Re: Iris lactea [was Siberian Email Robin]
- To: Multiple recipients of list <i*@rt66.com>
- Subject: Re: Iris lactea [was Siberian Email Robin]
- From: C*@aol.com
- Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 01:48:11 -0700 (MST)
In a message dated 97-03-23 23:24:27 EST, you write:
<< Clarence, I am confused over the naming. If lactea is well represented
by the place on page 77 of Glasgow's new book, then this is not the
species.
On the other hand, if the plates in Linnegar and Hewitt (opposite page
8), Innes (plate 95), and Dykes (plate 19) are considered, then we are
very close to the species. As ensata also occurs in the Ussuri region,
I would assume that the ensata identification is reasonable. I am
looking for a photo of a laevigata from Siberia that occured in
Currier's garden but, from memory, again the resemblance in structure
and colour are very similar.
If lactea now reflects the last three references, then I better start
from scratch and try to learn the species again! >>
Ian,
Yes, Iris ensata is reportedly also native to the Ussuri region, and I fear
my message which you quoted only added confusion. The iris pictured on page
77 of the Glasgow book is definitely Iris lactea. The Linnegar and Hewitt,
opposite page 8, is definitely I. ensata as is Plate XIX in Dykes. Plate 95
in Innes, however, is I. laevigata.
My comment was in part triggered by your previous references to Central
Asia---as you know, Iris lactea is native to several areas of Central Asia, a
most hostile environment for Iris ensata. But I may well have misunderstood,
and if you say the iris in the Realm of the Russian Bear is Iris ensata, I
certainly believe you. Sorry to have contibuted confusion to a subject area
in which confusion has abounded ever since Thunberg published his
description of Iris ensata more than 200 years ago.
I definitely don't think you should start from scratch---but perhaps I
should!
Best wishes, Clarence Mahan in VA
