Hi, All. For those who follow such things, a new species of lily, Lilium pyrophilum was named in 2002. http://ridgwaydb.mobot.org/mobot/mbgpress/… Publications Published in: Novon: Vol. 12, No. 1. pp. 94–105 "Lilium pyrophilum M. Skinner & Sorrie is a new taxon from the Sandhills region of the Atlantic Coastal Plain, where it is known from 16 counties in the Carolinas and adjacent Virginia. Lilium pyrophilum is most closely allied to L. superbum but is allopatrically distributed and confined to a restricted habitat. Compared to L. superbum it blooms later, is smaller, has fewer and smaller flowers with slightly longer tubes, and it has shorter and relatively broader leaves that are ascending and concentrated in fewer whorls toward the bottom of the stem. Frequent fires are essential for habitat maintenance in natural settings, thus the Latin epithet pyrophilum (= fire loving) is used for the new taxon. We suggest the common name Sandhills lily for this rare lily, and urge its fullest protection." There is a photo, accessible by scrolling to the bottom of the document at the URL above. I'm not an expert in such things, but wonder if this is really separate from L. superbum. L. superbum is a widely distributed species, and does vary. Given different habitat, it would be expected to vary, especially in size and number of flowers, and even in size and number of leaves. I suspect that it may take genetic analysis to determine if it is indeed a valid new species. It appears to me the name is misleading, as I doubt the lily really loves fire so much as appreciates the reduced competition from other plants, caused by burning trees and brush, something which is true of most plants. I have seen it suggested that the name is "propagandistic", with the suggestion that the lily was named in an effort to support the management practice of burning its' habitat. As there are only 250 presently known plants, it appears that, if a true species, not simply a form of the widespread L. superbum, it would be listed as endangered. Thus, it would be a reason for continued burning of its' habitat. However, claiming that fires are necessary for its' continued existance ignores the fact there are other means of controlling vegatation, such as hand clearing, etc. While there are values on both sides of managed burning, I resent the naming a lily species to support burning, if that is what is happening. It will be interesting to see what comes of this new name. Ken, western Oregon