It's time to vote on our 2017 photo contest! Vote for your favorite photos of the year here!

Is Rudbeckia hirta Considered a Coneflower?

West Pottsgrove, PA(Zone 6b)

Is Rudbeckia hirta considered a coneflower? Just wondering, because when you type 'coneflower' in the common name search box in plantfiles, other Rudbeckias show up, Echinaceas and Ratibidas, but no R. hirtas. Maybe just the way they were enterd in PF?
Thanks, Mike

Zeeland, MI

I may be incorrect on my information, but I would say they are not a coneflower. Echinacea's common name is a coneflower and a Rudbeckia's common name is black eyed susan. However, I do see why it is confusing, they are both part of the same family Asteraceae along with Dracopis (an annual with the common name of clasping coneflower). You can tell by their looks that they are all cousins!

Cincinnati (Anderson, OH(Zone 6a)

I think at one point in nomenclature history some rudbeckias were echinacea or vice versa. That may explain the way DG has it organized and I think it is common practice to call some of the plain echinaceas rudbeckias. Jelitto calls them both ways...

Menasha, WI(Zone 5a)

In my opinion they are, they have well distinguished cones. For the sake of generalizing for this forum all hirtas that aren't annuals work for me.

(Clint) Medina, TN(Zone 7b)

I guess this forum is for any plant with a cone. I only consider Echinaceas to be coneflowers though. I have no idea what they intended with this forum. I like all the Rudbeckias and Echinaceas so it's cool with me! Mexican Hat plants have the biggest cones though. LOL.

Post a Reply to this Thread

You cannot post until you , sign up and subscribe. to post.