Two cypellas pictured here, Peter (UK) http://srgc.org.uk/forum/index.php/… On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Peter Taggart <petersirises@gmail.com>wrote: > I quite agree about the problems of using the Inness book! > Also it is very cautios over the growing conditions for plants. Not every > picture is correctly named if I remember right. What it does do is collect > an awfull lot of names together along with the names of the botanists who > published those names. > Peter (UK) > > > On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 2:13 AM, Mary Sue Ittner <msittner@mcn.org> wrote: > >> >> I have the Innes book but I don't usually think >> of it for current taxonomy since it was published >> in 1985. But without good sources about South >> American irids it is a help because at least it >> has descriptions of plants as they were known at >> that time. There isn't a key and they don't >> always include the same things in the >> descriptions which makes comparing a bit of a challenge. >> >>