 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Photos edit
I searched for photos of the plant, but understanding that the species naming has somewhat complex history, I'm reluctant to add them to the article without a nod from the experts. These two photos from Bulgaria are accompanied by the uploader's explanation that they believe it is indeed the new species:
_%E2%80%93_%D0%BB%D0%B8%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B0_2.jpg)
_%E2%80%93_%D1%81%D1%8A%D1%86%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%8F_2.jpg)
Judging on the year, File:Salix euxina - Sturm 1796.png is a misnomer. No such user (talk) 15:14, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
- Re the Bulgarian photos, key distinguishing features seem to be hairs and the stomata position, which aren't mentioned.
- Re the Sturm 1796 image, the point is that "Salix fragilis" was applied inconsistently to both the pure species and the hybrid, so the illustration could be what is now S. euxina. However, the cultivar 'Bullata' is distinctive and is placed in this taxon now, so I propose using a photo of it for now. Peter coxhead (talk) 20:02, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
- It's unusual but I've left the "image requested" note because the cultivar image isn't ideal. Peter coxhead (talk) 20:22, 10 August 2021 (UTC)