Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Plants/Archive27

Archive 20

←

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

Archive 28

Archive 29

Archive 30

Phellinus weirii and Laminated root rot

I've created Laminated root rot as a seperate entry than Phellinus weirii because the former is the disease and the latter is the fungus. I'm not expert, and I don't know how things work in WP Fungi, so I thought I'd post this here. The P. weirii article is still very focus on the disease rather than on the fungus so you might want to take a look at it.Headbomb {ταλκ – WP Physics: PotW} 09:33, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm not really aware of a consensus one way or the other about whether to combine the disease article and the pathogen article. See for example the discussion at Talk:Sudden oak death#Requested move which seemed pretty inconclusive and didn't have a lot of people commenting on it. Either way, there's plenty of room for expanding the Laminated root rot and/or Phellinus weirii articles. Kingdon (talk) 01:27, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Image needs replacement - Juniperus communis

Hello all...

An image used in the article, specifically Image:Juniperus communis.jpg, has a little bit of a licensing issue. The image was uploaded back when the rules around image uploading were less restrictive. It is presumed that the uploader was willing to license the picture under the GFDL license but was not clear in that regard. As such, the image, while not at risk of deletion, is likely not clearly licensed to allow for free use in any future use of this article. If anyone has an image that can replace this, or can go take one and upload it, it would be best.

You have your mission, take your camera and start clicking.--Jordan 1972 (talk) 01:11, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and replaced it on Juniperus communis with another image from commons. I think this means Image:Juniperus communis.jpg can be deleted but I'm not sure how to propose that. If someone is attached to this image, I don't think there is any copyright issue with the original at et:Pilt:Kadakas.jpg, just the color-corrected version at Image:Juniperus communis.jpg. Kingdon (talk) 01:40, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Image needs replacement - Anthocyanin

Hello all...

An image used in the article, specifically Image:Juvenile anthocyanin.jpg, has a little bit of a licensing issue. The image was uploaded back when the rules around image uploading were less restrictive. It is presumed that the uploader was willing to license the picture under the GFDL license but was not clear in that regard. As such, the image, while not at risk of deletion, is likely not clearly licensed to allow for free use in any future use of this article. If anyone has an image that can replace this, or can go take one and upload it, it would be best.

You have your mission, take your camera and start clicking.--Jordan 1972 (talk) 01:13, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Ficus Indica?

If I may ask,as a point of clarification, is the Ficus indica, known in the Philippines as baleting-baging, a currently accepted species designation, or has it been renamed or something? It's not listed as a classification under Banyan. Thanks. Alternativity (talk) 10:32, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Ficus indica is given as cross reference to the tagalog phrase baleting-baging in sources on ethnopharmacology etc. Torkelson. Another source, NewCROP, states that it is a synonym of Ficus benghalensis (Banyan tree), which agrees with a unimelb database that states that F. benghalensis is the widely accepted name. The only certainty I can provide is that it is not Opuntia ficus-indica :-) cygnis insignis 17:02, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Hehe. Given the many names of Ficus benghalensis I don't now actually know how to rephrase it to incorporate the Ficus Indica or Ficus Indicus synonyms. Hehe. I do believe it should be there, though, to prevent confusion. It seems Ficus Indica/Ficus Indicus is in common use in the Philippines, at least. -- Alternativity (talk) 18:26, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I've incorporated the synonym in the taxobox.--Lenticel ^(talk) 01:07, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

What is the difference between floristics and phytogeography?

What's the difference between floristics and phytogeography? According to Wikipedia, the former "studies distribution and relationships of plant species over geographic areas", while the latter "is concerned with the geographic distribution of plant species". It is all as clear as mud to me. Hesperian 03:05, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

It hadn't crossed my mind that the distinction was unclear, but now you ask it's not trivial to put it into words - try - phytogeography focuses on the areas in which plants are found (and how they ended up there), and floristics on which plants are found in an area. Phytogeography is more theoretical, and floristics more descriptive. (See also zoogeography and faunistics.)

