11 responses to “Callicarpa bodinieri var. giraldii ‘Profusion’”

  1. Beverley

    Callicarpa bodinieri var. giraldii ‘Profusion’ – Z6, RHS Index of Garden Plants, Griffiths

  2. phillip lacock

    is this edible? also…………from your wonderful collection of photos (which i have created a folder, including all the amazing links)i send every once and a while, one of your pictures, full size, to my friends and family, just saying “a flower for you”. you can’t believe all of the wonderful returns of thanks for making someones day !!
    thank you again ! phillip

  3. Daniel Mosquin

    phillip, thanks for the compliments, and glad to be of help in making someone’s day.

    Regarding edibility, no, not for humans. There was a good discussion recently on the forums that arose out of a plant ID question for Callicarpa americana that you might like to read here.

  4. eric

    why have you placed this in the lamiaceae and not the verbenaceae?

  5. Daniel Mosquin

    Eric, thanks – I’m following the latest work done through the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group, which notes Callicarpa is in the Lamiaceae (though currently unassigned to any subfamily). I’ve not been able to track down a paper or reference that explains the change in families, though.

  6. Daniel Mosquin

    For readers of the National Post article, here are the entries associated with the remaining photographs: Sumallo Grove, Verbascum eriophorum, Populus trichocarpa, Acer circinatum, Gleditsia japonica var. japonica and Euonymus alatus ‘Compactus’.

  7. Jeff Saarela

    Daniel, congrats on the excellent national coverage!
    It would be interesting to see a compilation of ‘hits’ to the site, correlated with media coverage in the past. On average, how many visitors do you receive per day?

  8. Daniel Mosquin

    Eric, I’ve added some of the references re: Lamiaceae in that discussion thread from my comment prior to yours.

    Jeff, the best ever day for the site for unique visitors was when BPotD was made a Yahoo! Pick of the Day with 10206 visitors (this was during a time when site visitors ranged from 4000 – 6000 / day). Currently, the site receives roughly 6000 – 8000 visitors / day, and last month was the best ever, with a total of just under 118 000 unique visitors for the entire month. These numbers have to be taken with a small grain of salt, of course, because there are factors that push the numbers both higher and lower that can’t be recorded by any web statistics software (e.g., you might have a thousand people who use RSS readers to view the site, but that might only count as a handful of unique visitors).

    For a little bit of fun, you [used to be able to] visit Alexa.com’s traffic rankings and do some comparisons and trend-watching for the garden’s web site. For example, in the box below the graph type in rbgkew.org.uk to check UBC’s traffic vs. RBG Kew’s or nybg.org for New York Botanical Garden. It isn’t a terribly useful comparison, because you’re not quite comparing the same populations of users (e.g., I think it’s safe to say that Kew receives a far higher proportion of researcher users), but it’s good for a bit of a lark. Still, it seems we’ve similar numbers of people using and visiting the UBC site, even though our institutional budget is perhaps 2-3% of RBG Kew. Much credit for this though is the contributions of the many users on the garden’s forums.

  9. Daniel Mosquin

    P.S.: Most people are familiar with “Hits” as a measure of web site popularity, which is pretty useless because it counts the number of files requested from the site (which may be dozens to see a single web page). Monday’s stats are as follows: 7809 visitors, 33890 page views, 143283 hits for a total of 2.18 GB bandwidth.

    P.P.S.: I should also mention, since I’m on the topic, that I first started tracking the garden’s web statistics in February 2003. The number of unique visitors for that month was just over 3000, which we now reach in 12 hours.

  10. Steven Kembel

    Hi Daniel… great photo as usual!

    A quick search of TreeBASE for phylogenies containing Callicarpa found a 1993 study by Olmstead and colleagues that placed Callicarpa as sister to Salvia within Lamiaceae… maybe that is where the switch from Verbenaceae to Lamiaceae is coming from.

    Olmstead, R. G., B. Bremer, K. M. Scott, and J. D. Palmer. 1993. A parsimony analysis of the Asteridae sensu lato based on rbcL sequences. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard. 80:700-722.

  11. Daniel Mosquin

    Thanks Steven. It seems that the work out of the Olmstead lab is based in part on some work done by Cantino in the previous year:

    Cantino. 1992. Evidence for a polyphyletic origin of the Labiatae. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard. 79:361-379.

Leave a Reply to phillip lacock Click here to cancel reply.