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.
Documented by oldnick on 2nd February 2013.
Edit history
date | user | change |
---|
17/02/2013 | dawn nelson | Deleted determination (orig): Cuscuta trifolii |
17/02/2013 | dawn nelson | Deleted determination (orig): Cuscuta europaea |
17/02/2013 | dawn nelson | Added determination (orig): Cuscuta trifolii |
17/02/2013 | dawn nelson | Added determination (orig): Cuscuta europaea |
17/02/2013 | dawn nelson | Deleted determination (orig): Cuscuta trifolii |
17/02/2013 | dawn nelson | Deleted determination (orig): Cuscuta europaea |
17/02/2013 | dawn nelson | Added determination (orig): Cuscuta europaea |
17/02/2013 | dawn nelson | Added determination (det): Cuscuta trifolii |
17/02/2013 | dawn nelson | Added determiner: B V [illegible] |
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
- dawn nelson wrote
- Should this be filed under Cuscuta epithymum?