Orchid Observers Talk
BM001188290: no actual ID on the label. I've assumed it's the same as the others on the sheet.
It's unclear whether this plant was growing in VC21 or VC20. The county boundary is rather convoluted round there!
The sheet's marked VC16 but I agree with the transcriber, this locality's in VC15
The locality was probably the place now spelt "Achosnich" on Ardnamurchan; I'm still not sure how the collector spelt it.
Typed label doesn't give the year but I'm sure you have a record of it.
It has a date and location but no clear ID of the plants!
Sorry - I think the label says Inglton, West riding, Yorkshire, which would mean VC66 is for the wrong Ingleton.
The date looks deceptively like 8/6/76 but that suits neither the donor's dates nor his writing: I'm fairly sure it's 1946.
Or more than two, as both labels are to the left of the line.
Adventurer's Fen - NE end of the Special Protection Area
BM001081225: barcode seems to belong to two drawings with no separate collection label
Collected by John Blackstone, 1713-1753. Not so much a name as a description in Latin: the binomial system was still being invented
Illegible locality seems to be Piercy's Bridge, Greenstead Green, Halstead, VC19 - I'd moved on before it clicked. No proper date anyway.
Yes, in the picture it looks more like downland than a marsh.
This sheet has no date or locality
#hybrid
BM001171391: there are two collections with different dates and localities - all the data are there but we need a second barcode.
BM001164093: two of the plants on this sheet have no proper labels. Perhaps there are written records that would help.
BM001189443: the pencilled label is too faint to read on the website. I cheated.
I hope the photographer said what this one is!
Aaargh- missed the insect - it was hiding behind the info box!
BM001116882: the date has been transcribed as July 1834 but could just as well be 1936 - might be worth checking if it matters.
I suppose Buckingham Palace only let them take one flower!
They don't grow in places like that round here!
BM001188560: the sheet's marked VC17 but this collection's clearly from E Kent. I've entered 15.
Great habitat shot, where's the picture of the plant?
Lovely picture!
BM001189300: no VC marked on sheet. The site is Redgrave Fen, at the junction of four VCs - I don't know, I left it blank.
and I can't read the locality or the date. The various pencilled notes suggest the original sheet isn't much better!
BM001171475: hybrid, determined as uncertain. No collection date. VC on sheet is for the other specimen, I've entered Pembroke.
BM001055027: date transcribed as 1851 but to my eye looks more like 1857
In Dunbartonshire? I thought broad-leaved, they often lack red colour when growing in shade.
Nice specimen though
That's small - Brown Argus?
It's huge and seems to be growing with alder. Could it be a fuchsii/praetermissa hybrid?
I thought it read North'd = 67 or 68. The locality might be legible on the original sheet, if worth it (there's no exact date).
Vice county not marked on sheet and we can't get it from locality "Somerset".
I can't find the name of the species on this sheet (and wonder if the very large plant's a hybrid)
Duh, sorry!
Species not marked
Date 16/8/79 has been transcribed as 1879 but the label looks more like 1979?
This had a locality and VC number in Thirsk; the sheet says London. I've entered correct data but how did the wrong ones get there?
Good point - the project instructions ought to cover dates hidden in a code: 36704 seems to mean 04/07/1936
The species isn't marked on the sheet. Someone must know, or how was it chosen for this project?
Sheet has three localities and only two barcodes
Orchis ericetorum (now Dactylorhiza maculata)... the island names become legible after twa-three drams, ye ken.
I've transcribed the other two (left-hand) specimens as barcode BM001189552
There may be two collection events on this barcode
I might have missed an insect
Label refers to two collection events; I've used the date for plants in flower and chosen a plant in flower.
Probably 1939. Dr Fleming (1895-1962) was active then and there's no label from a previous owner.
Pencilled on the capsule are a word and a date. The word might be the locality but isn't readable on the scan.
And photograph in the flesh - what reproductive parts has it got?
#autofocus
This one might need its identity checking
Collector didn't record the locality.
Gorgeous white Early Purple (with characteristic leaf tip) but if it can make purple for the spots why isn't it the normal colour?
