User Tag List

Informational! Informational!:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 17 to 24 of 24

Thread: Drosera "Sp. Chapada Diamantina"

  1. #17

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Oswego, New York, U.S.A.
    Posts
    5,290
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Fernando,

    You are quite incorrect in saying the CPN is the only "Official" publication possible. Any publication with "wide distribution" is acceptable, provided that the official Registrar (Dr. Schlauer) is made aware of the publication.

    I've discussed the potential with the CPN co-editors of publishing a Journal as a companion to the CPN, and they are ammenable. This would free the CPN for more varied content and contribute towards a more timely publication.

    What is needed is for people to understand the use of the tool!

    Your concept of ugly is a relative and personal evaulation. Cultivar registration has NOTHING to do with assessing merit. You have this confused with the orchid cultivar concept, and the judges that grant awards to desirable material. This is not the purpose that the ICBN registry is trying to afford, but it may create a method by which the community can be aware of these new forms, and later assign merit. Whether this happens or not, it is not the primary focus, and nowhere has this been implied. I think the very use of the term "Cultivar" was a mistake, since this concept is irrevokably married to the orchid side of horticulture.

    Registration of CP names (not plants!) is a recording tool to enable intelligent discussion regarding bogus material by making it legitimate. Simply that. It applies to anything outside the legitimate binomial that is being distributed: whether it be pretty, ugly, common, rare: irrespective of genetics or production method, irrespective of who first produced or introduced it. Without it, "Sp. I dunno's" will be a plauge to future growers, unnatural hybrids will create confusion and debate, and intelligent discussion of any of these plants will be vain. If I sound like Jan in this to you, it's because he too understands and sees these things clearly. He would know best, since nomenclature is his focus.

    In the case if your G. "Itacambrina Beauty" since there is no LEGITIMATE centralized record of either the plant, or its name as regards proper spelling, it is all a matter of opinion as to what it is and how it is spelled. I have probably mispelled it in the past on my own growlists, since it isn't in the CP Data Base or the CP cultivar registry to check. I use Bob Ziemer's site to readily access correct spelling (when it matters) since it is easily accessed and based on the CP Database. There is no reliable database entry to consult regarding the proper spelling. Web site consensus is quite unreliable, both for photos and spellings: . You think that 40 years after you are gone from the earth that there will still be some sense of what this material may or may not be? After the websites are no longer maintained, where will any reference be? Think ahead! This isn't about the here and now, its about posterity. Legitimate registery is maintained in perpetuem by the ICBN. They are the reason we still know what plants Linneaus first recorded some 4 centuries ago!

    Why would you be concerned if some newbie spells it right on a growlist, when you (and others) refuse to create a legitimate standard for them to learn to employ? Yes, your travelouges are informative and much better than nothing (I have them all printed out, and I love them!), but a picture is worth a thousand words, and one legitimate publication is worth a thousand travelouges.

    Nothing personal here my friend. I admire your efforts and your person very much. I chew everyone equally on this. Someone has to try to educate, and present the facts regarding this tool, and I sure could use your support for the rationality of this rather than your arguments to the contrary! If you don't want to trust my statements, check them with Barry or Jan. We've discussed these things at some length, and I think I have a good clear concept of this process, and what it can afford to us now, and in the future.

    Now if people would only listen!

    Look at the "MESS" on the UK Forum regarding the near impossibility of discussing unpublished material like D. "Sp. Chapada Diamntina" "D. capillaris long arm form" "D. aff. rorimae" and realize the only intelligent resolution came from posting reliable photographs and from your (hopefully) accurate recall of your intrepid adventures some 10 years ago! I have the accounts, have read them and enjoyed them many times, but nowhere in them is there an actual detailed description of the material you saw, and few photos. Such a description is nowhere but in your head. I am very fond of your head, Fernando, but the fact remains, memory fades with age. A small vein in the head goes "pop" and the information is locked away forever, lost. We decline and pass on, but the information may now be conserved. The tool is in place as has not been the case in the past! I hope sometime you will see fit to make the wonderful gifts of your experience with these "Sp." thingys a true gift for the ages. You deserve that.

    Here are my other replies to this discussion:

    Publication will resolve nomenclature by defining what is correctly spelled and what is not. Publication sets this in stone. Were I to call "Itacambrina Beauty" by another name, then that would be the only legitimate reference. If I publised it as "Insain Impressuns" this would be the name by which the ages will call it, and only this spelling would be correct: if they care to be accurate, that is!

