Feedback request: Ranunculus penicillatus subsp. pseudofluitans (9007)

[Mike d'Apice]

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 #282461

Taxon:	Ranunculaceae: Ranunculus penicillatus subsp. pseudofluitans (Syme) S.D. Webster
Other name:	Ranunculaceae: Ranunculus fluitans Lam. ("River Water-crowfoot") "but recept (icle?) hispid"
Filed in taxon folder:	Ranunculaceae: Ranunculus penicillatus subsp. pseudofluitans (Syme) S.D. Webster
Collected by:	Rev. Augustin Ley
Collection date:	5/7/1908
Locality:	Great Britain, VC42 Breconshire, Three Cocks, SO13
communicated:	Rev. Augustin Ley
Institution:	University of Birmingham (BIRM)
Image:
fruits/flowers:	mature flowers
notes:	The year, (19)"08", is not certain.
Filing note:	R. pseudofluitans var minor

Inferred details are marked.

Documented by mikedaps on 9^th November 2009.

Edit history

date	user	change
10/11/2009	mikedaps	Added note: The year, (19)"08", is not certain.
10/11/2009	mikedaps	Added collector: Rev. Augustin Ley
10/11/2009	mikedaps	Added collection date: 5/7/1908
10/11/2009	mikedaps	Deleted determiner's note: "but recept (icle?) hispid"
10/11/2009	mikedaps	Added determiner's note: A. tennuis Sibth

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

mikedaps wrote

Collector and detailed location if that is what they are near illegible, no sign of a date - any ideas?

[Tom Humphrey]

There's a faint pencil date, bottom right of the label: 5 vii 08 (I'm not confident of the year)

The collector is probably Ley (there are other collections from Three Cocks, and it looks like his writing).

[Mike d'Apice]

Yep, now seen. Amended. Thanks Mike d'A