File talk:Moeraswesporchis 12-11-2005 16.25.58.JPG

[[:Image:]]== determination == Hello Teun, I removed the picture Image:Moeraswesporchis 12-11-2005 16.25.58.JPG from Epipactis palustris. It seems, it is another Epipactis. The seedpods are too thick and the color is too green. Seedpods of Epipactis palustris are longer, they don´t appear as thick as in your picture and are usually slightly red. --BerndH 09:17, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello Bernd, is is a good thing that you check what is being uploaded. But in this case I think you err. However, I'll check your arguments before restoring them. TeunSpaans 04:30, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

A bit of history: I took this photo in a nature area called stormvloedpolderbos.

In Dutch it has a page at http://www.zuidhollandslandschap.nl/default.asp?idpage=4

The area is maintained by a foundation, zuid hollands landschap, which has about a 100 nature areas in this province. It has several professional biologists and numerous dedicated volunteers. Epipactis palustris was mentioned at a sign at the entrance. While walking around through the area we met a guy who maintained the site and when I asked for Epipactis palustris he showed us this specimen. I dont think it is very likely that a professional organization would err in the determination of this kind of species, and this man was clearly well aware of the flora in this (small, 9ha) nature reserve.

Btw, the sign at the entrance also mentioned something about the ecological relation in which it grew, a rare communion, but if i did photograph it, i can no longer find it.

As for your arguments: The first one is that they appear too thick. The only explanation I can think of is that this specimen grows on clay which is extremely fertile. e.g., all plants in this area become some 25%-30% taller than elsewhere, and I can imagine that they also tend to become thicker, but thats only a guess.

As for the colour, I noticed that Image:Epipactis palustris.jpg shows the seedpods as green, not as reddish. Didnt you see that red on another species?

I hope that this explanation satisfies you, please let me know what you think. TeunSpaans 04:49, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Well... I can´t help it but the seed pods just don´t look right... to me. The seed pods should have the same position like in Image:Epipactis_palustris_100705a.jpg. They should also be hairy. also, sometimes colors in the illustrations ae not as they should be. --BerndH 19:18, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Image:Epipactis_palustris_100705a.jpg is still flowering, the seed pods develop after it. I suggest that we don't start an edit war on this issue. I'll tag this photo with the category, and sooner or later someone else will voice his or her opinion too. In the meantime, could you provide us with a good seed pod photo? I dont have time to get back to that area before october, my weekends in september are always overloaded. TeunSpaans 21:05, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I don´t think I´ll have the opportunity to visit a site where Epipactis palustris grows in the near future. I wanted to on Sunday but there was no time.

Over the weekend I thought about the matter a little further. Could it be that the stem was not growing upright? Looks like it did...? That would explain why the seed pods are facing more or less upward.--BerndH 15:50, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Old discussion... but... I´m sure now. It is definitely not Epipactis palustris. They sould look like this. --BerndH 19:33, 23 July 2007 (UTC)