The vegetation looks pretty lush too.
What a fine specimen!
South Hampshire. Massive neat-looking spike growing on a site with a view. Can I identify it? No.
King's Mtn = King's Mountain. They get slightly easier with practice.
BM001189598: label doesn't state species, only that it was verified - I've assumed the same as the other plant from the same locality
BM001188342: barcode not on this sheet, it only has BM001188341
A jester, laughing its head off! Most bee orchids do that for me.
I suspect it's a hybrid
It's beautiful, though still outside the project
But when you need to identify orchids growing horizontally out of a cliff, you'll be ready!
The collector was obviously not thinking of you!
BM001138232: label gives two locations a few miles apart
Spotted, and growing with bracken. Could be either species.
Is there any way of finding out the locality for the left-hand label? It's so gloriously illegible that I'd love to know!
The collector's spelling had me there!
Sheet marked VC23, locality is Heddington Wick which is in VC7. ID of plants could be in doubt.
Isle of Wight - it has chalk downs but apparently only marsh fragrant. That's odd, I'm sure they could find some conopsea if they tried!
Notes on sheet suggest plants might be hybrids
BM001116870 has Gymnadenia conopsea on a 2013 label but G borealis in the database. BM001116871 has G borealis on its label.
They germinate in the thin grass where you walk across your lawn. You move them to plant pots then try to give them away.
I don't think it's a pollinator
Bottom left specimen is just a pair of leaves. Database has L ovata, label says cordata - it doesn't look like ovata.
Date could be 1872 or 1892.
Looks like limestone habitat so Common rather than Heath
Sheet marked VC? but locality seems to be "near Epping" which is VC18
Lesser twayblades grow in Sphagnum bogs but have the leaves partway up the stem; IME common twayblades don't grow in waterlogged ground.
No VC marked. Redgrave Fen should be on the Suffolk side of the river which is the VC boundary.
Bucks, growing inside a wire cage. If the site has both species the warden probably knows which plant this is.
Locality probably Calver parish (cf. the r in near). The thing before 57 might be 19 or a month number.
I dithered between the two. As a photographer I've resolved to take some pictures of typical specimens and not just the prettiest!
ID required - the label doesn't say.
BM001188828: collector's name is dated 1832, locality dated 1881 - might not refer to this specimen.
Sheet has two barcodes but only one collection event
Inverness. Is this a white Northern Marsh?
Spit insect - are the adults any use as pollinators?
E Norfolk. The spots aren't surrounded by a trouser-shaped line and the lip's a bit 3-lobed. Early Marsh or maybe a hybrid.
It's got greenfly. I marked them but I don't think they're capable of transporting an orchid pollinium!
Best insect I've seen so far - Marsh Fritillary, Euphydryas aurinia. I suspect the orchid is a Southern Marsh hybrid.
Labels differ on the exact date
Apparently this one might be a hybrid.
The lower specimen is a non-flowering plant.
The spider is waiting to eat any pollinating insects that visit.
Is there a hint of hybrid about this one?
I've never seen a Lizard orchid!
I've assumed the bottom left barcode goes with the bottom left label although the label's between the next barcode and its label...
Label seems to say Rowdsey Wood, good chance it's modern Roudsea Wood
Locality is probably Gamlingay (bogs drained 1855)
The pink varies, even between neighbouring plants, and can fade with age. Strong sunlight is unhelpful to the photographer.
Label says two collections from different counties and dates
I've been given my own picture to identify - I recognise the invertebrates.
The Birmingham sheet might have a phonetic spelling of a Suffolk place name; the dialect is said to be impenetrable!
Sheet marked VC41/42 but label looks like Clydach (GL) so probably Clydach, Glam not Clydach, Mon
Sheet marked VC61-64, label says Craven which is VC64
Dirleton. Is the writing bad enough to misread Suffolk for Berwick?
This is one for the experts!
Keeping the volunteers on their toes?
But so nicely lit that no photographer could resist it
This common Twayblade seems to have a flower spike but it's a long way short of opening a flower.
VC68 is marked on the sheet but the label has been changed to a locality in VC 81
A nice variant of Early Purple but the colour balance of the photo is much too blue.