Or, phytogeography is the study of plant distribution; floristics the study of floras. Lavateraguy (talk) 06:49, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I think I get your drift. So if choose a locality and ask questions about the plant species that occur there – "What species occur here; why so many/few; why this species and not that species? what are the factors that have influenced the biodiversity of this locality?" – that's floristics. Whereas if I choose a taxon and ask questions about the localities in which it occurs — "Where does it occur; why such a large/small range; why here and not over there; how did it get here?" — that's biogeography. Does that sound right? Hesperian 06:58, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

edit conflict - I am just taking an uneducated guess here: Floristics tells us what plants live in an area with such and such boundaries, while phytogeography tells us what plants live under specific conditions. One says plants "x","y" and "z" live here while the other says plant "x" lives under these conditions and "y" lives under other conditions. Am I close? Hardyplants (talk) 07:06, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

I have long thought of floristics as a subdiscipline of phytogeography, probably because I learned it that way from Grady Webster. But I like Hesperian's distinction as a working definition.--Curtis Clark (talk) 04:29, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Hardyplants: No. :)

I think you're right on floristics, but your second definition is more ecology (community ecophysiology?) than phytogeography, I think. Phytogeography (biogeography in general) is also interested in where plants are in relation to one-another. The spatial/locational aspects are important, as are the evolutionary relationships. For example, the set of adaptations that you find in Mediterranean climates is an ecophysiological question. The difference in the species composition between these regions is a phytogeographic question. Guettarda (talk) 16:59, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks that makes it more clear for me...It looks like I was to preoccupied with here and now issue of what plants live were and completely neglected the past and the how and from whom they came from questions. Hardyplants (talk) 18:54, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Identification help

I'm pretty sure this is a Leucopogon, probably Leucopogon parviflorus (Coast Beard Heath), but I have absolutely no knowledge in this area so some help in identifying this plant would be good (before I go uploading others under the wrong name)! The image was taken in coastal Victoria, Australia. --bainer (talk) 11:33, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that appears correct. [1][2]. If you can provide location/region info on the image description page, that would be great. Melburnian (talk) 23:31, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I didn't bother putting all the information onto that cropped image, that was only for identification purposes. I've uploaded the uncropped version along with some others to Commons. --23:16, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

I've commenced a stub, thanks. Melburnian (talk) 01:30, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Please help identify this plant

Could someone please help identify the plant in this picture:

File:Red Banksia.jpg

Red Banksia

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.169.107.35 (talk • contribs)

It isn't a Banksia; it looks like a Waratah to me. Hesperian 04:06, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes it's within Proteaceae - the genus is Leucospermum; probably a cultivar of which there are many. Melburnian (talk) 04:22, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

It looks a lot like Leucospermum 'Scarlet Ribbon' --Melburnian (talk) 05:01, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Leucospermum 'Scarlet Ribbon'

pollen photo

I own a few electron microscope photos of yucca elata pollen grains. They look just like puffed wheat cereal. If there is any use for them, I would be glad to post them, but need help to do so. Yucca moth (talk) 13:43, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, to start with, see Wikipedia:COPYRIGHT#Image guidelines; we can only use the images if you took them or a few other categories. As for whether there would be a place for them, there probably are enough images at Pollen but the Yucca elata article could perhaps use them, or maybe some other article if the photo helped illustrate some point. Kingdon (talk) 05:12, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Request identification

G'day I was after an identification of this orchid from the tasmanian botanical gardens, unfortunately it was untagged but I think it's a species of Cymbidium, probably a cultivar, any help would be greatly appreciated. Flying Freddy (talk) 11:37, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Cultivated Orchids are not easy to ID, since the majority of them are hybrids. But maybe some one can put a name on this one. Hardyplants (talk) 12:12, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, there are thousands [3] of Cymbidium hybrids making ID very difficult indeed. --Melburnian (talk) 12:43, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Request identification of cherry crabapple(?) species

Wild cherries growing in Indiana

Can anyone tell what species of plant this is? It seems to be some type of wild cherry. Kaldari (talk) 15:13, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

It looks more like a species of crabapple. Colchicum (talk) 15:39, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. Any idea which one? Kaldari (talk) 15:57, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Judging by the location, it seems like it would have to be either Malus ioensis (Prairie Crabapple) or Malus coronaria (Sweet Crabapple). Kaldari (talk) 16:36, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

No clue what this is

Anthurium scherzerianum

Need some help with the unidentified thing here (is flower the right term?). Is this the best place to ask on wikipedia for identification or is there a help desk or something? Noodle snacks (talk) 07:46, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

It's an Anthurium inflorescence. Colloquially you could call it a flower in the same way as you call an composite pseudanthium or an Euphorbia cyathium a flower.

The spike is called a spadix - this is composed of many small flowers; the other bit is the spathe. Lavateraguy (talk) 09:32, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

It appears to be Anthurium scherzerianum [4]. This page is the most commonly used venue for plant ID - it was thought a few months ago that a separate ID page cold be established if demand increased, which it certainly has in the last few weeks. Melburnian (talk) 10:07, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I suspect demand would largely be seasonal, it is spring in many parts of the southern hemisphere at the moment, and the same would be true in six months on the other side of the world. Noodle snacks (talk) 10:54, 27 October 2008 (UTC)