    You can spell as correctly as you like, but if there is no legitimate publication to consult and tie to the name, then what is the sense? Yes, if the information is published, it is reachable: See! You do agree with me!

    I totally agree that proper spelling is required regarding growlists, published photos, and sending out plants. There is are times when being lazy is marginally acceptable and understandable, but these are not those times.

    You said mislabeled D. aliciae/sessilifolia was used and a wrong ploidy count was the result, earlier in the post. This is what I was referring to by a "skewed study". I cited it as an example of why it is important to know what you grow, and also as an example of why you can't trust cultivated material. I don't mean to imply that you made the ID error, but obviously someone did and passed it on to you.

    The seed testa research is going like a snail riding on a turtle. I can't use seed from cultivated collections as it is atypical and too prone to ID error, plus the everpresent concern of hybridogenic involvement - and it takes forever to source and obtain native seed. This is where I should once again make my pitch to you for a few native Drosera seeds when you happen by them! If there were more such contributions, a good inclusive reference might someday be possible, but no one is really falling over themselves to assist. I am expecting some native South African material (inviable, but utterly precious) collected by Debbert. I no longer have the assist of the resources provided by the Idaho State Herbarium since my associate left for private employment. I am looking into purchasing a good digital dissecting microscope (if I ever see that money I am waiting on) and will continue the work on my own. I wonder if the herbariums would be willing to LOAN me the seed for the study? I only need 3 seeds to mount and photograph, I'm not asking for all that much. What other purpose is there for such material other than legitimate research like this? Yeah, I am not BIG, but I have some pretty good references, even if I don't have a string of letters after my name. Maybe this, along with my silver tongue, will win the day, and a three year knock out effort to find some good material for the study will actually be realized before I end up in a nursing home! It is meant to be a gift, I do not intend on profiting from the reference, but finding good seed is like pulling rhinocerous teeth with chopsticks.

    Kudos to Allen Lowerie for checking his seeds for accuracy! He probably should have done this years ago. He's going to have quite a time of it, regarding the length of his seed list: if he is going to check the all his material he should finish about the same time I have a complete seed reference to offer the world.....say around the year 3000. [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html312/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif[/img]



    "Grow More, Share More"

  2. #18

    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lincoln, NE
    Posts
    2,974
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Fernando,

    I had a pack of seed from the ICPS(I think) that was labeled as that. I hope I am wrong on the source, as that would be a really bad place to get it, but it was under the old management if it matters.

    Joe

  3. #19

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Oswego, New York, U.S.A.
    Posts
    5,290
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Seedbanks are only as accurate as the donors, whether this be the ICPS, Lowerie, Carnibank, or any of the society seed banks. This also applies to Universities and Botancial Gardens. The only thing immune from errors are the holotype itself (and keep in mind that "typical" is also relative to the experience of the initial collector, and may or may not reflect accurate statistical variation across the range: this depends on the depth of the sampling). In other words, nothing is "For Sure".

    P.S. Just to toot my horn a little, a good squeaky clean accurate seed testa reference might just possibly be of use to seedbank managers!



    "Grow More, Share More"

  4. #20

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    237
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hey William,

    OK, here goes another long one so please be patient with William and I! I'd just like to warn everybody 1st to please not think that I am offended by anything anyone wrote, especially you William. Remember that things always seem harsher when written, so just try to imagine me speaking the words below while all the time laughing about it, OK? I do get pissed off every once in a while, but it’s usually nothing I’ll take to my grave. And whenever I do get pissed off, I am always happy to tell that person so. [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html312/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif[/img] So don’t worry, cause if you step on my toes, I’ll tell you so -- and expect the same treatment too!