How should I have known it wasn't a Southern Marsh? It hasn't the "trousers" pattern on the lip, or the vertical side sepals.
Maybe the 1876 plant was added to an 1863 sheet, later both notes pasted here by the BM - and the other plant elsewhere with no date?
Heath spotted x Southern Marsh?
Broad-leaved helleborine?
Some spikes aren't clear enough to guess flowering stage...
An attractively arranged sheet
Fine specimen but I think it's a fuchsii x praetermissa hybrid
Label says "Chiltington, Sussex": West Chiltington is in VC 13, East Chiltington is in VC 14, 15 miles apart. Plant a hybrid anyway!
A second place in VC96 has been added to the label but no second date or VC number; I've assumed the plants were all from the first site
I'm sure of mid-June 1882 but the exact date is unclear
What was the exact location? If that's in Sussex I'll pay it a visit.
I've never seen a white fragrant orchid. If I keep doing this long enough will I get a picture of a white pyramidal?
Before 1739 and perhaps Essex
It's really pretty
The fly's subtle colour harmony is lovely. And there's room for a few insects on a spike that large!
The date (top right) seems to be 11 Jan 1894 - as it's a saprophyte could it flower in mid-winter?
Locality = Hawksworth Yorks: Baildon was next parish, both in VC 64. Sheet marked VC56? but Hawksworth Notts not on millstone grit as noted
They seem not to be flowering at all
Yes, you can see that the "soil" is on the right of the picture.
These data will be such fun to analyse!
CSO/HSO hybrid?
I'm told the best way to distinguish them is by the scent!
Cave Hill, Belfast seems to be in VC H39
Date 25 June 92 - a human could check which century. Label gives four localities, doesn't say where this plant grew.
No date but before 1849
Three-lobed lip but you'd expect a Common Spotted this dark to have spotted leaves. Interesting habitat.
The colour's very EMO but I wasn't sure about the lip shape.
I do agree it's a GFH so outside the study - I was empathising with the photographer who sent it in with best intentions!
The locality spelling on the label is Bewsey
No date or locality, though before 1753 when John Blackstone died.
VC15 is marked on the sheet but this plant was from Cobham which is apparently in VC16
Tartan orchid, a Scottish speciality?
South Wilts - I'm going for Common.
Carrablagh is a large country house where the collector was staying
You can see water in the background - it's a helleborine growing in a marsh, innit? I'm surprised so few of the photos are off-list.
The locality might be Balmuto Castle near Kircaldy
No date, no parish
But you can see it's growing in a marsh...
There are six locations on the label and only three specimens!
Was its mimicry successful enough to attract an insectivore?
Don't be mean to it - all flowers fade, and it's trying for a capsule.
Date says 184, probably 1884 as Vaughan's book was published in 1906
It's a fragrant orchid but I couldn't tell which
No parish name and the location is hard to read
An Early Marsh hybrid?
No parish name or county
Ard Skinid on OS map
No collection date, but "Rec'd 9 Jun 1927"
No date and particularly difficult writing - the parish might be Partington.
Is it too pale for unadulterated Northern Marsh?
Autofocus picking out straight lines.
The camera angle on the sole open flower might be misleading
Classic habitat shot showing how orchids love to grow on and beside paths.
Interesting - the note says the specimen was misidentified a generation earlier and the wrong species appeared in the county flora.
I went for heath spotted, based on what I've read in the comments here!
I suppose the computer couldn't assign a VC to the data provided by the photographer. They'll need a human to look at them...
Or to prevent deer nipping the heads off all 200 plants in a large garden.
I hadn't seen the shorter spike; the longer one looks too robust - but I'm not an expert!
Some very out-of-focus greenery close to the lens. It may have been impossible to get a clearer shot.
I think it's a hybrid but I don't know what the parents were
That's a big one!
Thanks - this species isn't found in my part of the country so I did hesitate.
That does say Catdown! Probably Cattedown, Plymouth, then open space.
I'm afraid what I did was wrong then, but the dates are so similar that it shouldn't make much difference.
