I did notice that some of our sources were using Ericaceae, but some of them were still using Epicaridaceae. I made a note of it and we'll research it further once we get caught up with some of the other family changes we are working on.
Hello Terry ,
I have searched high and low for all the details on this Tree .
I can only get 3 out of the 4 requirements .
The Tree is called a Eucalyptus Codonocarpa ,
Commonly called a Bell-Fruited Mallee .
[quote]On the high ridges to the west and south-west of Mt Norman are the park's only stands of bell-fruited mallee, Eucalyptus codonocarpa. Eucalypts more commonly observed along the walking tracks are New England Blackbutt, Eucalyptus andrewsii subsp. andrewsii, round-leaved gum, orange gum, yellow box, apple box, Youman's stringybark and broad-leaved stingybark. [/quote]
Quoted from this link : http://www.epa.qld.gov.au/parks_and_forests/find_a_park_or_forest/girraween_national_park/girraween__nature_culture_and_history/
Kell, you should be able to add any Eucalyptus species to PlantFiles without running it past us here - the genus is already in the checklist. If you run into any snags creating an entry, be sure to double-check the spelling of the genus and family names, as those are the fields that trigger a system check.
Kell, I have looked up Eucalyptus codonocarpa in the Flora of Australia and the Flora of New South Wales. The Flora of Australia has it as Eucalyptus approximans subsp. codonocarpa, with Eucalyptus codonocarpa as a synonym. The Flora of New South Wales has them the other way round.
I have added what details I can based on the two floras. One small correction that I cannot make, the species name is always in lower case, that is Eucalyptus codonocarpa NOT Eucalyptus Codonocarpa. If you created the entry, you should be able to amend it. If you open this page: http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/go/163818/
you and only you, should find near the bottom of the page a link
[quote]» Edit this entry[/quote]
follow this link and you can change the case of the species name,
[quote]We no longer use the Fabaceae family in PlantFiles. [HYPERLINK@davesgarden.com] We use the subfamilies instead. Therefore Acacia would fall under the Mimosaceae family[/quote]
Nomenclatural point . . . if treating it as a subfamily rather than a family, the correct name ending is -oideae, i.e., Faboideae, Mimosoideae, Caesalpinioideae.
Thanks Joan ,
I'll give that a shot .
I'm a simple Photographer trying to share My Pics with every one here on DG .
All these New to yall Plants just grow wild all around me .
If I can take some interesting Pic's of them and share , My joy is complete .
All this gobbledygook name calling is a little beyond little ole me .
Maybe all this wisdom comes with age ?
Maybe I’m just to young to understand ? :o)
[quote]Fabaceae - Mimosoideae ( not sure which one ? )[/quote]
That means family Fabaceae, subfamily Mimosoideae. Anything ending "-aceae" is a family, while anything ending "-oideae" is a subfamily.
Terry, I just discovered that the plant I identified as Lepyrodia was in fact not that species, but the Tassel Rope-rush (Hypolaena fastigiata).
Because I created the entry I have been able to change its name, so that the image is now stored in the right place. http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/go/112894/
I suspect that the genus Hypolaena in the Restionaceae, is not in your list and you may want to add it.
Are you aware that there is this loophole for adding a new genus. You simply add it as belonging to an already approved genus, and then edit the entry and chage the genus name. The change is not subject to the check that is applied if the new genus is entered directly,
I've added it to the checklist. We also have a report that shows us any entries with a genus or family name not on the checklist, so we can keep tabs on anything that is out of place. Hopefully most people will continue to come through the "front door" and get us to put it in the checklist first so we can verify spellings and avoid potential duplicates (e.g., if you force an override but misspell the botanical name and an entry with the proper spelling already exists, then we have a bigger mess to sort out ;o)
In this case, I think there has been a recent change in the family name. I believe that all the Australian Lilies and their near cousins have been changed recently. I suspect that none of the Australian lilies are in Liliaceae any more, and it seems that Smilacaceae has also been split up or otherwise modified.
Geitonoplesium is still in Smilacaceae in the Flora of Australia volume published 1987, and in the Flora of Victoria volume published in 1994, but is in Luzuriagaceae in the Flora of New South Wales volume, published in 1993.
