I don't think S. hughii has a muddy blue form. The ones I have are a brilliant blue. The differences between S. hughii and S. peruviana are as follows: In S. hughii the leaves are much broader, the bracts below each floret are much longer and are tinted a bronze color. The bronze color also tints the stems. I used to grow both, and was able to compare side by side, and you could see the differences. There are pictures of S. hughii on my web site, http://www.telosrarebulbs.com/, and I tried to photgraph them to show the bracts. Diana Telos Rare Bulbs > > > Once, maybe twice, I have grown "Scilla peruviana" from seed exchange > donations, at least one was labelled "Alba", but when it eventually > flowered > turned out to be a dull, muddy, pale grey blue. Could this be "hughii"? > The > closest in colouring from memory, is that of Scilla dimartinoi on the pbs > wiki, though I can't remember if the flower scape differed at all from my > other S. peruviana. The only trouble is yesterday I labelled another pot, > with no root bulbils, as "pale form", which was what I originally called > it > to differentiate it for my own purposes, so maybe this was not this form > but > another that has lost its label over the eons. Now I will have to flower > them both to see if they are different flower forms, and that may take > more > than a year from the smallish sized bulbs. (only 1 has the root bulbils)