Thanks - that one defeated me!
The collector felt Brockadale was probably in Yorkshire; it's now a YWT reserve which makes things easier!
Very old specimen - sadly no month on label. The word before 28 starts with F, could be part of Js Kendrick's surname.
Yorkshire. If growing down here it'd be a Southern Marsh hybrid.
At last a collector whose writing's pleasure to read!
Possibly also trodden on.
It looks exactly like many members of a hybrid population on a site close to me!
Southern Marsh spreading northwards on the boots of English visitors?
I considered 1836 and couldn't see it as a 3, but the earlier date would make you wonder where the sheet had been for ten years.
One label has two barcodes and another has none
I was wrong then - couldn't see a pattern on the lip
VC number looks a like 36 to modern eyes but I think it's meant to be 34
Whitehill is in Crondall, Surrey though the label seems to read Crondow (phonetic from a local accent?) Date not found.
praetermissa x fuchsii ?
Thorp Arch is a small affluent village near Wetherby
VC number not found
I'm not familiar enough with this species to ID with no open flower
Locality seems to be Hitch Wood near Hitchin
It looks Pyramidal to me
Small young fuchsii/praetermissa hybrid?
It lacks the red colour. Something's taken its pollinia though.
It's a Gymnadenia but I can't tell which
This spike has been partly eaten by something
Maybe a fuchsii/praetermissa hybrid
"Glanquin" may mean Glenquin
The collection date should be earlier than the 1837 in the label heading so I think it is 1826 not 1846.
Maybe D praetermissa, maybe a hybrid
Still Libertia formosa...
The vice-county marked beside this label really is 19 which seems not to match the locality.
I missed the spots, said it was praetermissa. With spots I'd say it was a hybrid.
The Channel Islands are biologically part of France so they haven't a VC number.
I missed the insect - sorry - suspect this huge spike is a hybrid
White form of a species that's normally mauve
Maybe D maculata, maybe a hybrid
Resembles fuchsii/praetermissa hybrids, closer pictures needed!
BM001188290: no actual ID on the label. I've assumed it's the same as the others on the sheet.
It's unclear whether this plant was growing in VC21 or VC20. The county boundary is rather convoluted round there!
The sheet's marked VC16 but I agree with the transcriber, this locality's in VC15
The locality was probably the place now spelt "Achosnich" on Ardnamurchan; I'm still not sure how the collector spelt it.
Typed label doesn't give the year but I'm sure you have a record of it.
It has a date and location but no clear ID of the plants!
Sorry - I think the label says Inglton, West riding, Yorkshire, which would mean VC66 is for the wrong Ingleton.
The date looks deceptively like 8/6/76 but that suits neither the donor's dates nor his writing: I'm fairly sure it's 1946.
Or more than two, as both labels are to the left of the line.
Adventurer's Fen - NE end of the Special Protection Area
BM001081225: barcode seems to belong to two drawings with no separate collection label
Collected by John Blackstone, 1713-1753. Not so much a name as a description in Latin: the binomial system was still being invented
Illegible locality seems to be Piercy's Bridge, Greenstead Green, Halstead, VC19 - I'd moved on before it clicked. No proper date anyway.
Yes, in the picture it looks more like downland than a marsh.
This sheet has no date or locality
#hybrid
BM001171391: there are two collections with different dates and localities - all the data are there but we need a second barcode.
BM001164093: two of the plants on this sheet have no proper labels. Perhaps there are written records that would help.
BM001189443: the pencilled label is too faint to read on the website. I cheated.
I hope the photographer said what this one is!
Aaargh- missed the insect - it was hiding behind the info box!
BM001116882: the date has been transcribed as July 1834 but could just as well be 1936 - might be worth checking if it matters.
I suppose Buckingham Palace only let them take one flower!
They don't grow in places like that round here!
BM001188560: the sheet's marked VC17 but this collection's clearly from E Kent. I've entered 15.
Great habitat shot, where's the picture of the plant?
Lovely picture!
BM001189300: no VC marked on sheet. The site is Redgrave Fen, at the junction of four VCs - I don't know, I left it blank.
and I can't read the locality or the date. The various pencilled notes suggest the original sheet isn't much better!
