Moraea

[Paul T]

Ray et al,

I was talking to someone with more knowledge than me on these various Moraeas (i.e simulans, pritzeliana and setifolia etc) as to what the differences are.  I need to do some more research, but his comment was that pritzeliana should have no spotting at all.  Mine under the pritzeliana name doesn't have any spots, while my simulans does, and the setifolia is much smaller than the two of them.  I think I have pics of all 3 if anyone is interested.  I want to do some more research to find out what is what before trying to say who has the correctly named things.... so often we get plants that are incorrectly named and never realise it until seeing pics like this where we notice big differences to the things we have in our own collection.

Fermi, Moraea fugax comes in at least white through yellow, and I think I recall reading it also comes in a mauve form?  Not sure about the later.  I have (or at least did have) a white, and a yellow that is darker than Ray's.  It is in flower here at the moment.  I can't think where my white fugax is unfortunately, which may mean it has gone to the Goddess!!  

[fermi de Sousa]

There are more moraeas to come but this one is flowering nicely this year; lemon coloured Moraea (was Homeria)


The next one is a rather fleeting one, small (less than 1" in diameter); any guesses?(Paul suggests M. setifolia)


cheers
fermi

[Paul T]

Fermi,

At that size, probably setifolia (I think I have the right name).  I will check my camera for the photos I took yesterday and are still on there.  I photographed the labels at the time I photographed the plants.  Is the smallest of the 3 I referred to above.  Cute little things, that is for sure.

[Ray]

Hi Paul,have been doing a bit of research myself and looks like what I have been calling M pritzeliana is really M simulans,but that name is not on the Kew register,
so now I have to go looking for the real thing.
Agree with your ID of Fermi Moraea. bye Ray

[Paul T]

Ray,

I have the true pritzeliana I think, at least it doesn't have spots and is a larger flower than the setifolia I have.  I still haven't uploaded the pics from my camera though, so can't show comparative photos.  I took photos of all 3 of them when they had flowers out, just so I had all 3 in the same sort of light.    If it is correct then I have enough to share, as it is a good pot of them and they will set seed freely if I let them I think.  Of course, if we have suitable cross pollinators then the seed wouldn't necessarily be true as the simulans is right next to it.

As to the name.... according to here....
http://www.gbif.net/species/browse/resource/8113/taxon/21345209/
if you follow down through the heirarchy the name is in the International Plant Names Index.  Not sure exactly what that means.  Attributed to "Baker" by the looks of it?

[Paul T]

Howdy All,

This is Moraea papillionacea.  Tiny little flowers maybe 1.5cm wide, if that.  Sets seed very easily as you can see by the seed pod next to it.  I only just noticed it flowering, and there are already a couple of pods on it.  Been in amongst grass and weeds so I am lucky to see any of the flowers at all.    It shows the interesting things you can find when you try to clean some of your pots up. 

Please click on the pic for a larger version.

[Darren]

Lovely little flower Paul. I have something similar with 3 different labels (vegeta, gawleri, tricolor). I think this little complex is a bit muddled in the seed exchanges!

I recall seeing a slightly bigger flowered yellow/orange M. papillonacea growing in the lawn of a hotel/chalet park in Cape Town, just like daisies here growing right down in the turf. Unfortunately it was dusk when I spotted them and could not get a picture.

[Paul T]

Darren,

As far as I know Moraea vegeta (or at least the one I have had) is larger flowered than this one.  I think M. tricolor has 3 distinct colours in the flower (I don't have it, so only second hand knowledge), whereas this one is more blended (if you know what I mean).  I think it also has a larger flower as well.  This one of mine is tiny, probably around the size of M. setifolia.  If it is incorrectly named then I would very much like to know so I can have it accurately labelled.

[Michael J Campbell]

Paul here is Moraea tricolour, I have a pic of Vegeta somewhere but I can't find it at the moment.

[Darren]

I can check the monograph later Paul. Michael's tricolour looks right from the description I remember reading when trying (and failing) to get accurately named seed.

[Darren]

Hi Paul,

The Moraea monograph describes M papilionacea thus;

"....outer sepals 22-28mm.... flowers bright salmon pink or yellow...pollen red or yellow...leaves, spathes etc finely pubescent" 

The size is hard to translate but allowing for the tepal reflexing a little (and the flower of this species is described as 'spreading') it suggests a flower diameter of around 3-4cm.

Moraea vegeta is described as outer tepals 20-25mm but they are more reflexed so a flower diameter in plan-view of 15mm is quite possible for this.

The give-away might be the colour of the pollen - if it is pale blue then it is likely your flower is a form of M.vegeta.

I'm pretty sure all my plants labelled 'vegeta', 'tricolour' and 'gawleri' are vegeta. Thank you seed donors

[Paul T]

Darren,

Could you please check the size descriptions for M. setifolia please if you have them there?  What size is it supposed to be?  This one is similar in size to that, perhaps even a bit smaller, and both of them are smaller than any other Moraea that I grow.  If you look at my pic you can see that the flower is pretty much flat too, no reflexing backwards.  What you see in the picture is all of the flower, not some of it lost by reflexing.  It is a small, round, mostly flat flower.... quite cute but easy to miss with the colour.  But you're right, the description of the species does not match what I have.    It was from seed, but I don't know now where that seed came from.  I recall the flowers on this one being tiny in the past, so I don't think it is just a product of neglect that is making the flowers smaller.

Thanks.

P.

[fermi de Sousa]

Paul,
thanks for your suggestion; I think you may be right and mine is M. setifolia.

This one is labelled Moraea cedarmontana and was grown from Silverhill Seeds; I hadn't noticed it for a few years and think it may have liked our wetter than usual early spring.


cheers
fermi

[Darren]

Sorry Paul, didn't read this until today. The monograph pre-dates the inclusion of the Gynandriris group into Moraea but I'll look tonight, meanwhile I agree with your identification of it based upon my own plants (if correct) which are very similar if slightly paler in colour and, to be honest, not nearly as nice.  I'd post a pic but the flowers are so fleeting that I usually miss them at their best!

[Paul T]

Darren,

I think you're saying that mine would be correctly named?  The problem is that the flowers are maybe 15mm wide in total, nowhere near the size of papillionacea according to the monograph, so I am not at all sure what I have.  As I think I've mentioned before.... I recall them always having been very small flowers, so I don't believe it is a cultural thing this year.  I quite like it, whatever it is, but I would like to sort out the name for it if I can, as I can pass on seed to people if interested in it.