Feedback request: Viola odorata x hirta = V. x scabra (200705141105_6799)

[qgroom]

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 #235574

Taxon:	Violaceae: Viola odorata x hirta = V. x scabra F. Braun
Filed in taxon folder:	Violaceae: Viola odorata x hirta = V. x scabra F. Braun
Collected by:	Rev Henry Elliott Fox
Collection date:	16/8/1887
Locality:	Great Britain, VC67 South Northumberland, Druridge Bay, NZ2795, sand hills
ex herb:	Rev William Hunt Painter
Institution:	Aberystwyth University Herbarium (ABS)
Image:
fruits/flowers:	no flowers

Documented by keith barnett on 29^th July 2007.

Checked by tom humphrey

Edit history

date	user	change
06/09/2007	tom humphrey	Deleted locality: GB VC67,VC68 Druridge Bay, sand hills
06/09/2007	tom humphrey	Added collector: Rev Henry Elliott Fox
06/09/2007	tom humphrey	Added locality: GB VC67 Druridge Bay, sand hills NZ2795

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

qgroom wrote

I sent a link to this sheet to Mike Hardman (Viola referee). He believes this is Viola hirta. Here is what he says "The leaves are clearly nearer V. hirta than V. odorata in shape, and the hairs on the stems (as far as I can tell from the image) are pretty much V. hirta.
The key thing I would be looking for in V. x scabra would be intermediate runners/branching. The branches on these specimens do have a hint of runner about them, and that might have led to their being identified as V. x scabra, but the branching is really within the bounds of normal V. hirta.

So I would consider this V. hirta not V. x scabra."