| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
oldnick
Joined: 09 Oct 2009
Posts: 5472
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 08, 2011 5:16 pm Post subject: cultivated specimens |
 |
|
| A recent message board question re cultivated specimens, was whether to enter a site, and if so the original or the garden - I missed the answer, what was it? I am in favour of entering the original site for preference, or if not given then the garden site. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
hallucigenia
Joined: 26 Mar 2009
Posts: 1739
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2011 6:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I always think as the specimen in question came from a garden then this is the originating site for this specimen..
I always add the 'wild' site as well, for some botanist may will need the information in plotting the movement of a specimen over time, besides the more detail the better as who knows what the future will bring! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
oldnick
Joined: 09 Oct 2009
Posts: 5472
|
| Posted: Sun May 01, 2011 7:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Whereas I've now replied to kkopp's original message that I think it definitely best to enter the original site even though the other details inc date won't strictly 'match'. I think this makes a much more valuable entry. After all, someone interested in alpine species is hardly likely to search Norwood or Bournemouth; and such a species isn't really essential for a list of Surrey plants |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hallucigenia
Joined: 26 Mar 2009
Posts: 1739
|
| Posted: Mon May 02, 2011 5:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think we could do with a ruling on this so we all do the same, Tom?
Chris |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Log in to check your private messages
