Talk:Banksia violacea

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 Banksia violacea is part of WikiProject Banksia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the plant genus Banksia and related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance for WikiProject Plants assessment.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance for WikiProject Australia assessment.
Flag
Portal
 Banksia violacea is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.
This article is supported by WikiProject Western Australia.
This article is supported by WikiProject Australian biota.
Assessment comments

[edit] lignotuberous populations

Cas, I've removed your statement

Banksia violacea is mostly nonlignotuberous, though some plants with lignotubers have been found in the western part of its range.

from the description section, just while we figure out what the situation is. George 1981 refers to northern populations that "apparently do have them, though they have not been seen in post-fire situations". Lignotuberous plants continue to be mentioned in the 1984 and 1987 editions of The Banksia Book, and in the 1988 and 1991 editions of the Banksia Atlas. But the 1999 Flora of Australia states straight out that they are non-lignotuberous. My reading of this is that the claim that there are lignotuberous populations was shown to be false in the 1990s. Have you any other information?

I put a brief coverage of this in the ecology section, which you mustn't have noticed.

Hesperian 02:17, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Certainly that could be the case, although I wouldn't be surprised if a question mark over lignotuberous ones simply disappeared off the radar. I know, let's ask Alex :) cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 06:04, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
PS: Species including both lig and nonlig - B. marginata, B. ashbyi were the two you were thinking of? If one doesn't count B. cunninghamii as a separate species then that's another one. also B. paludosa....can't think of any more....cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 06:07, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
George 81 and/or 87 (can't remember exactly at the moment) said only marginata and violacea (if it is counted). Let's face it; these are great references but they are getting old. I'm not surprised to hear that ashbyi and paludosa have been added to the list.
...
Ah, you're right. I've just had a dig through Lamont and Markey's "Biogeography of fire-killed and resprouting Banksia species in South-western Australia", and it has a pretty detailed discussion of how ashbyi and violacea have lignotuberous and non-lignotuberous variants. That will teach me to give too much weight to the absence of information.
Hesperian 06:24, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] image of woody cone?

Wanna pic of a cone? I an upload one later. Remind me on my talk page if you don't see one in a few days cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 03:32, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes please. Hesperian 03:33, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
young follicles - B. violacea
young follicles - B. violacea

- taken at the same place as the last one. cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 11:03, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

older follicles - B. violacea
older follicles - B. violacea
ex.cellent. Hesperian 11:17, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
I've stuck them in. They're not in particularly sensible locations, but at least they are spread around and give the article a bit of colour. Hesperian 11:23, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for jumping on the violacea bandwagon with me; nice to have some company. Hesperian 12:22, 25 May 2007 (UTC)