# Plant ID



## Magnus (Feb 4, 2004)

I found this plant near a drainage by my school. I doubt it's aquatic but still worth a try.








Thanks,


----------



## Steve Pituch (Jan 25, 2004)

I have many times picked up a plant similar to this hopng it was baby's tears, but it seems it always turns out to be Chickweed.
See bottom of this page:
http://users.ev1.net/~spituch/unidentified/unidentified.html

Steve


----------



## HeyPK (Jan 23, 2004)

That plant looks like _Micranthemum umbrosum_. Is any of it growing in water?


----------



## Ghazanfar Ghori (Jan 27, 2004)

M. umbrosum has rounded leaf tips. In the picture the leaf ends
in a slight point.


----------



## HeyPK (Jan 23, 2004)

I went back and looked at my pictures of M. umbrosum, and, yes, the leaves are rounder. Also, the newest pair of leaves is folded, and in this unknown, it is not. However, the veination of the leaves looks very similar. This unknown does not look like chickweed to me.


----------



## Magnus (Feb 4, 2004)

Thanks for everyone's help. The plant in the picture wasn't growing in the water. It only gets halfwet when there's a rain, or when the sprinkler goes on. However, the area is very moist. It also looks aquatic, hence the reason I wanted to try it out. I guess it could be some type of Bacopas...


----------



## Gomer (Feb 2, 2004)

You walking the trail again magnus ? 

lots of "potential stuff" in that area.

Could always try it out and report back


----------



## ShaneSmith (Feb 15, 2004)

That is not what hemianthus Umbrosum looks like emmersed. But its a good possibility is something that will work out great submersed Hemianthus umbrosum is much smaller emmersed and looks like hemianthus callitriochoides (SP? sorry).


----------



## Error (Apr 16, 2004)

Looks like it could be a Lysimachia species to me. I found L. nummularia growing by a shallow creek in my neighborhood.

According to Kasselmann, there are several species in the genus that are good pond plants.


----------



## Sue (Mar 19, 2004)

Looks like a kind of chickweed to me too.
Grows rampant in the wet soil around my pond and stream.


----------



## Magnus (Feb 4, 2004)

Could this be chickweed? 








If so, then those two are different plants. If not, could someone take a stab at ID-ing this plant?

I found another almost dried up pond with thousands of guppies, and also found these plants. Need ID as well.

Plant 1: This plant was crawling/floating on the surface of the water. It was found in a very shallow area. The flower is yellow.

















Plant 2: Growing with bottom half in the water.

















Plant 3: Growing with bottom half in the water.

















Plant 4: This plant reminds me of R. rotundifolia growing submersed. The leaves underwater are red/pink. They are green out of the water. Again, growing with bottom half in the water.

















Plant 5: This plant looks very similar to Hygrophila, it was growing out of the water.

















Plant 6: Some random plant, looks like it could be aquatic.









Thanks,


----------



## tsunami (Jan 24, 2004)

Plant1 is definitely a species of Ludwigia. 

Plant4 looks a lot like a Rotala. Could it be Rotala ramoisir (check spelling)? It's one of the few Rotalas native to the U.S.

Plant5 reminds me of a Polygonum.

The last one really doesn't look aquatic. 

Carlos


----------



## Magnus (Feb 4, 2004)

Thank you, Carlos! I thought the first one was Ludwigia too! I'll definitely be trying 1, 4, and 5 out! Still waiting for some information on the other plants.


----------



## Error (Apr 16, 2004)

tsunami said:


> Plant1 is definitely a species of Ludwigia.
> 
> Plant4 looks a lot like a Rotala. Could it be Rotala ramoisir (check spelling)? It's one of the few Rotalas native to the U.S.
> 
> ...


(1) The species of Ludwigia found in CA are: palustris, peploides ssp. peploides, peploides ssp. montedivensis, repens, and uruguayensis. It looks most like either L. palustris or more likely uruguayensis to me.

(4) Rotala ramosior is indeed found in CA, but it does not have alternate leaves like this plant does.


----------



## Magnus (Feb 4, 2004)

Error, thanks! With your help, I think we have our first plant: Ludwigia uruguayensis. Yesterday, I tossed everything in a bucket, and today, I saw this:









With that, I was able to compare it with L. uruguayensis' flower, and they look the same.
How does this plant do submersed? How fast does it grow? Is it hardy? Can't wait to try it out! Still researching + waiting for words about the other plants.
Thanks,


----------



## Error (Apr 16, 2004)

Glad to know you positively IDed it. Beuatiful flower!

