Notes on the notes sections.

Version 1.4 April 17, 2024.

These notes provide some details on what information is included in the "Notes" sections, and how to interpret the data presented.

1. Flower Name (scientific)

At the species level, plants are named using the binomial system developed principally by Carl Linnaeus and published in 1753 in his monumental two volume work Species Plantarum (The Species of Plants). The first part of the name is capitalized and gives the genus to which the plant belongs. The second part of the binomial name is called the specific epithet and is given as lowercase. Both names are italicized, since they are Latinized names that follow the grammatical rules of Latin. Many names have a Greek origin, and a number derive from other languages. For example, for the name Oxalis stricta, the genus is Oxalis and the specific epithet is stricta.

The hierarchy of classifications for plants used in these notes is the following: family → genus → species. Sometimes the ranks below species are employed: they are subspecies, variety (Latin varietas), and form (Latin forma). These are called the infraspecifics, or infraspecific ranks. When used as part of a scientific name they are abbreviated as subsp., var., and f., and the abbreviations are not italicized. For example, Epilobium ciliatum subsp. ciliatum, Rudbeckia hirta var. pulcherrima, and Actaea pachypoda f. rubrocarpa. Sometimes in the literature the abbreviation ssp. is also in use for subspecies. The infraspecific names are Latinized.

Plant names are selected in a multitude of ways. The name may reflect features of the plant morphology, it might reflect a geographic location where the plant is found, or was first found, or it may honor a notable botanist or plant collector. Sometimes it might reflect a bit of humor on the part of the botanist. For example, the fern Gaga germanotta honors the pop singer Lady Gaga. The orchid genus Aa certainly gets it first in any alphabetized list of plants, but hardly conveys any practical information about the genus. This orchid genus may have been named to honor the Dutch printer Pieter van der Aa. The word acanth-, derived from Greek, means spiny, or thorny. So, one may wonder if the German botanist Carl Friedrich von Gärtner had been impacted on more than one occasion when he proposed the name Damnacanthus for the genus of a bushy spine bearing plant Damnacanthus indicus.

A key point to note is that the scientific name of a plant is unique. Sometimes a particular plant has had multiple names in the past, but those names are treated as synonym names, they are not valid scientific names. The term synonym is used in everyday usage to mean a word that can replace another word with approximate retention of the same meaning. In botany the usage is different. A synonym is a former name of a plant that was valid, though sometimes not, but is no longer accepted by experts as the correct scientific name of the plant. All synonyms are not accepted as valid scientific names. There are of course situations where experts do not agree on what is the proper scientific name of a particular plant, but eventually a consensus on the correct name will emerge.

A principal disadvantage of the current binomial naming system is that names are not necessarily static. As new scientific information becomes available, names may change. As names are changed, not all resources adopt the changes at the same speed. The problem of course arises from adopting a naming system developed in the middle of the eighteen century, when modern scientific techniques were not available. One might imagine that in the future, a naming system will evolve that is based on the molecular details of the plant.

From the scientific method point of view, one may think of a plant name as a hypothesis. A name is given to a plant based on the scientific evidence available to a botanist at the time of publication. Additional data collection may confirm the hypothesis and the given name is retained, or the new data may indicate a need to make a new hypothesis, that is, provide a new name. This is an ongoing dynamic process.

Authoritative resources used to determine the appropriate scientific name include the Flora of North America (online version), the International Plant Names Index (IPNI), and the World Flora Online. Usually, all three of these sources will be in complete agreement, but for recent name changes, the latter two resources appear to respond more quickly.

1a. The Authority (or Authorities)

After each binomial name it is a common scientific practice to give the name of the first person to validly publish the name and give a description of the plant. This person is called the authority for the plant. It is very common to not give the complete name of the person, but instead an abbreviation of the name is used. Some examples:
Achillea millefolium L. In this name L. is the abbreviation for Carl Linnaeus. Cornus alternifolia L. f. In this example the abbreviation stands for Carl Linnaeus the younger, known as Linnaeus filius (Latin for Linnaeus the son). The L. stands for Linnaeus and the f. indicates the son. Lespedeza capitate Michx. In this name Michx. is an abbreviation for the French botanist André Michaux.

