Notes From Nature Talk
The plant is a Scirpus (in a broad sense) in the Cyperaceace BTW.
There isn't a skip option in the new system so you kind of get stuck in a situation like this. It does seem like a rare case. Thoughts?
Well this is interesting because I was just trying to decide if scientific name should be required or not in the new system.
And fulva means tawny, so which is it?!
Agreed. It looks like Flathead County, Montana to me as well.
I agree. It looks like just notes about the specimen on this one.
I would guess that it is in Garfield County
That is a strange one for sure.
These are some strange ones for sure!
That is a tough one for sure. Seems like a good guess to me. Thanks.
I agree with @am.zooni, I see no collection number here.
I'd go with 37
I do not think so.
I think the collector number is 265.
Yes, these are late blooming plants, so I think November is possible.
I would assume the same.
I am not sure why it is not in ITIS. The name does appear to be valid (http://www.tropicos.org/Name/19300089)
Yes, this paper is most likely not "acid free" (acid neutral). Most paper used now will not do this.
I am going got the former since it looks like there is plenty of room on the page.
Hmm. Not sure about this one. It could mean either that there were 3 specimens collected (duplicates) or that the specimen has 3 sheets.
I see now. Yes, I would put it in the Location field.
@am.zooni You can just enter the name 'as is'. We are not asking you to figure out the accepted name.
That makes sense, but you can just write it verbatim.
I think so. This is in Grays Harbor County.
Note that sometimes preprinted header on the label is not correct. This one says "Pacific Coast Fungi"
It looks like Trinidad Colorado. It is on Las Animas County.
Good catch. I would just leave it blank in this case.
It looks like the genus Torilis but it is OK to leave blank (skip)
I would say that the year is 2004
! indicates that the person agrees.
It is a Hieracium in the Sunflower family. I think that the annotation is indicating that the person agrees with the original determination.
The date is 1836 but dropdown currently only goes to 1890.
comb. nov. ined, basically means that he intends to make a name change but has not published it yet.
I think it is 'Arnoglossum ovatum var. lanceolatum (Nutt) Pippen comb. nov. ined. 1973'
Agree with jaymoore. Almut G. Jones is saying that the species is Aster dumosus but the plant has characteristics of Aster simmondsii.
I think that seems reasonable since we are not planning to capture date ranges at this point for plant specimens. Thanks for your efforts!
We are asking for the author they way it is written. That would be 'Walt.' in this case.
The convention when there is no number is to write "s.n." (sine numero) which is latin for without a number. #s.n.
I see a pencil written number at the lower right that says 964. That could be the number.
This is a hybrid (or #cross). You can enter it as 'Eupatorium X pinnatifidum'
Hi Peter. Thanks for catching this one!
Yes, you are correct. We need to fix that, though these names occur less frequently in general
The lower one should have the rest. Thanks!
The top one is a 'correction' to the scientific name that was added later. You can use that one for entering the scientific name and author.