I don't know how well it does submersed, but I am certainly willing to help you test it out! I am a Ludwigia nut and would like to try to cultivate as many species as I can.

I'd like to trade you for a few stems, if that's not a problem.


----------



## Steve Pituch (Jan 25, 2004)

Error,
If you are a Ludwigia fan please look at this plant (Unidentified #1):
http://users.ev1.net/~spituch/unidentified/unidentified.html

Steve Pituch


----------



## Error (Apr 16, 2004)

spituch said:


> Error,
> If you are a Ludwigia fan please look at this plant (Unidentified #1):
> http://users.ev1.net/~spituch/unidentified/unidentified.html
> 
> Steve Pituch


North American Ludwigias are excessively difficult to identify without the flower. At first glance it looks like L. peploides ssp. montedivensis, but I have a few questions. Where did you find this, i.e. state, county, river, etc.? Also, are the stems and leaves pubescent at all, or are they glabrous? When (if at all) it flowers, does the flower rise up from one of the nodes on a separate stalk or does it develop directly from the rosette? If you have seen the flower, how many petals does it have, also how many stamens?

It also could be a variety of either L. repens or L. palustris.


----------



## Magnus (Feb 4, 2004)

Spituch,
Your plant looks very similar to mine. Can you check my plant #1 to see if they are the same?

Error,
It'd be great if you want to test it out too. I might come back tomorrow (there were some more unidentified plants I didn't take home last time). So if you're okay with accepting a few emersed stems, I will definitely pick some up for you. Let me know here, or PM me with your address.


----------



## Error (Apr 16, 2004)

Magnus, the more I eyeball that flower and the leaves, the more unsure I am about it being L uruguayensis.

The definitive feature differentiating L. uruguayensis from L. peploides (their flowers are almost identical) is the presence of pubescence (hairs) on the stems and leaves. L. uruguayensis is the one with the hairs, L. peploides is the one without. L. uruguayensis also sends up erect stems with flowers while L. peploides tends to keep them on the main floating/creeping stem.

These two pages should help:
http://www.wes.army.mil/el/aqua/apis/plants/html/ludwigi1.html
http://www.wes.army.mil/el/aqua/apis/plants/html/ludwigia.html

Click on the flower at the top for pictures.


----------



## Magnus (Feb 4, 2004)

Error, I think you are right, once again. The flower looks VERY similar to L. peploides. Since I am at work, I can't confirm the pubesence for you, but I am 90% positive my plant lacks it. I will confirm this once I get home.


----------



## Steve Pituch (Jan 25, 2004)

Error,
Unfortunately my plant bloomed a few days ago and I forgot about it and now all the flowers are shriveled. They were yellow similar to your two references. My plant is not pubescent anywhere (emersed) The emersed leaves are shiney but thinner than yours. Floating in the water it looks exactly like L. helminthorrhiza except it has never formed the floating air sacs.

Your stem is fatter. While my plant depends of the leaves to float the stem which is submerged, your has fat hollow stems for bouyancy. My plant was found on the shore of the Nueces River just northwest of Corpus Christi Texas.

Steve


----------



## Error (Apr 16, 2004)

spituch said:


> Error,
> Unfortunately my plant bloomed a few days ago and I forgot about it and now all the flowers are shriveled. They were yellow similar to your two references. My plant is not pubescent anywhere (emersed) The emersed leaves are shiney but thinner than yours. Floating in the water it looks exactly like L. helminthorrhiza except it has never formed the floating air sacs.
> 
> Your stem is fatter. While my plant depends of the leaves to float the stem which is submerged, your has fat hollow stems for bouyancy. My plant was found on the shore of the Nueces River just northwest of Corpus Christi Texas.
> ...


After doing a little research at this page here http://www.csdl.tamu.edu/~sangita/1ROSID.htm, I am pretty sure that you've got L. peploides ssp. montevidensis. Does this pic look a lot like it to you? (ignore the embedded caption; it's incorrect): 









I think it's a dead ringer. Your plant is definitely not L. palustris or L. repens, since they both have opposite leaves. The only Ludwigia that I can seem to identify as being from Texas that has rounded, alternate leaves is L. peploides ssp. montevidensis. I'm sure it is a fairly variable species (as a rule, all Ludwigias are), hence the leaf thickness and stem diameter being a little divergent. But I think it's a match. I'd really have to have a picture of a flower and some of the fruit to be 100% sure.