As improved scientific knowledge became available, numerous plant names have been changed. Commonly this might arise when a species is moved from its current genus to a different genus. The original authority is indicated in parentheses followed by the new authority. For example, Berteroa incana (L.) DC. The original authority was Carl Linnaeus who in 1753 called the plant Alyssum incanum. The plant was renamed in 1821 as Berteroa incana by the Swiss botanist Augustin Pyramus de Candolle, whose standard botanist abbreviation is DC. Sometimes a plant name is suggested by a person but not validly published. If the suggested name is then validly published later by a second person, or possibly the same person, and references the name previously given, then that information is conveyed in the naming of the plant using the designation ex. This indicates the first person to give the plant name precedes the ex. For example, Bidens connata Muhl. ex Willd., has the American botanist Gotthilf Muhlenberg as the proposer of the name, but without providing a valid description or publication. The proposed name was later validated when published by the German botanist Carl Ludwig Willdenow, who is the authority for this species. Plant names published before May 1, 1753 do not align with the accepted modern binomial approach, so it will be uncommon to see botanists from the pre-Linnaean period indicated with an ex, but there are examples, such as Fritillaria Tourn. ex L., where Tourn. is the abbreviation for the French botanist Joseph Pitton de Tournefort (1656 – 1708), and Tradescantia Ruppius ex L., where Ruppius is the German botanist Heinrich Bernhard Ruppius (or Rupp) (1688 – 1719).

When citing the authority for a subspecies, variety or form, it is only necessary to cite the authority for the taxon at the lowest rank. For example, Actaea pachypoda f. rubrocarpa (Killip) Fernald and not Actaea pachypoda Elliott f. rubrocarpa (Killip) Fernald.

1b. Publication Year
When citing a plant name, it is not common practice to provide the literature source including the year of publication of the original description. Though in a professional journal article discussing a particular plant, that information would be commonly given. Having the publication date available can give the reader a sense for the temporal development of some aspects of botany. It can also be an aid to sort out authority names when they have similar abbreviated forms.

1c. Pronunciation guide
Scientific plant names come from many different sources. They are Latinizations of geographic locations, people's names, descriptive words from indigenous native cultures, terminology from ancient times, and so forth. Hence, it is not possible to assign a correct pronunciation to a particular plant name. The best one can do is to provide some useful guidelines. Also bear in mind that non-native English-speaking people may have a different pronunciation, because they are more familiar with how a plant name derived for example from a person's name in their culture would sound, even if Latinized. There is the more subtle distinction of pronunciation of classical Latin versus what is now referred to as Botanical Latin.

In the guide to pronunciation that is shown with the plant name, the syllables are separated by hyphens and displayed in a simplified phonetic spelling format, and the syllable to stress is capitalized. For example, for Acer rubrum, AY-ser ROO-brum, stress the first syllable in each word. For many readers, one might expect the simplified phonetic spelling is a bit easier to sound out then one involving diacritics, schwa, ash, and other markings, for example, təˈræksəkəm versus ta-RAKS-uh-kum. In different sources it is common to see nonidentical phonetic spellings. For example, for Taraxacum the following phonetic spellings have been found: tuh-RACK-suh-kuhm (OED), ta-RAX-ak-um (Smith, 1997), ta-RAKS-uh-kum (NC State Extension).

In Latin, each vowel in a word is pronounced separately, so the number of syllables is equal to the vowel count in a word. The exceptions are the diphthongs ae, ei, oe, etc., which are pronounced as single syllables.

The following guide will help with the pronunciation of most plant names. 1. In words with two syllables, stress the first syllable, e.g. Acer is AY-ser. 2. For words having more than two syllables, the stress is commonly on the penultimate syllable when the vowel is long or a diphthong. If this vowel is short, then the penultimate syllable is stressed or the syllable that precedes it (the antepenultimate) is stressed. 3. In plant names with multiple syllables, the stress is not placed on a syllable preceding the antepenultimate syllable.

Plants named to honor people frequently have a specific epithet ending in ii. This is commonly spoken to sound like "ee" and not "eye". When the ending is "i", also sound it like "ee" and not "eye".

2. Common Name
Many plants, particularly those in accessible geographic locations, have a common name. Many of which predate the Linnaean era of botany. A principal disadvantage of the common naming of plants is that there are no set guidelines or principles for establishing common names. Several plants can have the same common name. A single plant can have several or many common names. A common name can have different spellings in different languages. When a plant has multiple common names, how should one decide which is the principal common name? This question seems to be answered by selecting the name most commonly used in a local region. All of these drawbacks would render it very difficult to build a useful database to identify plants by common name.

Common names can have a use. For example, in older literature, when a plant has been identified by both its scientific and vernacular names, and the scientific name given is no longer valid and could possibly apply to more than one species, then the common name used may help to correctly identify the intended plant, assuming of course that the current name has not changed with time. Common names are almost always easier to pronounce, which is probably one of the reasons they remain in use by non-botanists. Common names are not italicized and not Latinized. Some authors capitalize the first letter of common names, other authors do not.

There is a notion that common names refer to common plants. Look in any list of common plant names and you will find this explicitly expressed by using a vernacular name such as common whatever. However, for a particular plant, what is common in one geographic region may be very uncommon or rare in a different region.

