop in the book, and bingo, people are thinking if it looks like so-and-so then it must be so-and-so, especially if they're not so experienced in snowdrop collecting. I just thought that starting a thread inviting people to show pics for id could be getting into dangerous waters, and simply wanted to urge a little caution before the ball starts rolling.