Some interesting links, thanks Mark. The seed exchanges often receive and list "Aquilegia jonesii x saximontana" but I remember Bob Nold saying that he didn't think this hybrid exists. So are these reputed crosses just A saximontana or a different hybrid? Has anyone grown them on?
Some years ago I grew seed under this hybrid name. The resultant plants looked more like A. flabellata than anything else, and not the 'Nana' form either, but quite large and vigorous.
I believe that the plant is as shown in the July 2010 #7 of International Rock Gardener http://www.srgc.org.uk/logs/logdir/2010Jul291280437029IRG7_July2010.pdf
- the tiny stature, foliage colour and short, curling spurs convince me!
These links are to various USA sites ....
The curling spurs are clearly i llustreated here :
Interesting links.... none of which look like the plant in IRG 7 :-X
Interesting links.... none of which look like the plant in IRG 7 :-XI'm with Mark - it looks like A flabellata (nana) as I have grown it ... and as Google sees it!
(Attachment Link)
This illustration from efloras.org, Flora of North America shows a flower form that is like the IRG 7 pic...You are right. The image is obviously misleading. It is a general problem of botanical illustration which exaggerates certain distinctive characters but forgets others not important for a given purpose.
Interesting links.... none of which look like the plant in IRG 7The Aquilegia flabellata var. pumila at the Japanese
Interesting links.... none of which look like the plant in IRG 7The Aquilegia flabellata var. pumila at the Japanese
http://ptech.cocolog-nifty.com/blog/2008/04/post_869f.html
It certainly looks like the plant in IRG 7.
I am finding this thread very interesting.
Here are a couple of pics of seedlings of mine.
Aquilegia saximontana seedling
Aquilegia jonesii x saximontana
Lastly, an A. flabellata bought from a nursery
I don't know what the first three actually are but I like them a lot.
Mark, I'm not at all sure that the first two are flabellata. I have lots of those and they all grow into a lovely little mound, these ones are only about half the height of the flabellata and the leaves look different. If they flower at the same time next year I will have a really good squizz at them.
I refer again to McMark's scan of the drawings.... and to the two plants shown..... the last looks like a saximontans but the first two pictures are surely, by his reasoning, laramiensis? ::)I am not certain which image should depict A. laramiensis. The flowers if it are usually whitish.
Great Moravian...... I can see what you mean to say.... but the photos you show are displaying a different meaning to the one I understand of paralllel, for a start....... parallel means being the same distant apart along the length...... :-XDespite I am a mathematician, I don't expect plants to be geometric objects. All terms in botany are merely approximate.
Despite I am a mathematician, I don't expect plants to be geometric objects. All terms in botany are merely approximate.
I am not certain which image should depict A. laramiensis.I rather thought the image labelled laramiensis??
I refer again to McMark's scan of the drawings.... and to the two plants shown..... the last looks like a saximontans but the first two pictures are surely, by his reasoning, laramiensis? ::)
Does anyone know whay I really have? I posted this in april 2009.A Japanese cultivar of Aquilegia flabellata var. pumila in my guess.
http://www.srgc.org.uk/smf/index.php?topic=3329.msg89842#msg89842 (http://www.srgc.org.uk/smf/index.php?topic=3329.msg89842#msg89842)
Does anyone know whay I really have? I posted this in april 2009.A Japanese cultivar of Aquilegia flabellata var. pumila in my guess.
http://www.srgc.org.uk/smf/index.php?topic=3329.msg89842#msg89842 (http://www.srgc.org.uk/smf/index.php?topic=3329.msg89842#msg89842)
In my opinion, the identity of A. laramiensis and A. saximontana was sufficiently clarified.
The former is not a showy species, the latter is prone to hybridization.
But is it "prone to hybridisation"? Has anyone ever grown or even seen the fabled A jonesii x saximontana (and it wasn't A flabellata or similar). I'm not sure it exists.
Moravian/Onion Man - Thank you for identifying my plant. I am happy that more knowledgeable people have put me right rather than living in ignorance and expounding the problem when I give away its offspring. 8)
regards
Graeme Strachan
I am disappointed by this topic. I understand many of my aquilegias are under wrong names.
But now I can not say they are truly recognized. ???
I am disappointed by this topic. I understand many of my aquilegias are under wrong names.
This one came like A. saximontana
(http://cs4145.vkontakte.ru/u6450879/93407084/x_86b9ccb8.jpg)
A. pyrenaica subsp. dicolor
***
This one like A. bertolonii
(http://cs4145.vkontakte.ru/u6450879/93407084/x_40d04252.jpg)
A. pyrenaica subsp. pyrenaica or A. bertolonii. The latter is usually a coarser plant.
***
This - A. discolor
(http://cs4289.vkontakte.ru/u6450879/92164489/x_988744fa.jpg)
Cultivar of A. flabellata var. pumila
***
A. flabellata v. pumilio
(http://cs723.vkontakte.ru/u6450879/20107304/x_b06097ed.jpg)
Cultivar of A. flabellata var.pumila
***
And A. flabellata v. pumilio Rosea
(http://cs723.vkontakte.ru/u6450879/20107304/x_469968c0.jpg)
Cultivar of A. flabellata var pumila
But now I can not say they are truly recognized. ???
an interesting topic..
how far do aquilegias go with their promiscuity? if for example i had a couple of large garden cultivars, and one of the north american native oranges, (i do) and were to get wild collected seed of one of the western miniatures, such as jonesii or others, would these be sufficiently different to be safe, or will they still cross among themselves?
an interesting topic..
how far do aquilegias go with their promiscuity? if for example i had a couple of large garden cultivars, and one of the north american native oranges, (i do) and were to get wild collected seed of one of the western miniatures, such as jonesii or others, would these be sufficiently different to be safe, or will they still cross among themselves?