3. Family Name (Scientific)
A botanical family is a taxonomic group of one or more genera that share common attributes, such as reproductive structures and other morphological features. Plants in the same family will often share similar growth patterns, soil requirements, pests, etc. Families can serve as a valuable unit in evolutionary studies. The scientific name of each family ends in the Latin suffix -aceae and the names are not italicized. Family names in most cases have been constructed from the name of a genus currently part of the family. There are approximately 450 accepted plant families, of which Asteraceae is one of the most diverse. It is to be noted that this is a constantly changing number.

4. Family Name (Common)
Just as with the common names for species, common names for plant families come from a variety of sources. Sometimes they will directly reflect the scientific name, for example the Aster family with scientific name Asteraceae. Sometimes it will reflect one species in the family, for example the Carrot family, includes Daucus carota, for which a cultivar of Daucus carota subsp. sativus is the source of the familiar carrot. The scientific family name of the Carrot family is Apiaceae. The reader will probably not be surprised to learn that some plant families have more than one common name. For example, Rubiaceae is called by the common names Bedstraw, Madder, or Coffee family. The first two names are linked with the genus Galium, with several of the species having bedstraw as part of their common name. The family Rubiaceae also includes the genus Coffea, from which the common family name Coffee arises.

5. Scientific name origin: Genus
Genus names are derived from a variety of sources. They have been named after people, for example Linnaea and Rudbeckia to honor notable botanists, Linnaeus and the father and son pair Olof Rudbeck the Younger (1660 – 1740), and his father Olof Rudbeck the Elder (1630 – 1702). The relatively new (2015) genus Sirdavidia is named in honor of Sir David Attenborough. They have been named for mythological characters, e.g. Achillea for Achilles, pop stars Gaga for Lady Gaga, and Jeffersonia United States President Thomas Jefferson. Occasionally the name will reflect some morphological feature, e.g. Dicentra for two spurs on the flowers. Sometimes the etymology of the name is uncertain, e.g. Bacopa, though there may be one or multiple guesses as to the name origin.

Although the genus names are Latinized, their origin is from many sources. These include medieval Latin, ancient Greek, European, Asian, and African languages, and from the languages of many indigenous native people from all the continents, excepting Antarctica.

6. Scientific name origin: Specific epithet
The specific epithet, the second part of a binomial plant name, is a Latinized name, and has its origin in much the same way that genus names have been selected. That is, specific epithets are selected to honor people, to reflect some notable or sometimes less notable characteristic of the plant, to designate some geographic region where the species was first observed, and so on. The International Code for Nomenclature (ICN) has some restrictions in place on what can be a valid scientific specific epithet. The latest version of the code, formally called International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (Shenzhen Code) 2018, and is referred to as The Shenzhen Code. Shenzhen refers to the location in China where the XIX International Botanical Congress (IBC) took place. For example, the specific epithet name must be different than the name of the genus to which the species belongs. There are guidelines in the ICN to botanists to follow when forming specific epithets. Some examples from section 23A. Avoid epithets which are very long and difficult to pronounce in Latin. Avoid epithets which are formed by combining words from different languages. Avoid those formed of two or more hyphenated words. And some suggestions that have a more botanical intention. Avoid those which have the same meaning as the generic name. Avoid those which express a character common to all or nearly all the species of a genus. Avoid those which have been used before in any closely allied genus.

In addition, there are requirements imposed by Latin grammar. For example, it is recommended to use Latin terminations where possible. There should be agreement in gender between the genus name and the specific epithet.

It is an ICN recommendation (numbered 60H) that authors giving new genus or lower taxa names should indicate the etymology of the name unless it would be obvious. This guideline was of course not in place in the distant past, so that one can readily encounter genus or epithets for which the origin is ambiguous, or completely unknown.

7. Common name origin
There are no rules governing the assignment of common names to plants. Some common names have existed for several hundred years, and consequently their origin is unknown or at best uncertain. The word common is part of many vernacular names, presumably reflecting the fact that the plant is indeed common in a particular region. When a color is part of the common name, for example, common blue violet, Viola sororia, one can anticipate that the flowers will indeed be some shade of blue. Which for this species is indeed the case, though a mostly white colored form of this species is also common, and there is a less common reddish-purple colored form.

Plants that are widely distributed around the world are likely to have multiple common names, related of course to the local languages in use where the plants grow. Common names assigned by indigenous native cultures to different plants will typically remain as local common names. Tracing origins of such names can be made very difficult if the culture has no written language and compounded by converting spoken sounds into one of the common European languages.

8. Flower description

8a. Size
The size of the flower will be reported in a couple of different ways. In most cases the diameter across the "face" of the flower will be reported. This measurement would be the easiest to capture for the casual observer. A more useful observation would obviously be the actual petal length. For tube-like flowers, sometimes the length will be reported. Even at flower maturity, there can be a significant spread in the measured values. So, treat the reported values as a rough guide to size. This is particularly the case for flowers that are very small in size. When observing flowers, it always helps to have a short ruler available to get an estimate of flower size.

