Thanks, Mike, for taking the time to do the updates, and thanks Jim, for posting the correct link. I was disappointed to see so many subdivisions of the species used in the Narcissus list. Do all of the names cited really correspond to distinct, sexually reproducing populations in nature? If the basis of modern species concept is the interbreeding population, and if the proper focus of the taxonomist is that interbreeding population, it seems to me that the continued subdivision of the species into smaller units such as the subspecies, variety and form only continues the muddied taxonomy of the past. What sense does it make to have an interbreeding population itself within another interbreeding population itself within yet another larger interbreeding population? I’m still waiting for a truly modern treatment of the genus Narcissus. Jim McKenney jimmckenney@jimmckenney.com Montgomery County, Maryland, USA, 39.03871º North, 77.09829º West, USDA zone 7 My Virtual Maryland Garden http://www.jimmckenney.com/ BLOG! http://mcwort.blogspot.com/ Webmaster Potomac Valley Chapter, NARGS Editor PVC Bulletin http://www.pvcnargs.org/ Webmaster Potomac Lily Society http://www.potomaclilysociety.org/