Two other subspecies of L. peploides are found in TX: L. peploides ssp. peploides and L. peploides ssp. glabrescens. The latter is definitely not your plant, however, since the leaves are lanceolate. The former I cannot find a reliable picture of.


----------



## Steve Pituch (Jan 25, 2004)

Error,

Hey I'm impressed. The stem is thicker and I don't know what the bumps are from, but it looks close.

I added a photo I just took to show that the terrestrial leaves have gome pointed again.
http://users.ev1.net/~spituch/unidentified/unidentified.html

I am now obsessed to get a photo the next time I see a flower.

Thanks,
Steve


----------



## Error (Apr 16, 2004)

spituch said:


> Error,
> 
> Hey I'm impressed. The stem is thicker and I don't know what the bumps are from, but it looks close.
> 
> ...


Steve,

Would there be any way I could persuade you to send me a sample of your plant, perhaps even a few stems of that beautiful Ammannia latifolius and the Polgonum? I would certainly be open to trading.


----------



## Magnus (Feb 4, 2004)

After a week of being submerged, my L. peploides went from this:









to this:








I fear this is a floating plant, and not true aquatic. I left one stem floating to see how it does, and trimmed the rest to see if they will eventually adapt to being submerged. I'd like to hear your experience on this.

Also, I found this a few days ago, and it's growing beautifully in my tank. Although it's too early to say (or to get my hopes up), this plant MAY be a true aquatic plant. Can anyone identify this?









Thanks,


----------



## Error (Apr 16, 2004)

Ooooo, that's a doozy. Gratiola, perhaps? Many species native to Cali, most aquatic. I'll trade you for some


----------



## Error (Apr 16, 2004)

Try this: http://www.spl.usace.army.mil/regulatory/plants/ora.htm


----------



## Error (Apr 16, 2004)

Also these: http://mamba.bio.uci.edu/~pjbryant/biodiv/


----------



## Magnus (Feb 4, 2004)

Error,
Thanks for all the informative links. I tried going through all of them, but there's just too much info for me to soak in at one sitting  .
I couldn't find any Gratiola species using the first link you gave, did I not look hard enough? :lol: 
I agree that it does look like a Gratiola, but I still have no idea what it is. Back to research I go...

PS: Error, you've got PM.


----------



## SCMurphy (Jan 28, 2004)

Magnus, is that the bacopa I sent you on the right hand side of your last pic?


----------



## Magnus (Feb 4, 2004)

Sean,
Yes, that is the Bacopa australis (Kasselman?) you sent me. At first, it wasn't too thrill being stuck in the corner of my tank. For that, it didn't do too hot. However, as soon as I took it out in to the open, it grew into a really nice bush! I'm very tempted to start a mound-scape tank with just this plants, rocks, a a FEW other species. Thanks again for adding it randomly into the package!  
How is your 10g? Did you manage to enter it to the AB contest in time? Are you thinking of the new Iron Aquascaper contest with that 10g now?  
Can't wait to see your pictures.


----------



## SCMurphy (Jan 28, 2004)

Magnus said:


> Sean,
> Yes, that is the Bacopa australis (Kasselman?) you sent me. At first, it wasn't too thrill being stuck in the corner of my tank. For that, it didn't do too hot. However, as soon as I took it out in to the open, it grew into a really nice bush! I'm very tempted to start a mound-scape tank with just this plants, rocks, a a FEW other species. Thanks again for adding it randomly into the package!
> How is your 10g? Did you manage to enter it to the AB contest in time? Are you thinking of the new Iron Aquascaper contest with that 10g now?
> Can't wait to see your pictures.


Your welcome, it is looking good for you.

It is ok, I didn't manage to enter it in the ADA contest  but I did manage to get it into the AB contest.

I haven't considered the IA contest yet, I was just about to trash all of my Rotala indicta (rotundifolia) when they announced it. If you want a peek at the ten look for it on the PT.


----------



## Magnus (Feb 4, 2004)

I saw this plant growing along a side of a ditch. I suspect it is Bacopa monnieri. Can anyone confirm it?


















Thanks,


----------



## Error (Apr 16, 2004)

Magnus said:


> I saw this plant growing along a side of a ditch. I suspect it is Bacopa monnieri. Can anyone confirm it?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I can't see those pics...