Both non-metric and metric values are given: The standard metric conversions are: 10 mm = 1 cm, and 100 cm = 1 m, with the accepted abbreviations mm for millimeters, cm for centimeters, and m for meters. The non-metric units are: 12 inches = 1 foot.

Three useful conversions between the different systems are: 25.4 mm = 1 inch, 1 cm ~ 0.3937 inches, and 1 m ~ 39.37 inches ~ 3.28 feet

Reporting numerical values
In some sources numerical measurements for petal size, leaf lengths, plant heights, etc., and petal counts, stem numbers, inflorescence numbers, etc., are reported in a format like (2–)5–7(–15) with the units of the measurement (if required) given after the final right parenthesis. That approach is also employed in the notes sections in various places. The interpretation of the example just given would be that the plant has typically 5 to 7 of whatever feature is being reported. The minimum value observed was as low as 2, and the maximum value observed as high as 15. Keep in mind that these are observation-based values, and the sample size, that is, the number of specimens examined, may be small to rather large. An observation might always be made that falls outside the stated minimum and maximum values reported. Be very wary of statements like "this flower species always has 5 petals".

8b. Petal Count
Reporting the petal count is in a number of cases, not as easy as you may expect. For example, species in the Asteraceae family provide an obvious challenge. The number of ray florets and disc florets that a flower can have may be both large and variable numbers, and neither being a petal in the true technical sense. The petals are modified leaves forming the segments of the corolla of a flower. The ray florets are usually strap-shaped flowers characteristic of composite flowers. The disc florets are usually small tubular flowers at the center of composite flowers. A more difficult problem occurs for some flowers, where differentiating petals from sepals is not obvious for the casual observer. The sepals are the separate leaves that form the calyx of the flower. They are usually green, and when this is the case, can be readily differentiated from the petals, assuming of course that the petals are colored and not green. When the sepals are not green-colored, the situation is more difficult, and becomes particularly so when the petals and sepals share a similar color. A tepal is a segment of a perianth, the outer floral envelope of a flower, which is not divided into a corolla and a calyx.

The petal count reported will represent one of the following four items, depending on the flower in question. (1) The actual petal count. Sometimes this will be a single number, in other cases a range will be given. If a range is given, but the flower is known to have a common petal count, that information will be conveyed. (2) When the sepals are colored and non-green, both the petal and sepal counts will be given. (3) When the sepals and petals cannot be differentiated, the tepal count will be given. (4) For composite flowers, the number of ray florets will be given and usually the number of disc florets will also be provided.

8c. Color
For the casual observer, color is usually one of the most characteristic features displayed by a flower. Though in dichotomous keys to separate different species within a genus, color often plays a secondary role, or sometimes no role at all in the identification of a particular species. This is tied in part to the color variations that can occur for various flowers. In some cases, the color variations are uncommon or rare. For example, personal observations of thousands of the very common plant Oxalis stricta (Yellow Wood Sorrel) have been made, which as the vernacular name would suggest is yellow, but only spotted an all-white flower of this species twice, and a bicolored white-yellow version once. At the other extreme, some flowers are noted for being able to occur with different colors. The common blue violet Viola sororia typically ranges in color from pale blue to dark blue-violet, but also quiet commonly occurs in a form that is half white and half blue. There is yet another fairly common form of this species that is mostly white, and finally there is a less common form that has reddish-purple flowers. All these different color variations can be somewhat bewildering to the novice flower hunter.

When a particular plant has a flower that is most commonly some color other than white, then one of the most common variations in color likely to be observed is a mostly an all-white flower. This may range from a common occurrence, to atypical, to rather rare, depending on the plant in question. The take home message is: note the observed color carefully, but don't rely on just the flower color for the purposes of identification.

The color reported in the notes sections is what one would typically find. If some other color is also possible, that will be noted, and in most cases, some indication will be given as to whether it is also common, atypical, or rare.

8d. Flower arrangement
The type of flower arrangement can be helpful in identifying some species. The typical types are as follows:
   (a) Solitary flower on a principal stem or a longish stem.
   (b) Spike arrangement (no flower stalks present).
   (c) Raceme (flowers have stalks present).
   (d) Panicle (multiple branches with flowers from the inflorescence).
   (e) Whorl of flowers.
   (f) Cluster of flowers (umbel)(all the pedicels arise from a common point).
   (g) Cluster of flowers (cyme or corymb) (all the pedicels do not arise from a common point).
   (h) Cluster of flowers that is flat or possibly convex shaped.
   (i) Cluster of flowers that is spherical or rounded in shape.
   (j) Spadix
One will certainly encounter situations where the arrangement is somewhat borderline between more than one of the above choices. When that case has been observed, consultation of authoritative sources has been used to resolve the issue and recorded as the commonly accepted flower arrangement in the notes sections.