    -------------------------------------------------------

    To start off, I think my joke was lost in the text of my last message, my fault. I wasn't sure if CPN was the only place to publish cultivars, but if it was, I sure didn't want to see too much space taken up with cultivars(pretty or ugly) simply because cultivation is not really my interest. Hmmm, isn’t it ironic that I should be complaining about taking up space in CPN, considering that I clogged up 14 full pages in the last CPN issue?? Hahaha! 8-P

    Anyways, I agree registering cultivars is a useful tool... but for cultivators, NOT taxonomists. I think that's where we're disagreeing (and as long as it's not done in CPN [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html312/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif[/img] ). From a taxonomist's point of view, a cultivar is worth ZIP! I believe no herbarium specimen (holotype) is necessary for a cultivar description, right? If so, then excuse me, but who's not thinking about the future here? Who's gonna be able to prove 100 years from now whether I have the right cultivar or not if there isn't a holotype? A picture in an obscure publication will not be enough...

    And from a cultivator’s point of view (I wonder if I can still do this), if the person is really keen on tying a name to his plant, he'll do it no matter if it's a cultivar or if it's a P.sp."whatever", especially with the internet. But if he's not, he'll get it wrong either way and will soon be growing D.capensis thinking it's a VFT!

    And I want to make one point very clear to you (then maybe you’ll stop nagging me about it... [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html312/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif[/img] ) that I certainly do worry about the future. My main objective on any CP trip is to collect herbarium material. I am close to 2000 collections already, which is pretty good if you consider that Lowrie is around 3000 -- and he had a good head start on me. [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html312/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif[/img]

    All my herbarium collections are deposited at the University of Sao Paulo for anybody who wants to see and study them. Sorry if that's WAY far south for some, but just remember that most of the holotypes for our flora are in Europe and the US -- and it really sucks sh*t that we have to go abroad to study our own flora! So the least a serious taxonomist should do is travel to the country of origin of the plants he wants to study.

    Therefore you can relax, because if I fall off a mountain tomorrow and crack my head, any taxonomist that wishes to take up my work (karma?) would have it really easy. All my collections are in a public herbarium PLUS a quick search on the internet would give anyone all the information they could wish for on why I consider such and such plant different from another, since I write about everything. Not to mention all the pictures available too. It’s more than any taxonomist could wish for.

    Look, you have to agree that I am not one to hog information like most taxonomist do until after they’ve published their new species, fearing that somebody could “steal” it from them. I believe in sharing information, even if this puts me at risk of having new species “robbed” from me by people anxious to see their own names attached to a new species, no matter how bad the description is. Incomplete or poor descriptions of new species only add to taxonomic confusion – and I think the goal of any such publication should be to help clear up taxonomy, don’t you?

    Tell me the truth William, would you prefer that I 1st introduce a new species to cultivation with a bogus name and publish it years later, or only introduce it to cultivation years after discovering it, when I’ve finally published it? I think it’s a small price for cultivators to pay to have a D.sp.”whatever” going around for a few years, rather than waiting until it is published before you finally get a shot at cultivating it (or even seeing a picture of it), don’t you?

    I’m sorry if this is a bit harsh, but I have to admit it rather pisses me off when cultivators who are used to sitting on their ***es, doing absolutely nothing to increase scientific knowledge of CPs, write to me telling me what I should or shouldn’t do in relation to plants I busted my *** to discover in the field. CP expeditions are not only tiresome, exaustive, difficult, and d@amn expensive, but often downright dangerous and life-threatenning too. I am not joking when I say that I often risk my life for these plants!! And then I have people write to me saying how “lucky” I am, as if I was on a Carribean cruise, geez!! Its got NOTHING to do with luck, it’s pure sacrifice.

    Many CPers don’t seem to understand that I have a regular job just like most people, but that I spend almost all my money to pay for gasoline, car rentals, airplanes, hotels, etc., in order to hunt these plants down -- instead of simply wasting it all on myself as most people would do. And I don’t earn a salary in US dollars, Euros, or Yen either, which makes it all the more difficult. I sacrifice much of my personal life because of these plants, which I’m sure explains why I’m still single, hehehe! After all, who would be crazy enough to want a guy that is always going on long trips, driving literally thousands of kilometers in a single weekend and waking up at 5am every day, without even stopping to eat during the day in order not to waste any time And all the while knowing that plants go first, always! Hahaha!

    So what I want to make clear is that NOBODY pays me to go CP hunting. It all comes out of my own wallet and my own vacation time when I could be relaxing on a tropical beach instead of killing myself climbing dangerous mountains. I’ve only ever accepted donations from 2 people, and this was for my last 2 trips to Venezuela which were very expensive due to rented airplanes and helicopters. My interest in CPs is purely scientific. I have no commercial nor career interests in publishing new species, it will not bring me any money nor something to put on my CV when I apply for a job. All I want is to understand better the carnivorous flora of Brazil, S.America, the world. I want to publish papers that will make things clearer, not foggier.

