Kent, The flowers are Drimiopsis like, but Drimiopsis has recently been submerged into Ledebouria by J. C. Manning and Goldblatt. The common Drimiopsis maculata is now Ledebouria petiolata J. C. Manning & Goldblatt, no relation to S. Venter's unpublished L. petiolata which is related to L. rupestris. I don't recall what Manning and Goldblatt renamed Drimiopsis kirkii when they transferred it to Ledebouria. It could not be called L. kirkii because that combination already existed. Interestingly Baker named a Scilla kirkii (which in 1995-96 Stedge and Thulin transferred to Ledebouria kirkii) and Baker also named a different plant Drimiopsis kirkii, which when transferred to Ledebouria in 2004 by Manning and Goldblatt needed a new specific name. Fred Boutin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard" <xerics@cox.net> To: "Marilyn Pekasky" <pekasky@earthlink.net>; "Pacific Bulb Society" <pbs@lists.ibiblio.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 3:44 PM Subject: Re: [pbs] New mystery bulb > Yes, the leaves are very succulent but the flower doesn't look like any > Ledebouria that I know. > > Subject: Re: [pbs] New mystery bulb > > > > Are the leaves of this plant extremely succulent? If so, it's an unknown > > Ledebouria. I have had conversations with two people here in Southern > > California about it, Tom Glavich and Fred Baker, and neither one knows > > where it came from or what exactly it is. However, it has been known to > > exist for a good number of years. Tom is on this list. If you're there, > > Tom, what do you remember about this bulb? > > _______________________________________________ > pbs mailing list > pbs@lists.ibiblio.org > http://www.pacificbulbsociety.org/list.php > >