9. Overall Plant description

9a. Size
While plant size can be somewhat variable, it is still a useful feature to help differentiate some closely related species with distinctive heights. The one caveat to keep in mind is that specimens are at approximately the same level of maturity are being observed. Sometimes environmental factors may play a role during a particular growing season.

9b. Stem hairy
Some of the factors to keep in mind for stems that appear hairy are as follows: (1) What are the types of hairs present, whether glandular or not. (2) Are the hairs of approximately uniform length or not. (3) Are the hairs sticking out perpendicular to the stem or appressed along the stem in a particular direction. (4) Is the entire stem covered with hairs or just part of the stem. (5) Are the hairs evenly distributed around the circumference of the stem, or perhaps just along stem edges. (6) Are the hairs sparsely distributed or very densely distributed on the stem. Densely packed hairs on the stem can impact the observed stem color.

Other
This will include additional information that might aid in the identification of some species. For example, is the plant highly branched or just a single stem. Does the stem have a particular appearance, for example, is the stem square in cross-sectional shape.

10. Leaf description
The key characteristics recorded under this heading are the type of leaf, and the type of attachment. The common types of leaf attachment are as follows:
    (1) alternate attachment
    (2) opposite attachment
    (3) whorl (3 or more leaves)
    (4) basal
    (5) both alternate and opposite on different parts of the stem
    (6) alternate and basal
    (7) opposite and basal
    (8) alternate and/or whorl
    (9) opposite and/or whorl
    (10) basal and/or whorl

The common leaf types can be characterized as:
    (1) simple
    (2) compound
    (3) lobed
    (4) palmate
    (5) simple and lobed
    (6) compound and lobed

10a. Size
Knowledge of the typical leaf lengths and widths can sometimes be a useful characteristic to differentiate different species. Leaf or leaflet sizes reported correspond to the blade and do not include the petiole or petiolule length. Recall the useful conversions 1 inch = 2.54 cm and 1 cm = 10 mm.

10b. Color
Leaves can take on a range of shades of green. Noting the color is useful to ID the plant. Sometimes the leaf will be shiny in appearance, sometimes early growth leaves will have a bronze hue, sometimes there will be a difference in color between the upper and lower leaf surfaces. Hair on a leaf can impact the color, and very densely hairy leaves can have a whitish color.

10c. Hairy
The absence or presence of hairs on a leaf can be an important identifying feature. Are they on just one surface or on both surfaces, are they sparsely or densely covering the leaf surfaces, are they short or long, and are they distributed only along leaf veins. All these can be useful bits of information to gather to positively identify some plant species.

10d. Leaf Shape
Leaf shape is a key variable in the identification of many plant species. There are many descriptive botanical terms for leaf shape. When you examine the technical descriptions of plants by professional botanists, it is not uncommon to see the leaves described with different shapes. In the notes sections, sometimes as many as three sources have been used, when the leaf descriptions are different. The reader should keep in mind that on a single plant, there can be multiple leaf shapes as one ascends the stem. For some plants, a leaf shape for the basal leaves, and for the upper stem leaves will be provided. Some of the leaf shapes are uncommon, while others occur with high frequency.

Here is a list of the common leaf shapes for simple leaves:

(1) Acicular	(11) Flabellate	(21) Obdeltoid	(31) Palmatisect	(41) Sagittate
(2) Cordate	(12) Hastate	(22) Oblanceolate	(32) Pandurate	(42) Spathulate
(3) Cuneate	(13) Lanceolate	(23) Oblong	(33) Peltate	(43) Suborbicular
(4) Deltate	(14) Ligulate	(24) Obovate	(34) Pinnatifid	(44) Suborbiculate
(5) Deltoid	(15) Linear	(25) Obtrullate	(35) Pinnatipartite	(45) Subulate
(6) Elliptic	(16) Lingulate	(26) Orbicular	(36) Pinnatisect	(46) Trullate
(7) Ensiform	(17) Lorate	(27) Orbiculate	(37) Reniform
(8) Falcate	(18) Lunate	(28) Oval	(38) Rhombic
(9) Fan-shaped	(19) Lyrate	(29) Ovate	(39)Rhomboid
(10) Filiform	(20) Obcordate	(30) Palmatifid	(40) Runcinate

10e. For compound leaves, overall shape, and leaflet shape
For compound leaves, sometimes the overall outline of the shape will be given, sometimes the individual leaflet shape given, and sometimes both bits of information are provided.