    Therefore it does not seem at all “fair” when people tell me I have to publish quickly, just so they can write a name on a label and stick it in a pot. And this from people who are often living right next door to widely-known potential new species, but for some reason can’t be bothered with their time and money to do a little field work of their own (D.capillaris and Pings in the SE USA ring a bell??). Yet they somehow feel they’re in a position to bother other people they’ve never even met about certain plants growing thousands of miles away.

    Speed in publication is not in the best interest of anyone except commercial growers and taxonomists who need to publish papers in order to get grants. So if I take several years to publish a new species, please remember that this is so because I want to publish a full report, not just throw another name in the pot. And unfortunately nobody has yet offered to pay me to do full time taxonomical work at home and get all these names out faster, I do have a career to worry about too.

    So back to cultivar names. Publishing cultivars is a useful tool, but I still believe it is only good for horticulture, not for science. In my point of view a cultivar name should only be applied to plants that have horticultural interest, but which do not deserve a taxonomic rank of their own, whether species, subspecies, or variety. If a plant is believed to be a new species, then people should work on actually publishing it as such, and not as a cultivar. If somebody is already working on it (which is the case with many of the plants I’ve discovered), then just be patient and WAIT! Putting a cultivar name on it, which will soon become invalid once the new species is published, will NOT help at all, in my opinion. The same lazy CPers who do not care about writing names correctly will get it wrong either way, while the really interested and responsible ones like you will try to maintain some order whether the name is G.sp.”Itacambira beauty”, G.”Itacambira beauty”, or G.itacambiraensis. The internet is here to help spread the word.

    In short (hehehe),
    Fernando

  5. #21

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    237
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    William,

    A few more comments. In regards to D."sp. Chapada Diamantina", I did not spread this plant in cultivation and have no idea what it was originally.

    As for my "hopefully accurate recalls" of my trips, I'd like you to know that I write careful field notes, which often keep me awake long into the night on CP trips, even though I have to wake up at sunrise the following day. This and herborization is the hardest, but most essential part of any CP trip.

    As for the supposed lack of "detailed description of the material you saw, and few photos" in my field trip accounts, please remember that countless herbarium collections were made, available to all who truly wish to study them, and which will hopefully soon be available in publication, all neatly "digested" and ready for anyone's consumption.

    As for pics, you should be happy that there are any pics at all for all those plants which were virtually unknown until 15 years ago, especially of species which have not even been published (you know anybody else that spreads pictures of new species before they're published??). So please don't whine if some pics are not of top quality, since this is often really hard to do when you're kneeling on quartz gravel or lying in the mud, mosquitoes are buzzing in your ears, sweat is running into your eyes, and lightining is striking the hillsides all around you. Especially cause you can always ask me about any detail that is not clear in pictures. I have tons of pics, but unfortunately once again, I can't scan them during office hours or stay home to do it all. So please forgive me if all my pics are not available to all on the web free of charge.

    >Such a description is nowhere but in your head.

    Yes it is, in much more detail in all my herbarium specimens... Whatever is not preserved in herbarium specimens or in my head is written on the web and in my field notes (which I assure you will not be placed inside my grave).

    As for the D. aliciae/sessilifolia mess regarding chromosome numbers, AAARGH! I can't believe this somehow turned around so that you think ***I*** created it all!! Or that I wouldn't know how to tell a D.aliciae from a D.sessilifolia! YIKES! I'm trying to clear up the mess OTHERS have made, please!

    What happened was that a chromosome number of 2n=80 was published for D.sessilifolia, but the plants were actually D.aliciae!! And before you can complain, Barry Meyers-Rice has an article of mine about this mess (and with several new chromosome numbers for Drosera in S.America) in his hands right now, awaiting publication in CPN, OK? [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html312/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif[/img]

    Fernando

  6. #22

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    237
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    One last topic William: Your seed testa research.

    Your constant "pitch" for seeds demands a reply.

    Please don't take it personally that I haven't sent you seeds, but as I told you before, I am literally SWAMPED every year with requests for seeds from people all over the world and I simply do not have the time to help everyone, although I did do this for many years, never once asking for $$ in return.

