Pulsatilla

LucS wrote:

The first pulsatilla showing some colour : Pulsatilla chinensis

This species is an interesting challenge, most difficult to find any images of the true species.  In China it is used extensively in herbal medicine, so googling will reveal mostly herbal web sites where they'll throw in a photo of most any Pulsatilla or Anemone species.  What makes this species distinctive is the broad and less divided foliage, typically just trifoliate and possibly with some smaller leaf divisions, unlike the much more dissected leaves of species like P. vulgaris.  It seems that in cultivation, much of what is labeled as P. chinensis is misidentified, with P. vulgaris the usual result.

However, I did find a few photos of true P. chinensis, which shows the distinctive broad modestly divided foliage.

Pulsatilla chinensis in Flora of China:
http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=2&taxon_id=200008054
...illustration (right hand side, items 1-4), notice broad 3-lobed leaves, prominent involucral bracts (not particularly fuzzy with hairs), flowers erect before anthesis, the erect flower disposition separating it from the closely allied P. cernua with nodding buds.
http://www.efloras.org/object_page.aspx?object_id=39968&flora_id=2

Pulsatilla chinensis photo:
http://www.99.com.cn/uploads/090630/1_213954_1.jpg

foliage on a young plant:
http://stewartia.net/engei/field_plant/Kinpouge_ka/Pulsatilla%20chinensi...

This one was labeled as P. chinensis, but might actually be P. cernua based on the leaflet lobes more deeply divided, and semi-nodding buds, but otherwise close to P. chinensis:
http://plant.cqla.cn/06/MG11A_baitouweng002.JPG

Luc, if I were to venture a guess, I'd guess that you have a lovely form of P. vulgaris, a beautiful garden plant in its own right.

The leaves of P chinensis is more like the leaves of P vernalis than any other species I have seen!

Hoy wrote:

The leaves of P chinensis is more like the leaves of P vernalis than any other species I have seen!

Based on your photo Trond, true enough.  In your photo of P. vernalis, I see the involucral bracts are very dissected and super fuzzy; what stands our for me on P. chinensis (and P. cernua too), is the mostly entire bract segments that are mildly pilose and without the usual puff of fuzz, which gives it a distinct look (although we all love the fluffy puffs on many Pulsatilla species).

McDonough wrote:

Luc, if I were to venture a guess, I'd guess that you have a lovely form of P. vulgaris, a beautiful garden plant in its own right.

Mark, you could be very right. The foliage of the plant on the photo is indeed very different from what I see here. I'll edit the posting.
Thanks for your time.

This one has the right ID : Pulsatilla slavica

LucS wrote:

This one has the right ID : Pulsatilla slavica

HOLY MOLY Luc, that is simply drop-dead gorgeous... an explosion of fluffiness! :o :o :o

Very well, LucS, the last one is overwhelming! - and I don't worry at all about the name ;)

Astounding!! What are your secrets?

Wish I knew the secrets myself. Didn't do a thing to encourage it.

One more in flower today : Pulsatilla Budapest seedstrain

Glorious shade of light blue, my favorite color.  How true does "Budapest seedstrain" come from seed, and if one has lots of various color Pulsatilla vulgaris plants nearby, will the strain degenerate into something other than what is qualified as the "Budapest seedstrain".  I have seen photos of this seed strain labeled as "Budapest" and they have always appeared as superior ethereal blue-flowered forms.

Those pale lilac-blues are stunning!

I'll kick off my NARGS forum membership by showing my P. albana lutea

Wow, it's stunning, Mark!  Welcome to the forum.  It's great to see you here!

thanks Lori

mark wrote:

I'll kick off my NARGS forum membership by showing my P. albana lutea

Very nice Mark S, and a hearty welcome!  Glad to see you made your way to this side of the pond.

For years I grew this particular Pulsatilla, and liked it very much... seemed to be one that might even be small enough for a trough.

I have the white form of Pulsatilla slavica in flower at the moment. Not as impressive as the blue form but nice anyway.