The common compound leaf shapes are as follows:

(1) Digitate	(6) Trifoliate	11) Paripinnate	(16) Tripinnate	(21) Triternate
(2) Palmate	(7) Trifoliolate	(12) Even-pinnate	(17) Ternate	(22) 4-Ternate
(3) Pedate	(8) Pinnate	(13) 2-Pinnate	(18) 2-Ternate
(4) 3-Foliolate	(9) Imparipinnate	(14) Bipinnate	(19) Biternate
(5) 5-Foliolate	(10) Odd-pinnate	(15) 3-Pinnate	(20) 3-Ternate

11. Origin
For the origin, interest focuses on whether the plant is native or introduced. Native is used to mean the plant was typically present in a given environment before the arrival of Europeans to North America. Introduced means that the plant was delivered to a region, either deliberately or accidentally. If the plant is known to be invasive, that information is also conveyed. Sometimes a plant is so invasive, causing multiple problems such as interfering with native plants, or causing economic impact on crops, that the plant is listed by some authoritative body as restricted. When that information is available, it is indicated.

12. Status
Status is used to indicate whether a plant is likely to be common, uncommon, or rare in a particular region. If a plant is listed as special concern, threatened, or endangered by some authoritative body, such as a state DNR or a federal body, that information is conveyed. Species that are listed as threatened or endangered are not likely to be observed unless you are rather lucky or spend considerable time in the field.

13. Bloom time
The bloom times reported are those that are typical for the observation region. Go significantly further north or south and the bloom times will change appropriately. Be aware that in any given season bloom times can be impacted by any unusual weather conditions. Also note that there are a few of the spring ephemerals that you may see bloom very late in summer or into the early fall months.

14. Cycle
Cycle indicates the life cycle for a species, whether it is perennial, annual, or biennial. For some species this is not clear cut, and this will be indicated by a designation such as annual/biennial or biennial/ perennial.

15. Habitat
Knowledge of a species habitat can be useful information to help identify some species and to locate them out in the field. You typically would not expect to find a water loving species in the middle of a dry meadow. There are of course some species which are well adapted to do well in a diverse variety of habitats, some of the invasive species fit this group. There are other species that are very selective of the type of habitat they prefer.

Habitat information typically will include general areas such as prairies and woods, preferred sun conditions such as full sun or shade, preference for wet or dry conditions, and sometimes the type of soil favored.

16. Fruit
Many fruits are distinctive, and in some cases can provide significant help in identifying some species. There are also a number of species that have similar looking fruits, and some of these are known to be mildly toxic. Do not sample fruits from the outdoors unless you have expert knowledge about the harmful lookalikes.

17. Seed
Seed appearance, such as shape, color, attached hairs, etc., can all be very useful bits of information that can aid a positive species identification. There are a few species that are differentiated primarily on the appearance of the seeds.

18. Importance to wildlife
Plants in general, and flowers in particular provide a food source for a variety of species. With habitat loss for various plants, there is a ripple effect, loss of pollinators, loss of bird populations, and so on.

For the pollinator information recorded, heavy use has been made of the many published works of Charles Roberson and of Dr. Sigmund Graenicher.

19. Similar species (if any)
This is a key section for those readers interested in pinning down the identity of an observed flower. Because the difference between some species in the same genus can depend on fine details, it is impossible to avoid some technical vocabulary if a reader really wants to make an accurate identification. If you find some technical vocabulary you are not familiar with, take advantage of the glossary of botanical terms that is available. Look upon it as a valuable learning opportunity.

For a good number of flowers, their appearance is rather unique, and no other plant in the region has similar flowers. When that is the situation, an expression such as "no lookalikes" is indicated. This does not mean there are no other plants that might share some similar feature, for example, a similar leaf shape, or a very hairy stem. "No lookalikes" means principally the flower, but with the possible attention to some aspects of the plant morphology.

The ideal tool to employ for identification is the dichotomous key. Well-constructed keys ask questions which by design, have only two choices at each step. With the sequence of questions leading to the correct identification. This usually takes a bit of experience to use, since missing information can leave one stuck in the middle of the questions, with no way to move forward. In place of a dichotomous key, either one, or perhaps a few key features have been selected, which would help the casual observer identify the plant, but sometimes the best then can be done, is to narrow the choice to two or three possibilities. With further experience, one learns to pick up on the finer details that help the identification process. Timing of observation can be a key ingredient. Sometimes you might really need to see the fruit, or the seed, or the color of the hairs on a seed capsule, but these may not yet be present on the plant observed.

If the reader is new to making observations, so that every yellow-colored composite flower looks like a dandelion, don't lose heart, everyone starts at that point. But learn to start focusing on other parts of the plant. What does the leaf look like, does it have teeth, is it hairy, are both sides of the leaves the same color, etc., etc. As observational skills develop, you can focus on finer details. But if you prefer just to enjoy the beauty of the flowers, then that approach is fine as well.

20. Ethnobotany
Ethnobotany refers to the scientific study of the relationships between humans and plants, and most commonly denotes the study of indigenous peoples' knowledge of plants. This includes the use of plants for food, medicines, shelters, religious, and other uses. The focus of this section is on the native American tribes of this region, both past and present. In the US the terminology Native American tribe, or American Indian tribe is commonly used, though further north, First Nations people is employed.