BM001171475: hybrid, determined as uncertain. No collection date. VC on sheet is for the other specimen, I've entered Pembroke.
BM001055027: date transcribed as 1851 but to my eye looks more like 1857
In Dunbartonshire? I thought broad-leaved, they often lack red colour when growing in shade.
Nice specimen though
That's small - Brown Argus?
It's huge and seems to be growing with alder. Could it be a fuchsii/praetermissa hybrid?
I thought it read North'd = 67 or 68. The locality might be legible on the original sheet, if worth it (there's no exact date).
Vice county not marked on sheet and we can't get it from locality "Somerset".
I can't find the name of the species on this sheet (and wonder if the very large plant's a hybrid)
Duh, sorry!
Species not marked
Date 16/8/79 has been transcribed as 1879 but the label looks more like 1979?
This had a locality and VC number in Thirsk; the sheet says London. I've entered correct data but how did the wrong ones get there?
Good point - the project instructions ought to cover dates hidden in a code: 36704 seems to mean 04/07/1936
The species isn't marked on the sheet. Someone must know, or how was it chosen for this project?
Sheet has three localities and only two barcodes
Orchis ericetorum (now Dactylorhiza maculata)... the island names become legible after twa-three drams, ye ken.
I've transcribed the other two (left-hand) specimens as barcode BM001189552
There may be two collection events on this barcode
I might have missed an insect
Label refers to two collection events; I've used the date for plants in flower and chosen a plant in flower.
Probably 1939. Dr Fleming (1895-1962) was active then and there's no label from a previous owner.
Pencilled on the capsule are a word and a date. The word might be the locality but isn't readable on the scan.
And photograph in the flesh - what reproductive parts has it got?
#autofocus
This one might need its identity checking
Collector didn't record the locality.
Gorgeous white Early Purple (with characteristic leaf tip) but if it can make purple for the spots why isn't it the normal colour?
The vegetation looks pretty lush too.
What a fine specimen!
South Hampshire. Massive neat-looking spike growing on a site with a view. Can I identify it? No.
King's Mtn = King's Mountain. They get slightly easier with practice.
BM001189598: label doesn't state species, only that it was verified - I've assumed the same as the other plant from the same locality
BM001188342: barcode not on this sheet, it only has BM001188341
A jester, laughing its head off! Most bee orchids do that for me.
I suspect it's a hybrid
It's beautiful, though still outside the project
But when you need to identify orchids growing horizontally out of a cliff, you'll be ready!
The collector was obviously not thinking of you!
BM001138232: label gives two locations a few miles apart
Spotted, and growing with bracken. Could be either species.
Is there any way of finding out the locality for the left-hand label? It's so gloriously illegible that I'd love to know!
The collector's spelling had me there!
Sheet marked VC23, locality is Heddington Wick which is in VC7. ID of plants could be in doubt.
Isle of Wight - it has chalk downs but apparently only marsh fragrant. That's odd, I'm sure they could find some conopsea if they tried!
Notes on sheet suggest plants might be hybrids
BM001116870 has Gymnadenia conopsea on a 2013 label but G borealis in the database. BM001116871 has G borealis on its label.
They germinate in the thin grass where you walk across your lawn. You move them to plant pots then try to give them away.
I don't think it's a pollinator
Bottom left specimen is just a pair of leaves. Database has L ovata, label says cordata - it doesn't look like ovata.
Date could be 1872 or 1892.
Looks like limestone habitat so Common rather than Heath
Sheet marked VC? but locality seems to be "near Epping" which is VC18
Lesser twayblades grow in Sphagnum bogs but have the leaves partway up the stem; IME common twayblades don't grow in waterlogged ground.
No VC marked. Redgrave Fen should be on the Suffolk side of the river which is the VC boundary.
Bucks, growing inside a wire cage. If the site has both species the warden probably knows which plant this is.
Locality probably Calver parish (cf. the r in near). The thing before 57 might be 19 or a month number.
I dithered between the two. As a photographer I've resolved to take some pictures of typical specimens and not just the prettiest!