    I have maintained a few outlets responsible for spreading any seeds I collect, simply because I lack the time to do this on my own.

    When you initially wrote to me asking for seeds, you were one in a million, and there was simply no reason why I should make an exception for you. You had an interesting project in mind: to draw the seeds of all species so people could use this as a reference to ID their material.

    But I have dedicated my efforts once too often to people's enthusiastic projects which slowly withered into oblivion. So as I told you before, until you show any real work I am simply not going to open an exception for you.

    Although you have since proved that you are very keen on keeping these plants in cultivation and that you have every interest in clearing up taxonomic confusions involving plants in cultivation, the truth is that you have shown absolutely nothing to the world regarding your seed testa project, or did I miss something?

    On all thse discussions I've taken part of, I always see you writing how people should publish, publish, publish (especially me). So what have you published regarding Drosera seed testa so far?? Where's your contribution to the "future" you're always so worried about?

    Please don't think that I am picking on you and will never help you no matter what. I'm just hoping you'll understand that in order to obtain support for your projects, you have to show some results 1st, you have to prove that you're not just inventing an excuse to obtain rare seed for cultivation and that you are truly willing to dedicate your time to generate scientific knowledge.

    You do not need rare seed to start your project. You can very well do a "rough draft" using the species readily available in cultivation. And you are certainly not gonna be able to convince any herbarium to lend you holotypes without publishing stuff first. So forget trying to compare any seed you have with type material for the moment. The best you could probably do is obtain seed collected from type locations.

    But if you simply compared all the seed you could get your hands on and published something on the variability you found, this would be of tremendous scientific value. Even (and especially!) for "common" plants like D.intermedia, D.capillaris, D.capensis, which are actually very variable and often taxonomically very messy.

    So for now, try to forget about publishing a seed testa guide for ALL the ~150 species of Drosera, because until you prove to the world through publications that you are seriously working on this project, you will not get the backing you want and need. Think a bit smaller to begin with. Focus on one species or one group and then slowly work your way up.

    For example, I intend to one day write a complete taxonomic work on the Drosera of Brazil, maybe S.America, and who knows (if I live long enough) maybe even a monograph for the whole genus. But 1st I gotta start with a few species, one by one, or else I'll never get anywhere.

    So don't give up on your project, it's a fantastic idea. But set yourself some goals (this species 1st, that group 2nd) and work your way up, publishing data along the way. You might not finish all ~150 species, but it'll be better than never having gotten anywhere...

    Good luck!
    Fernando

  7. #23

    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lincoln, NE
    Posts
    2,974
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Fernando,

    I want that taxonomic monograph now! Could I have it by next week?
    Not really, as interesting as it would be. Many of us(me included) are lazy about this sort of thing and hope we get seed that is labled right. It is admirable what some like William are trying to do.
    I appreciate that Fernando is taking his time when publishing new species, to make sure it's done right. It is a "damned if you do, damned if you don't " dilemna, because if you publish too quickly and then find out you were wrong about something, then you have a mess in people's collection. I don't know how may Neps people are into Drosera also, but what is now called N. mindanaoensis was mislabled as N. petiolata, and Phill Mann discovered the true one in..1996?
    There are still mislabled plants out there.
    The problem with taking your time , is that someone can take the credit for your discovery if they publish the name while you are checking and re-checking.
    I am not 100% sure of the timing, but Allen Lowrie has been looking at different variants of D. indica for some time, and was aware of a form that had little yellow structures on it's leaves, but was not sure yet where it fit in. Somebody else found it and now we have D. hartmeyerorem(sp?). I was told he was aware of this plant since the late 80s, early 90s. It may end up that D. indica will end up diversified more(maybe in subspecies), as there are locales that have plants only a few cm tall and others that have some 50 cm tall! Quite a difference for one species.
    Anyway, now my break is over and I have to get back to work.

    Regards,

    Joe

    PS I was one in a million in asking Fernando for seeds too, and I was not one of the lucky ones either, if it makes anyone happy.