Unless one were to keep plants isolated and covered to prevent insect pollination, then the flowers selfed, it is my belief that they will start hybridizing right away. I have found that all of the North American red and red-orange types will hybridize readily with other species, to such a degree that one needs to be growing plants from wild seed often to keep them going in the garden. You'll get close look-alikes from seed, but one loses confidence in only a few years of growing seedlings after seeing first hand the hybrid shift.
There will be a lovely A. scopulorum ssp. perplexans picture by Joyce Carruthers in the International Rock Gardener for November.
I haven't seen mention of the Italian (?) A. bertolonii in this thread. I have no picture unfortunately but in my experience, it does seem always to come true from seed, even though I have had many others growing nearby. It seems to be the American species that are most prone to hybridizing.
Thanks Maggi, I look forward to seeing the next IRG issue with that photo, along with more buckwheats.
I'm out for the day, but tonight will post what is written about A. scopulorum ssp. perplexans in the Gentes Herbarum monograph on Aquilegia, it explains the color variation and I think readers will be interested.
This one I get from seed taken at Tajikistan.Aquilegia lactiflora - vicaria - pseudovicaria - tianschanica -karatavica - darwazii alliance discussed in a parallel thread
(http://cs10003.vkontakte.ru/u6450879/31156622/x_eec5edb7.jpg) (http://cs10003.vkontakte.ru/u6450879/31156622/x_c5b3c5e7.jpg)
| A.bertolonii | A. pyrenaica subsp. pyrenaica |
| éperon gént recourbé en crochet `a son extrémité, plus rart simplement arqué ---> -+ droit | éperon droit ou un peu arqué, exceptionnellement -+ recourbé en crochet `a son extrémité |
| t. soit glabres soit -+ poilues-glanduleuses ds leur part. sup. | t. glabres ou faiblt poilues-glanduleuses ds leur part. sup. |
| 10-50 cm | 10-30 cm |
I am Great Moravian and not Marovian, otherwise I thank TheOnionMan for further information.Dear me, so easy to get the names confused, isn't it, even with people? ;)
Dear me, so easy to get the names confused, isn't it, even with people? ;)No problem. I checked the descriptions by Munz posted above by TheOnionMan. No other differences can be found.
Great Moravian.... I was having a little joke about the Onion Man getting your name wrong.... I'm sorry if the British humour is a little difficult to follow.Dear me, so easy to get the names confused, isn't it, even with people? ;)No problem. I checked the descriptions by Munz posted above by TheOnionMan. No other differences can be found.
I am Great Moravian and not Marovian, otherwise I thank TheOnionMan for further information.
So the leaves should be pilose beneath in Aquilegia bertolonii whereas glabrous beneath in Aquilegia pyrenaica.
Sepals are broader in the latter in reality. Botanists obviously cannot reveal a clear distinctive feature separating the two species.
Here's another aquilegia I have labelled as saximontana, also grown from seed.
Yes or no? ??? ??? ???
Sorry the pics aren't very good.
]
Ding, ding, ding! Congratulations Helen, give this woman a teddy bear! :o ;D :o Yes, that looks like A. saximontana, notice the outwardly splayed (divergent) spurs... yours is the first columbine submitted on this topic that looks correct. Well done!
Where did you get the seed? Now, there is also a strong possibility this is a hybrid with saximontana, particularly if it came from garden grown seed, but it at least has the right look and is definitely not a flabellata nor a pyrenaica type.
| (http://cs4145.vkontakte.ru/u6450879/93407084/x_86b9ccb8.jpg) | (http://www.srgc.org.uk/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=6126.0;attach=253235) |
| Aquilegia pyrenaica subsp. discolor | Aquilegia saximontana |
At a sister society-This one, which is my trough plant, is A. laramiensis, not A. saximontana... unless you are saying it is something else?
http://nargs.org/nargswiki/show_image.php?id=816&scalesize=o
Yes, it might be, but A. laramiensis was discussed above too. I would appreciate if you would share the image if possible.At a sister society-This one, which is my trough plant, is A. laramiensis, not A. saximontana... unless you are saying it is something else?
http://nargs.org/nargswiki/show_image.php?id=816&scalesize=o
Yes, it might be, but A. laramiensis was discussed above too. I would appreciate if you would share the image if possible.
jn
French authors include Aquilegia reuteri in Aquilegia bertolonii.It's an old thread but it's the only one dealing with the difference betweeen A. pyrenaica and bertolonii.
Several Italian authors restrict the latter to Alpi Apuane and regard the former as a member of the Aquilegia einseleana group.