ID required - the label doesn't say.
BM001188828: collector's name is dated 1832, locality dated 1881 - might not refer to this specimen.
Sheet has two barcodes but only one collection event
Inverness. Is this a white Northern Marsh?
Spit insect - are the adults any use as pollinators?
E Norfolk. The spots aren't surrounded by a trouser-shaped line and the lip's a bit 3-lobed. Early Marsh or maybe a hybrid.
It's got greenfly. I marked them but I don't think they're capable of transporting an orchid pollinium!
Best insect I've seen so far - Marsh Fritillary, Euphydryas aurinia. I suspect the orchid is a Southern Marsh hybrid.
Labels differ on the exact date
Apparently this one might be a hybrid.
The lower specimen is a non-flowering plant.
The spider is waiting to eat any pollinating insects that visit.
Is there a hint of hybrid about this one?
I've never seen a Lizard orchid!
I've assumed the bottom left barcode goes with the bottom left label although the label's between the next barcode and its label...
Label seems to say Rowdsey Wood, good chance it's modern Roudsea Wood
Locality is probably Gamlingay (bogs drained 1855)
The pink varies, even between neighbouring plants, and can fade with age. Strong sunlight is unhelpful to the photographer.
Label says two collections from different counties and dates
I've been given my own picture to identify - I recognise the invertebrates.
The Birmingham sheet might have a phonetic spelling of a Suffolk place name; the dialect is said to be impenetrable!
Sheet marked VC41/42 but label looks like Clydach (GL) so probably Clydach, Glam not Clydach, Mon
Sheet marked VC61-64, label says Craven which is VC64
Dirleton. Is the writing bad enough to misread Suffolk for Berwick?
This is one for the experts!
Keeping the volunteers on their toes?
But so nicely lit that no photographer could resist it
This common Twayblade seems to have a flower spike but it's a long way short of opening a flower.
VC68 is marked on the sheet but the label has been changed to a locality in VC 81
A nice variant of Early Purple but the colour balance of the photo is much too blue.
How should I have known it wasn't a Southern Marsh? It hasn't the "trousers" pattern on the lip, or the vertical side sepals.
Maybe the 1876 plant was added to an 1863 sheet, later both notes pasted here by the BM - and the other plant elsewhere with no date?
Heath spotted x Southern Marsh?
Broad-leaved helleborine?
Some spikes aren't clear enough to guess flowering stage...
An attractively arranged sheet
Fine specimen but I think it's a fuchsii x praetermissa hybrid
Label says "Chiltington, Sussex": West Chiltington is in VC 13, East Chiltington is in VC 14, 15 miles apart. Plant a hybrid anyway!
A second place in VC96 has been added to the label but no second date or VC number; I've assumed the plants were all from the first site
I'm sure of mid-June 1882 but the exact date is unclear
What was the exact location? If that's in Sussex I'll pay it a visit.
#autofocus
I've never seen a white fragrant orchid. If I keep doing this long enough will I get a picture of a white pyramidal?
Before 1739 and perhaps Essex
It's really pretty
The fly's subtle colour harmony is lovely. And there's room for a few insects on a spike that large!
The date (top right) seems to be 11 Jan 1894 - as it's a saprophyte could it flower in mid-winter?
Locality = Hawksworth Yorks: Baildon was next parish, both in VC 64. Sheet marked VC56? but Hawksworth Notts not on millstone grit as noted
They seem not to be flowering at all
Yes, you can see that the "soil" is on the right of the picture.
These data will be such fun to analyse!
CSO/HSO hybrid?
I'm told the best way to distinguish them is by the scent!
Cave Hill, Belfast seems to be in VC H39
Date 25 June 92 - a human could check which century. Label gives four localities, doesn't say where this plant grew.
No date but before 1849
Three-lobed lip but you'd expect a Common Spotted this dark to have spotted leaves. Interesting habitat.
The colour's very EMO but I wasn't sure about the lip shape.
I do agree it's a GFH so outside the study - I was empathising with the photographer who sent it in with best intentions!
