| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
oldnick
Joined: 09 Oct 2009
Posts: 5472
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Tom Humphrey
Site Admin
Joined: 04 Jul 2005
Posts: 1298
Location: Wallingford, UK
|
 Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2015 9:53 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Hi Nick,
Thanks for posting about this. I've correct the two specimens that you noted, but it's likely that there may be some other miss-identifications.
Several of the specimen images from the BM were affected by a problem with the linking of taxon names to images. The museum is aware of the issue and once they send me a revised list of taxon names then I'll update the sheets to correct any remaining problems. (I'm also delaying loading any more BM sheets until the names are correct - there are several thousand more images waiting, which would obviously be better loaded with well-checked names from the outset...)
regards,
Tom |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
oldnick
Joined: 09 Oct 2009
Posts: 5472
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2015 7:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sounds tricky!
'Carex chordorrhiza (1132271) (1132269) (1132285)' |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
oldnick
Joined: 09 Oct 2009
Posts: 5472
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2015 8:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| There are quite a lot of these, and I think the easiest way to pick them out, is searching all specimens of 'C chordorriza', not from W Sutherland or E Inverness (also, first discovered 1897) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
oldnick
Joined: 09 Oct 2009
Posts: 5472
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 20, 2015 8:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Also all specimens of 'C. x helvola' not from S Aberdeenshire |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Log in to check your private messages