The current federally recognized native American tribes in Wisconsin are the following:
    (1) Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa
    (2) Ho-Chunk Nation
    (3) Lac Courte Oreilles Band of Lake Superior Chippewa
    (4) Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa
    (5) Menominee Tribe of Wisconsin
    (6) Oneida Nation
    (7) Forest County Potawatomi
    (8) Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa
    (9) St. Croix Chippewa
   (10) Sokaogon Chippewa (Mole Lake)
   (11) Stockbridge-Munsee.

In some of the early literature pertaining to native American ethnobotany, there are some tribes that are referenced that are not in the above list. These include the Meskwaki, a tribe that relocated southward from Wisconsin in the early part of the nineteenth century. The Sauk, which were based around Green Bay, relocated to Iowa, Oklahoma and Kansas.

An older list of tribes in Wisconsin was published by John Shea in 1857. This list includes the following names (with some spelling changes and equivalent names added):

(1) Ainoves (= Iowas)	(6) Keinouche (= Kinounchepirini)	(11) Makoueoue	(16) Mikissioua	(21) Ottawa	(26) Winnebago
(2) Atchatchakangouen	(7) Kickapoo	(12) Mascouten	(17) Nantoue	(22) Ouagoussak
(3) Fox	(8) Kiskakon (= Kekionga)	(13) Marameg	(18) Noquet	(23) Oneida
(4) Huron	(9) Kitchigamick	(14) Menominee	(19) Oharaouatenon	(24) Potawatomi
(5) Illinois	(10) Makoua	(15) Miami	(20) Ottawa Sinagos	(25) Sac (= Sauk)

It is to be noted that some tribes have been described by more than one name. For example, the Chippewa, the name commonly used in the US, are referred to as Ojibwe, Ojibwa, or Ojibway in Canada. The Potawatomi are sometimes referred to as the Forest Potawatomi or the Plains Potawatomi, depending on their geographic location. The Ho-Chunk are also called the Winnebago. The Meskwaki are also called the Fox.

For the information reported in the notes sections, heavy reliance has been placed on the published accounts by the ethnobotanist Huron Smith, who did field work with the Menominee, Meskwaki, Ojibwe, and Forest Potawatomi tribes. Major use has been made of Daniel Moerman's monumental resource Native American Ethnobotany.

In the notes it is often indicated that a particular plant has been used as a �cure� or remedy for a specific disease or ailment by some Native American tribe. However, it is important to keep in mind that this approach may not have been verified by modern scientific studies. Do not try these approaches on yourself since some of the plants employed are now known to be extremely toxic.

21. Latitude
Latitude, longitude, and altitude measurements with a camera gps depend upon several factors, which include the amount of tree cover, prevailing weather conditions, number of satellites detected by the camera, and the frequency with which the gps system records data.

Data can be recorded in one or two formats. In DMS format, which denotes degrees, minutes, seconds, you will see values reported like 44° 47' 45.881" N 91° 30' 5.789" W, with N and W signifying north of the equator, and west of the prime meridian. In DD format, which denotes decimal degrees, the values are represented in decimal format such as 44.796078, -91.501608 with the first value representing the latitude and the second the longitude. Positive latitudes are north of the equator and negative latitudes are south of the equator. Positive longitudes are east of the prime meridian and negative longitudes are west of the prime meridian.

DMS format can be converted to DD format for a location north of the equator and west of the prime meridian using:

latitude = degrees + (minutes/60) + (seconds/3600), and
longitude = -{degrees + (minutes/60) + (seconds/3600)

For the North and West location just given above, 1 second of latitude is approximately 101 feet and 1 second of longitude is approximately 72 feet.

By taking multiple readings at the same location on different days, under favorable weather conditions with no tree cover, and comparing with results from Google Maps, latitude locations look like they are approximately good to around 10 m or better. When overhead conditions are less than ideal, this number does appear to get worse.

22. Longitude
The error for longitude readings under favorable weather conditions is similar to that given above for latitude readings, and again gets worse when overhead conditions are not ideal.

23. Altitude
The uncertainty associated with the altitude data is probably around 50 meters on average. Though results have been observed that look like they are around 100 meters off when measurement conditions are less than ideal. Overhead tree cover does seem to have a noticeable impact on the quality of the values recorded.

24. Geographic Distribution
Geographic distribution data is an important resource. It can be an alert to species becoming threatened as habitat is lost, or as climatic conditions change. It can also be a useful record to map the spread of undesirable invasive species. The latter of course can have significant economic impact on the production of food crops.