----------



## Magnus (Feb 4, 2004)

The server at my work place that hosts the pictures is acting up. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. I hope they'll have it fixed by this weekend. Otherwise, I'll have to go in and check with the guy. You should see the pictures now (at the time I'm writing this, I can see them).


----------



## Error (Apr 16, 2004)

Are you in the "Sacramento Valley" area of Cali? Could be Bacopa repens.


----------



## Sir_BlackhOle (Jan 25, 2004)

I dont think its monnieri, but i could be wrong. :wink:


----------



## Magnus (Feb 4, 2004)

Error,
I'm a little bit south of the Sacramento Valley, closer to San Diego. What does this mean? I tried looking up Bacopa repens, but found very little information about it. Can you show me any pictures of it?
Sir Blackhole,
From most of the pictures I've seen, they look very similar. But, I don't have a positive ID of this plant. Why do you think this is not B. monnieri? Please explain, I really want to ID this plant.
Thanks,


----------



## Sir_BlackhOle (Jan 25, 2004)

well, on second thought i guess it could be. all the bacopa I have is growing submersed, so maybe the emmersed form is a bit different. The stems on yours look a lot thicker than anything i have though.


----------



## Error (Apr 16, 2004)

Magnus said:


> Error,
> I'm a little bit south of the Sacramento Valley, closer to San Diego. What does this mean? I tried looking up Bacopa repens, but found very little information about it. Can you show me any pictures of it?
> Sir Blackhole,
> From most of the pictures I've seen, they look very similar. But, I don't have a positive ID of this plant. Why do you think this is not B. monnieri? Please explain, I really want to ID this plant.
> Thanks,


The data I found at some California hort society's site said that B. repens is found pretty much only in the Sacramento Valley. I assume that also includes the area immediately around it, since most distributional data is often severely incomplete. It seems many areas all over the world are largely unexplored by botanists, doesn't it?

The species of Bacopa native to or naturalized in Cali (according to the USDA plants list) are B. eisenii, B. monnieri, B. repens, and B. rotundifolia. I think it's a safe guess to say that yours is one of the first three, but it's really irritating that there are no pictures of B. repens or B. eisenii to be found on the internet.

Ever considered checking out a hort society down there or sending some material to a university? I'm probably going to try to get that "Gratiola" you send me (which, by the way, is definitely aquatic and definitely very pretty) IDed by someone at university around here. The University of Michigan has a good botany program and I'm thinking that I could try to get it IDed by someone there, though I'm not sure they will be exactly chomping at the bit to perform that variety of service for a layman who does this as a hobby.


----------



## Magnus (Feb 4, 2004)

Sir Blackhole, I'll keep an eye on the plant's stem to see if it gets any smaller than it is now.
Error,
I can honestly tell you I never even thought about checking out the hort society, or the university. I don't even know where to begin this :lol: . I'll just have to rely on your expertise for now (as well as everyone else's here).
BTW, I was just about to send you a PM asking how that Gratiola sp. is doing in your tank  . Does it keep the same leaves, or do the leaves change to adapt to submersed growth? If you can get a picture, that would be great. I haven't been back there for a while now (midterms and projects), so I didn't get to try it again. It certainly sounds very encouraging to know the plant is aquatic, especially when the plant's that pretty.
Thanks again,


----------



## Error (Apr 16, 2004)

Magnus said:


> Sir Blackhole, I'll keep an eye on the plant's stem to see if it gets any smaller than it is now.
> Error,
> I can honestly tell you I never even thought about checking out the hort society, or the university. I don't even know where to begin this :lol: . I'll just have to rely on your expertise for now (as well as everyone else's here).
> BTW, I was just about to send you a PM asking how that Gratiola sp. is doing in your tank  . Does it keep the same leaves, or do the leaves change to adapt to submersed growth? If you can get a picture, that would be great. I haven't been back there for a while now (midterms and projects), so I didn't get to try it again. It certainly sounds very encouraging to know the plant is aquatic, especially when the plant's that pretty.
> Thanks again,


The leaves appear to be the same shape underwater as the ones lower on the stem, but really it's too early to tell. Wisteria can take up to a month to put out its submersed leaves. So far I believe this is definitely an amphibious Scrophulariaceid plant, possibly a weird form of Gratiola neglecta or a closely-related species.


----------

