Crocus January 2010

[Maggi Young]

I would recommend to compare your plant with the article "crocus biflorus in Anatolia"
by Kerndorff and Pasche. You can find some useful dates of the original species there

..... in the RHS .. "the Plantsman" journal, I think.

[Sinchets]

The source was PC and the plants on his site pic have lilac flowers, but in no way, shape or form am I complaining  
Here are 2 pics of the same plant now that the flower has closed at the end of the day- there seem to be almost 3 stripes on the outer petals. Thanks, Thomas  

[ashley]

I would recommend to compare your plant with the article "crocus biflorus in Anatolia"
by Kerndorff and Pasche. You can find some useful dates of the original species there

..... in the RHS .. "the Plantsman" journal, I think.

Here too for description of 2 new taxa in the biflorus complex.
More here (auf Deutsch), although not punctatus either.

[Maggi Young]

I would recommend to compare your plant with the article "crocus biflorus in Anatolia"
by Kerndorff and Pasche. You can find some useful dates of the original species there

..... in the RHS .. "the Plantsman" journal, I think.

Here too.

 Even better, Ashley! Many thanks. 

Mmm..... that not the paper with the references to C. biflorus punctatus, though..... that is another, I fear.....

Crocus biflorus in Anatolia: part two.
Personal Authors: Kerndorff, H., Pasche, E.
Author Affiliation: Sundgauer Str. 144, 14167, Berlin, Germany.
Document Title: Plantsman

Abstract:

In this second part, a closer look is taken at individual C. biflorus populations in Lycian and Pisidian Taurus of SW Anatolia of Turkey. In addition to these two areas, SW Anatolia also consists of Caria and Pisidia, and these four areas seem to be the centre of distribution for the C. biflorus aggregate. This article considers the climate and phytogeographical elements of these areas, and reports a study of 25 populations. Some 7 characters were measured for a mean of 30 individuals per population and the data were subjected to multivariate analysis using UPGMA cluster analysis. The resulting dendrogram had two main clusters, the first comprising mainly of populations of subsp. tauri while the second comprised populations with affinities to subspp. nubigena, pseudonubigena and punctatus. Populations of the first cluster mainly belonged to the Irano-Tauranian element whereas populations of the second cluster either belonged to the Mediterranean element or to the Mesopotamian district of the Irano-Turanian element. A series of colour photographs and maps are included.

Publisher: Royal Horticultural Society (RHS)

[ashley]

Sorry Maggi, reading the other one put punctatus out of my mind. 
Subscription only it seems

[Maggi Young]

Yes, Ashley...... drat it!  

[Luc Gilgemyn]

The source was PC and the plants on his site pic have lilac flowers, but in no way, shape or form am I complaining  
Here are 2 pics of the same plant now that the flower has closed at the end of the day- there seem to be almost 3 stripes on the outer petals. Thanks, Thomas  

Whatever it is Simon, it's a real beauty !!

[Sinchets]

I agree, Luc- and maybe one of those flowers better appreciated closed than open.
Also 'flowering' here today another group of C.korolkowii, which I may not get to see open as we have more snow on the way.

[Janis Ruksans]

Crocus biflorus punctatus is quite specific plant. For determination can be used hard coriaceous corm tunics (similar to isauricus). Important is length of filaments and anthers. In subsp. punctatus filaments are 2-4 mm long, anthers 11-13 mm long, but in isauricus - filaments 4-7 mm long, anthers 7-11 mm long. There are two forms generally in cultivation, white and blue. Anthers usually has blackish basal lobes, but in white colored specimens they can be absent. Those basal lobes you can see on fragment of picture.
Simon's plant has blackish tips of anthers which are not so characteristic, but variability can be larger than known to me. At present I can't remember that I sometimes saw such anthers. I suppose that I know from where (not from me!) comes corms sold by PC. There are grown several biflorus complex acquisitions and corms offered by him could be hybrids. But this is only speculation.
Janis

[Sinchets]

Thanks, janis. The stigmas of mine are longer than the stamens unlike those you show. Have you any ideas what the parents could be if this is a hybrid?

[Janis Ruksans]

Thanks, janis. The stigmas of mine are longer than the stamens unlike those you show. Have you any ideas what the parents could be if this is a hybrid?

May be nubigena, pseudonubigena. Really I have no idea at present.
Janis

[Armin]

Regarding C. biflorus ssp. punctatus discussion:

Does anybody have good pictures of C. alatavicus (i.e.top view to see style and anthers) for comparison?

I did not found a good one. It is just to satisfy my interest.

[Tony Willis]

The biflorus group is one of the most difficult in the genus and I would never dare
to give a 100% identification just from a photo. One of the most important features is
to know where the plant came from, if this isn't known you can cancel any ID attemps.

TH

I struggle with this concept,surely if it is distinct it must key out. I had this discussion once about dactylorhiza and was told knowing where it came from was essential in order to identify it. There seems no logic in this.

[Sinchets]

I'm inclined to agree with Thomas. Species and subspecies are often described from a limited number of individuals found in 1 particular location. If you are then presented with a plant from an intermediate location will it be difficult to identify this from a key that was not designed to include intermediates.
This is made even more difficult in genera such as Dactylorhiza, which show natural variation making keying out difficult. They also hybridise easily and knowing a location makes it easier to work through the possible parent species. Go to another location and the genetic makeup could be quite different. Better still go to an area like Bulgaria or Northern Greece, where Dactylorhiza in the mountain areas have been poorly studied, and you can only make assumptions based on possibilities. Even this has its faults. What do you do when a key says a plant does not grow in a certain area? Ophrys reinholdii was discovered growing in Bulgaria a few years. Check any orchid book from before this date and Bulgaria will not be in a list of locations for this species- yet it does grow here 
Keying out is made harder when new species are determined by ever smaller details and differences, so that ultimately we are left with a hoard of 'mutabile', 'confusum' and 'sororum' species as we see in Fritillaria and Colchicum.

[Thomas Huber]

I struggle with this concept,surely if it is distinct it must key out. I had this discussion once about dactylorhiza and was told knowing where it came from was essential in order to identify it. There seems no logic in this.

Surely you are right, Tony, the plant must key out somehow, but I only meant that this is hard to do ONLY FROM A PHOTO!
There might be species from the biflorus complex, for which this is possible, like ssp biflorus with its wide distribution in
Italy, but looking at the rare ones like ssp punctatus, that only grow in a small area it is hard if not impossible in my opinion.
In the last years there have been so many new discoveries of biflorus ssp, some of them only present on a single mountain,
they look similar to other ssp in first sight, but they do show important differences and the phylogenetic research of these
plants shows clearly, that they are related to other ssp, but not the same. And I have to agree with Simon: The biflorus
ssp show an unbelievable amount of variation, so how can these plants be described from just a few samples? And we have
to accept, that plants don't read these books in which humans write how they have to look and where they have to grow  

To find a final conclusion, I hope you will agree with me, that it is really helpful for ID to know where the plants origin was?