Take your pick!
re; the request for Trochocarpa, this is one of many genera in Australia, until recently classified in Epacridaceae, but recently moved with all the Epacridaceae to Ericaceae.
I am suggesting, as we have many plants recorded as Epacridaceae, that we stick to Epacridaceae for this genus until such time as you decide that all Epacrids should become Ericaceae. The Flora of NSW has adopted the change recently, so that on-line all these plants are Ericaceae, but the printed version of the Flora of NSW still shows them all as Epacridaceae
ecrane hit it on the head...I was out of pocket some this weekend (Sundays are usually my day off, although I'll pop in during the afternoon if everyone else is watching the game or napping ;o) A big thanks to Joan for stepping in!
Kell, I added Jacksonia to the checklist. The link you provided is a good reference ("map", if you will) of the families for each of those genera, but not all the names are in our checklist yet.)
Melichrus urceolatus is caught up in this recent change of all Epacridaceae into Ericaceae. The new entry has been made as Ericaceae. I believe that for consistency, until a decision is made to change all Epacrids, this species should have its family changed to Epacridaceae: http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/go/165733/
Could you please add the Genus: Austrostipa in the Poaceae to the list.
Most Australian Stipa species have been moved into Austrostipa. I have already modified Stipa rudis to Austrostipa rudis and added Stipa rudis as a synonym, and will be adding another Austrostipa species soon,
Just luck, Terry does a great job looking after us, but is certainly not on full time watch over this thread. In any case we are on a completely different trime scale from hers.
I usually ask for new additions well ahead of using them. I an working through my slide collections scanning them and adding them to PlantFiles. I usually set up 100 plants that I will be scanning over the next weeks and then check which genera are already in PlantFiles and then put in a request for the missing ones. That means I am usually some weeks ahead with my requests.
I do occasionally have more immediate requests when I come across new plants. I just photographed Austrostipa muelleri, a beautiful and unusual grass, with single flowers instead of heads, spikes, racemes or what have you. I checked that a couple of days before wanting to upload the images and chanced to do so while Terry was checking this forum.
I usually add 5 images a day, and I currently have 190 images ready for uploading, so I am well ahead with all my new genera!
It was just plain luck that I saw Ken's request (when the thread pops up on my thread watcher, I have no idea who has posted to it - when I see it's got a new post, I come take a gander.)
A couple things to keep in mind:
1) The other PlantFiles editors can also help you out with checklist additions. However, if you address your request to one of us specifically, we'll probably leave it for that person as a courtesy; and
2) I'm not likely to be around on weekends - probably less likely than some of the other editors who handle PlantFiles in their off hours. (I regularly log 50+ hours a week M-F here on the site, so I try to take off most of the day on Sunday to spend some downtime with my family. In the fall, Saturdays are also busy with football games and swim meets ;o)
So long story short...if you post a note to me after 10:00 any weeknight, I probably won't see it for 8-10 hours; if you post it on Friday night, it may be Monday before I get back to it.
That would be entered with the genus as Eucalyptus,
the species left blank and the name Summer Red entered as the cultivar name. There may be a way to indicate the parent species (Terry will know), but you can usefully add that information in a comment.
Poor Joan! We were in Kansas over Thanksgiving and got about 2" of snow while we were there. Unless this year is very different from most years, that may be more snow than we get all winter here. Before you start a fire under the tarpot to dip me in, we *do* get some cold days and nights; just not much snow :-(
I hope we get 10 feet of snow this year. We have been in such a drought for so long that I think it's going to take a good hard winter with lots of snow to break that cycle. Last time we had any significant amount of snow was in 1992, and the last summer we had adequate rainfall was in 1993.
Now my neighbors up here in the frozen tundra are going to bombard me with snowballs. :)
Cullen is an odd name for a genus, having not been Latinised as most names are. It incorporates all the Australian peas that were formerly placed in Psoralea, but we don't seem to have any Australian Psoraleas in PlantFiles yet, so we don't have to do any adjustment. I have images of three Cullen species and will add them all eventually,
Please add Pseudananas to Bromeliaceae. The plant I need to add is Pseudananas macrodontes (formerly Pseudananas sagenarius) has been renamed once and may be renamed into the Ananas genus. I don't think it has as of yet.
I have been unable to add synonym names except in the comments space. Because the comments are not searchable, I have been a bit worried about placing them there.