Wow, I'd say it's very impressive!  If it is even more impressive in blue, I can't imagine how. :o

A very fresh look to that one, Mark.  (Actually, it looks quite tasty to me  ;D.)

Thanks for stopping in, and we hope to see more of your additions here!

Skulski wrote:

Wow, I'd say it's very impressive!  If it is even more impressive in blue, I can't imagine how. :o

See reply #5 for the blue flowered plant Lori.

I like all Pulsatillas regardless the color! I would like to grow more of any kind.

A few more from the rockgarden because you like them:
Pulsatilla georgii
Pulsatilla patens
Pulsatilla x gayeri

Beautiful, Luc! What strong, healthy plants and what a profusion of bloom!

What is the origin of your P. patens?  It's very different from the appearance of the native species that occurs here, in the form, flower colour and nodding buds.  I realize that P. patens is also a Eurasian species (not just North American), but can the forms really be that different?  Here are some photos of the species in the wild in this area:
http://nargs.org/smf/index.php?topic=67.0

Some of my Pulsatilla seeds have sprouted ;D Hope they grow as exuberant as yours, Luc!

Ditto what Lori said about the American Pulsatilla patens.  The Minnesota native type can also be seen on that same thread.

Nevertheless, those are some very well grown plants!  Do the flower stems continue to elongate as the flower ages, as they do with Pulsatilla turczaninovii?

What species are involved with P. x gayeri?

Rick

P.S.  Did you mean Pulsatilla georgica instead of georgii?

This is the only one beginning bloom in my garden, as of yet: a very nice form, in my opinion, of Pulsatilla vulgaris.  (I don't grow P. patens myself.)

Skulski wrote:

Beautiful, Luc! What strong, healthy plants and what a profusion of bloom!

What is the origin of your P. patens?  It's very different from the appearance of the native species that occurs here, in the form, flower colour and nodding buds.  I realize that P. patens is also a Eurasian species (not just North American), but can the forms really be that different?  Here are some photos of the species in the wild in this area:
http://nargs.org/smf/index.php?topic=67.0

Lori, to be honoust I have doubts about its naming for some time. The plant looks more like a P. pratensis type to me.
I have a plant labelled P. pratensis ssp. bohemica that looks close to this one. See the picture below.
I was told that the plant (with name P. patens) in the picture above was grown from seeds collected in Primovice, Slowak Rep.

RickR wrote:

What species are involved with P. x gayeri?

Rick

P.S.  Did you mean Pulsatilla georgica instead of georgii?

The plant was originally labelled "Pulsatilla georgei" but it must be "P. georgica" no doubt.
It is a relatively small plant with small, light blue, hairy flowers.

I don't know much about P. gayeri. Got it from Gothenborg Botanics.
It looks to me as P. vulgaris is involved.

Luc

LucS wrote:

This one has the right ID : Pulsatilla slavica

love the colour of this one!

Posted elsewhere but I think they belong here too ;D
Although the "mogop" is a Norwegian native I have planted these in the meadow here as they were exterminated many years ago when my father-in-law was a boy due to grazing livestock.

Pulsatilla vernalis.

Great you could re-introduce :) Was it a Norwegian clone? are they spreading?

cohan wrote:

Great you could re-introduce :) Was it a Norwegian clone? are they spreading?

It is different sources. Some are plants I have collected as seedlings a place they are in abundance, others are seedlings I have bought. I haven't seen seedlings here yet but they haven't bloomed for more than a few years (and some years the flowers or the seedheads have been destroyed by grazing animals).
I intend to help by collecting seed and plant.

RickR wrote:

What species are involved with P. x gayeri?

Rick

There is a name found in IPNI.ORG as Pulsatilla gayeri Simonk., reference Magyar Bot. Lapok v. 179 (1906), with the note: Hybr (probably indicating "Hybrid").  Judging from a search through Tropicos, The Plant List, google, and other references, it would seem this is a phantom species and not a current recognized taxonomic entity, probably representing a P. vulgaris hybrid.  I see it listed variably as P. x gayeri and P. vulgaris 'Gayeri', and under the various names there are hits on Flickr image galleries and such.