    [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html312/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif[/img]

  8. #24

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Oswego, New York, U.S.A.
    Posts
    5,290
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi Fernando,

    Thanks for the rebuttal, some points of which do reassure me. I hadn't considered the field notes (I hope they are duplicated and filed in good places. IS there any chance of my obtaining a copy of these?) and of course there is the herborized material, which I didn't consider. That's an excellent start. I still encourage you to take lots of photos with your new digital camera, but don't do it in a lightning storm! I don't want to see the goose that takes the golden photo roasted in the process. I will continue to whine for the photos, with your permission: consider me the official whiner for CPers everywhere if you will (and I, like the rest of us are indebted for what you have provided). As to the "free" comment, how about someday burning a CD (yes, I know, you have a lot on your plate as it is) and marketing it? I'd buy it in a heartbeat!
    Free isn't the issue, and the proceeds could support your research. Availability is what I would like to see moe of: not all of us are going to Brasil, sadly/. OK. You make your point well, I am too demanding - but I hope you know it is my great love of this genus that motivates me and nothing more than that.

    As to the D. aliciae/sessilifolia if you read what I said, I specificaly sstated I did not mean to imply you made any sort of mess with that (!!!!), and used it only to illustrate that these things happen as a result of insufficient attention to detail. I think we agree at least in that! Thanks for your work in cleaning up the mess, sheesh! I have enough words in my mouth without you putting more in there, LOL.

    As for your comments regarding my own work, as you said, I am One in a Million, but I like to think that is a positive quality. The initial scans I sent you are unfortunately no longer possible as I explained in my post. I currently cannot afford the equipment I need, but this will change, and then I am going to bury you in seed testa photos, count on that!

    Meanwhile, I will continue to seek native seed for the study. Like you, I first have to source the material I wish to study, and like you I must attend to the details of confirming the material and not rush into things. You have been generous in the past to many, and I certainly don't imply otherwise. Believe me, there are many other supportive seed donors who have a little more faith in me than you do, and if you like I will NOT nag you further. Keep in mind, if I don't try to find sources for native seed, then I never will obtain it. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. Despite your feelings that I should concentrate on specific groups, I believe the time to ask for native seed is when someone is going to where the native seed is, irrespective of specific sections. The potential is best then for possibly getting it! My methods work for me, usually. Also, in my initial letters to you, I offered you references, and I sent you copies of the work which was then being performed. I was not then producing the photos (although this will soon change) and was acting as an adjunct with the Senior Seed Analyst of the Idaho State Herbarium to source and provide seed for the study. He was not a Drosera man, and had some faith in my expertise. What you see as whining and begging is nothing more than a dedicated effort to elicit some positive response from the community to produce a very worthy and much needed reference. Despite whatever doubts or suspicions you may have, I will continue to plod on, with or without your assistance: and BTW you asked me how it was going, and I told you. SO, in short, your past and current refusal to help provide good source material is completely up to you. You certainly have been consistent in your views and responses! Someday I hope to prove myself to you and the community and hopefully earn your approval and respect for the effort, if not your material assistance. This testa reference is going to happen but there is more work in sourcing the seed needed than in the act of photographing it. I can't do this until I purchase a very good digital dissecting microscope, and believe me, the moment I can afford such, I will continue with Phase Two, and this is not too far off! As to never helping me, my dear friend, you help me constantly. Maybe not directly with seed, but in many other ways, and I am not unappreciative of the time you have generously spared to me.

    In conclusion, you have reassured me that you have afforded posterity a reliable means of assessing your research through the modalities you employ. That's good to know. Other modalities maight make the information more centrally available to others, but it's up to you, not me, as to whether you will employ them. I made my pitch, but you aren't buying, so let's leave off of that.

    I hope my concerns haven't offended you, and I take no offense at your comments regarding my studies. Well not much, anyways. Besides, I'll win you over in the end, just wait and see!

    If you are interested, here are some examples of seed testa photos. Future photos will not have this quality. Unfortunately I was not able to source the more rare species for inclusion before my associate left the herbarium and it's equipment for employment in the private sector. Sometimes, speed is of the essence, lest valuable opportunity be lost.



    http://www.cpforums.org/gallery....zed.jpg

    http://www.cpforums.org/gallery....n_100xa

    http://www.cpforums.org/gallery....zed.jpg

    http://www.cpforums.org/gallery....zed.jpg

    http://www.cpforums.org/gallery....zed.jpg

    http://www.cpforums.org/gallery....zed.jpg

    http://www.cpforums.org/gallery....zed.jpg



    "Grow More, Share More"

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •