In article , Sacha writes: |> On 30/3/07 22:08, in article snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com, |> "Jangchub" wrote: |> |> > I suggest you contact your local botanical gardens. They are pretty |> > clear on identification. You can't tell me the taxonomy is so |> > involved in this species that botanists won't know the clear nature of |> > these seeds. |> |> Some of those who sell them admit they can't be clear on what they've got. |> I don't know *why*, however.
A combination of honesty and legal reasons. Classifying the species I am referring to is tough even for specialists!
Unfortunately, both Cambridge and Kew have been inflicted with modern, efficient, targetted management, and have closed their front doors to amateurs. I got a complete brush-off from the former, which did not impress me, as all I asked for was a pointer to references if anyone knew of any offhand. I don't know the people personally, or would bypass the bureaucracy.
In both cases, amateur botanists have to make do with the schoolchild- oriented pap that they provide as public information or find a way around the mechanism :-( And, increasingly, non-trivial information is being excluded even to academics of other disciplines, though it is only people like me who bemoan the fact. I can see the harm that it does to the specialities, but the specialists can't see widely enough to realise that.
Regards, Nick Maclaren.