Feedback request: Inula salicina subsp. UNKNOWN_a (5279)

[keith barnett]

This post was made automatically in response to a request for comment on the documentation form. There is more general info about such requests here.

Specimen #242081

Taxon:	Asteraceae: Inula britannica L. ("Meadow Fleabane")
Filed in taxon folder:	Asteraceae: Inula salicina subsp. UNKNOWN_a
Collected by:	Rev. Thomas Arthur Preston
Locality:	Great Britain, VC55 Leicestershire, Cropston Reservoir, SK51
communicated:	Mr Thomas Thorp
ex herb:	Mr Charles Bailey Mr Frederick Thompson Mott
Institution:	Manchester Museum (MANCH)
Image:
fruits/flowers:	mature flowers
notes:	no collection date

Inferred details are marked.

Documented by sureshot26 on 21^st December 2007.

Edit history

date	user	change
29/10/2008	keith barnett	Added note: no collection date
29/10/2008	keith barnett	Deleted collector: George Enos Mercer
29/10/2008	keith barnett	Added collector: Rev. Thomas Arthur Preston
29/10/2008	keith barnett	Added provenance: comm Mr Thomas Thorp
29/10/2008	keith barnett	Deleted collection date: 20/8/1908
29/10/2008	wonastow	Deleted determination (orig): Inula salicina subsp. UNKNOWN_a
29/10/2008	wonastow	Added determination (orig): Inula britannica

Specimen #266382

Taxon:	Asteraceae: Inula britannica L. ("Meadow Fleabane")
Filed in taxon folder:	Asteraceae: Inula salicina subsp. UNKNOWN_a
Collected by:	George Enos Mercer
Collection date:	20/8/1911
Locality:	Great Britain, VC55 Leicestershire, Cropston Reservoir, SK51
ex herb:	Mr Charles Bailey Mr Spencer Henry Bickham
Institution:	Manchester Museum (MANCH)
fruits/flowers:	mature flowers

Inferred details are marked.

Documented by wonastow following initial work by keith barnett on 29^th October 2008.

Edit history

date	user	change
29/10/2008	wonastow	Deleted determination (orig): Inula salicina subsp. UNKNOWN_a
29/10/2008	wonastow	Added determination (orig): Inula britannica
29/10/2008	wonastow	Added attribute flowerField: flowering
29/10/2008	tom humphrey	Deleted provenance: exherb Mr Frederick Thompson Mott
30/10/2008	wonastow	Deleted provenance: comm Mr Thomas Thorp

N.B. reporting of the edit history is currently fairly unclear and misleading. Most edits made to specimens appear as a pair of 'add' and 'delete' entries, which may not be together in the list. There are also often 'minor' edits, which are made automatically (rather than due to user activity), for example to merge synonym names.

Log-in to edit this sheet.

User comments about this sheet

keith barnett wrote

on review, apparently something unacceptable about the collection date

[David Price]

This specimen was correctly named Inula britannica L. by the collector - an American/Asian species (British Goldenhead) formerly naturalised in Britain & now believed to be extinct. I. salicina is found only at Lough Derg, Ireland.

[Tom Humphrey]

David,
Thank you for resolving the taxon name problem. The sheet got listed under 'subsp UNKNOWN_a' due to a technical problem when I first listed the sheet. I'd subsequently been unable to find a satisfactory name to correct the specimen to. Thanks v. much for this update.

Keith,
The problem with the date (20/8/1911) is that F T Mott died in 1908, so Bailey's label is at least partially incorrect.


regards,

Tom

[David Price]

"Mott died in 1908 ......."

Yes, but see my note 'Collectors and Biographies' under Bugs and Suggestions.

[David Price]

....... and Bickham's plant was not 'comm. Thomas Thorp'.

[Tom Humphrey]

Thank you for the further edit to the Bickam specimen. I'd already removed Mott before reading your post about Thorp's role. I've added a note to Thorp's entry.

I'd long suspected that Thorp was an intermediary rather than a collector, but it's good to have this confirmed.

How do you think Thorp should be recorded in general (if at all). Yesterday I checked the records that had him listed as 'collector', which were, as expected, erroneous in all cases. I also applied a database update changing 'ex herb Thorp' to 'comm Thorp' - I realise that that is also not accurate ('per' might be better than 'com').

regards,
Tom

[David Price]

Yes, I think Thorp's involvement should be recorded as part of the historical paper-chain (so often irresponsibly mutilated by Institutions which ought to have known better). How is J E Smith described vis-a-vis the Linnaean collections (for he bought and sold them!)?

The formula 'X exhanged plants with Y and Z' is somewhat misleading when the BES (not 'ex herb BES' either) acted as intermediary, sometimes between parties who may have had no actual knowledge of each other (though I don't know exactly the mechanics of the exchange), and A Ley did not 'exchange plants' with BIRM; it was a bequest.

The specimens at PTH from J H Balfour stated to have been collected by 'C & EF' were not collected by them. Christie and Edward Forbes were the receiving secretaries for the Bot Soc Edin to whom herb specimens were sent by regional and foreign 'corresponding secretaries'.

Where can we read about the actual workings of the Exchange Clubs? (And this wasn't intended as a rant, just some constructive observations!).

[David Price]

'BES' - I meant BEC.