24a. In Wisconsin
Data for the county distribution in Wisconsin is based on three sources. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) maintains a database of the distribution of species at the county level for the different states. This was my first source of data employed. While a valuable resource, it may not reflect the latest available observational data. It may also not reflect name changes that have occurred for various species. Knowing synonym names may help in this regard.
The second source employed was the individual records for each taxon at the Flora of Wisconsin database, part of the Wisconsin State Herbarium. The reader should note that the Wisconsin county distribution maps for each taxon on the website do not always accurately reflect the data in the Occurrence Records. Furthermore, the interactive maps displayed only show taxon records that have gps data locations. The third source is based on personal observations made in the field.

The best advice is to treat these county distributions as a guide. They will however give a useful picture of whether a particular taxon is widely distributed, or very narrowly located in the state. In some cases, probably a species is rather underreported, such as Taraxacum officinale (common dandelion) and Mollugo verticillata (carpetweed). In a couple of cases, some species new to the state will only be found in one county, for example Impatiens parviflora (Small Balsam), reported only from Eau Claire county, and Bacopa rotundifolia (Water-hyssop), known from just two counties.

24b. In US
Information for US wide distribution is taken from the USDA database for individual states distributions. The reader should note that the latest available information may not be present in this database.

24c. In Canada
Information on taxon distributions for the Canadian provinces is also maintained by the USDA and was the source for the information displayed in the notes sections.

25. References
The reference section provides resources for additional general information or for more scientifically based investigations. A large part of the cited literature can be accessed directly on the internet. Some of the older literature can be accessed indirectly from links at the Library of Congress, while other articles can be obtained if you have a connection to the online resource JSTOR. Searching via Google Scholar and Google Books can locate many resources.

References to published articles are also scattered in other parts of the notes sections. This is done to provide support for statements that would not be regarded as common knowledge.

26. Synonym(s)
Synonyms give names that the plant was at one time known by. No synonym represents the currently accepted valid scientific name for a particular plant. Under this heading synonyms are listed with regard to the particular type (see below). Some plants have a very large number of synonyms, so it is impossible to list them all. In such cases a selection based on what has close similarity to the currently accepted name has been selected.

The word synonym in everyday usage refers to a word that can replace another word with approximate retention of the same meaning. In botany, synonym is used in a different sense. It applies to names that a particular plant had in the past. A synonym name cannot replace the current scientific name. This of course does not mean there are no cases where there is disagreement between experts as to what the correct name for a particular plant should be. As more data is collected, these differences are resolved.

26a. Basionym
A basionym represents a previously published valid name that a plant once had, and upon which a new valid scientific name is based. For example, Abutilon theophrasti was initially named by Linnaeus Sp. Pl. 2: 685. 1753, as Sida abutilon, and then moved by the botanist Medikus to the new genus Abutilon with Linnaeus' specific epithet becoming the new genus name. In the example Actaea rubra, the basionym was named Actaea spicata var. rubra, so a variety became elevated in rank to a species, with the former variety name becoming the accepted specific epithet of the new species name.

An entry of na indicates that there is no basionym. This is likely to be the common situation when the currently accepted scientific name has a publication year that is 1753 or not long thereafter.

26b. Homotypic Synonym(s)
This is a name based on the same type as another name. The original plant specimen, called the nomenclatural type or type specimen, and commonly just the type, is the plant specimen that was used to give the valid description and scientific name.

26c. Heterotypic Synonym(s)
Literal meaning is from different types. Different names are associated with different types, but the prevailing opinion is that they belong to the same taxon.

26d. Autonym
This is an automatically created name for a subdivision of a genus or of an infraspecific taxon. For example, when Woodson published in 1944 the infraspecific names Asclepias tuberosa subsp. interior and Asclepias tuberosa subsp. rolfsii, then the name Asclepias tuberosa subsp. tuberosa was automatically created. The latter name is the autonym. Note that the final epithet is identical to the specific epithet for an infraspecific species. It is not necessary to publish the autonym since it is automatically created.

If an autonym is listed at the subspecies rank, then you know that there is at least one additional subspecies that is accepted. A similar situation applies if the autonym is a variety, or if the autonym is forma. You cannot have a single subspecies, variety, or forma as an infraspecific rank of a species. The authority for an infraspecific autonym is the same as the authority for the species from which the autonym is derived.

An entry of na indicates that there are no infraspecific ranks accepted for the current species at the present time. Plants of the World Online has been used as the principal authority for deciding if an infraspecific species is accepted or not. A special alert on the Flora of North America, which does not appear to a have a consistent approach. If there are no infraspecifics for a particular species recorded from North America (north of Mexico), even though accepted infraspecifics are known from outside North America, the entry under Lower Taxa (meaning infraspecifics) will often indicate "None". Though some authors may write an entry such as (4, 1 in the Flora) indicating there are four accepted infraspecifics, but only one is recorded from North America.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Return to Flower Home Page