The locality spelling on the label is Bewsey
No date or locality, though before 1753 when John Blackstone died.
VC15 is marked on the sheet but this plant was from Cobham which is apparently in VC16
Tartan orchid, a Scottish speciality?
South Wilts - I'm going for Common.
Carrablagh is a large country house where the collector was staying
You can see water in the background - it's a helleborine growing in a marsh, innit? I'm surprised so few of the photos are off-list.
The locality might be Balmuto Castle near Kircaldy
No date, no parish
But you can see it's growing in a marsh...
#autofocus
#autofocus
There are six locations on the label and only three specimens!
Was its mimicry successful enough to attract an insectivore?
Don't be mean to it - all flowers fade, and it's trying for a capsule.
Date says 184, probably 1884 as Vaughan's book was published in 1906
It's a fragrant orchid but I couldn't tell which
No parish name and the location is hard to read
An Early Marsh hybrid?
No parish name or county
Ard Skinid on OS map
No collection date, but "Rec'd 9 Jun 1927"
No date and particularly difficult writing - the parish might be Partington.
Is it too pale for unadulterated Northern Marsh?
#autofocus
Autofocus picking out straight lines.
The camera angle on the sole open flower might be misleading
Classic habitat shot showing how orchids love to grow on and beside paths.
Interesting - the note says the specimen was misidentified a generation earlier and the wrong species appeared in the county flora.
I went for heath spotted, based on what I've read in the comments here!
I suppose the computer couldn't assign a VC to the data provided by the photographer. They'll need a human to look at them...
Or to prevent deer nipping the heads off all 200 plants in a large garden.
I hadn't seen the shorter spike; the longer one looks too robust - but I'm not an expert!
Some very out-of-focus greenery close to the lens. It may have been impossible to get a clearer shot.
I think it's a hybrid but I don't know what the parents were
That's a big one!
Thanks - this species isn't found in my part of the country so I did hesitate.
That does say Catdown! Probably Cattedown, Plymouth, then open space.
I'm afraid what I did was wrong then, but the dates are so similar that it shouldn't make much difference.
Thanks - that one defeated me!
The collector felt Brockadale was probably in Yorkshire; it's now a YWT reserve which makes things easier!
Very old specimen - sadly no month on label. The word before 28 starts with F, could be part of Js Kendrick's surname.
Yorkshire. If growing down here it'd be a Southern Marsh hybrid.
At last a collector whose writing's pleasure to read!
Possibly also trodden on.
It looks exactly like many members of a hybrid population on a site close to me!
Southern Marsh spreading northwards on the boots of English visitors?
I considered 1836 and couldn't see it as a 3, but the earlier date would make you wonder where the sheet had been for ten years.
One label has two barcodes and another has none
I was wrong then - couldn't see a pattern on the lip
VC number looks a like 36 to modern eyes but I think it's meant to be 34
Whitehill is in Crondall, Surrey though the label seems to read Crondow (phonetic from a local accent?) Date not found.
praetermissa x fuchsii ?
Thorp Arch is a small affluent village near Wetherby
VC number not found
I'm not familiar enough with this species to ID with no open flower
Locality seems to be Hitch Wood near Hitchin
It looks Pyramidal to me
Small young fuchsii/praetermissa hybrid?
It lacks the red colour. Something's taken its pollinia though.
It's a Gymnadenia but I can't tell which
This spike has been partly eaten by something
Maybe a fuchsii/praetermissa hybrid
"Glanquin" may mean Glenquin
#autofocus
The collection date should be earlier than the 1837 in the label heading so I think it is 1826 not 1846.
#autofocus
Maybe D praetermissa, maybe a hybrid
What a fine specimen!
Still Libertia formosa...
The vice-county marked beside this label really is 19 which seems not to match the locality.
I missed the spots, said it was praetermissa. With spots I'd say it was a hybrid.
The Channel Islands are biologically part of France so they haven't a VC number.
I missed the insect - sorry - suspect this huge spike is a hybrid
White form of a species that's normally mauve
Maybe D maculata, maybe a hybrid
Resembles fuchsii/praetermissa hybrids, closer pictures needed!