Public coordinates shown as a random point within 10KM of the true coordinates. True coordinates are only visible to you and the curators of projects to which you add the observation.
private
Coordinates completely hidden from public maps, true coordinates only visible to you and the curators of projects to which you add the observation.
open
Everyone can see the coordinates unless the taxon is threatened.
Description
Roadside in one of the valleys just outside Anza-Borrego. This sp. is not listed on Calflora as documented in San Diego County, nor in the Jepson Manual bioregion maps for this area. But thanks to wanderingnome & kueda, I've got a couple more votes towards G. latiflora, & I don't see anything else it can be. Flowers look right for G. angelensis (Chapparal Gilia), but leaves are wrong.
Very pretty. Do you remember if the plant was glandular at all, and do you have any closer shots of the leaves? Gilia latiflora looks like a reasonable match.
No, don't remember one way or the other. Not visible in either shot I have, but I don't have any macros. (My boyfriend at the time didn't have much patience for flower photography.) My other shot shows the leaves about the same; maybe slightly better, but not enough to talk about.
That's a couple of votes I've gotten for latiflora now, and I think the only reason I didn't go with that in the 1st place is that it wasn't listed in San Diego county herbarium specimens or in either the foothill or low desert Jepson Manual floristic province. But both of those sources seem to be incomplete, esp in a banner year like this one. So I'll run with that for now.
The data quality assessment is a summary of an observation's accuracy. All
observations start as "casual" grade, and achieve
"research" grade when
the iNat community agrees with the observer's ID, where an "agreeing"
identification is one that matches exactly or is of a child taxon of the
observer's ID. For example, if Scott says it's a mammal and Ken-ichi
says it's Homo sapiens, then Ken-ichi agrees with Scott.
the observation has a date
the observation is georeferenced (i.e. has lat/lon coordinates)
the observation has a photo
Observations will revert to "casual" grade if the above conditions aren't met or
the community agrees the location doesn't looks accurate (e.g. monkeys in the middle of the ocean, hippos in office buildings, etc.)
the community agrees the organism isn't wild/naturalized (e.g. captive or cultivated by humans or intelligent space aliens)
Comments & Identifications
Very pretty. Do you remember if the plant was glandular at all, and do you have any closer shots of the leaves? Gilia latiflora looks like a reasonable match.
No, don't remember one way or the other. Not visible in either shot I have, but I don't have any macros. (My boyfriend at the time didn't have much patience for flower photography.) My other shot shows the leaves about the same; maybe slightly better, but not enough to talk about.
That's a couple of votes I've gotten for latiflora now, and I think the only reason I didn't go with that in the 1st place is that it wasn't listed in San Diego county herbarium specimens or in either the foothill or low desert Jepson Manual floristic province. But both of those sources seem to be incomplete, esp in a banner year like this one. So I'll run with that for now.
Add a Comment
Add an Identification