Problems in elm and rose Identifications
Conclusions
As a result of the work carried out in this study, it is considered that, for field biologists, it is no
longer meaningful to try to divide the genus Ulmus into sub-groups, beyond Ulmus glabra and
Ulmus sp. However, detailed descriptions of individuals, supported by photographs if possible, and
an eight-figure map reference for a larger specimen, should be essential for records. Because of
disease, most of the larger trees have now been superseded by hedgerow and scrub growth (Hanson
1990), and it has always been deemed impossible to identify these. The situation is not helped by the
absence of a national referee for the genus. Taxonomists are either 'splitters' or 'lumpers', and if
there are no accessible criteria for 'splitting' then, as naturalists, we should all be lumpers.
The work has also shown that this applies largely to willows, hawthorns and birch, where there
exists a continuum of forms between species in the same area. Some species of rose can be clearly
identified, with the help of the excellent BSBI handbook (Graham & Primavesi 1993 J. But the same
problem of identifying crosses, and the parents from which they originate, arises, as in the case of
elms. For these doubtful cases, the only record that can be justified is Rosa sp., supported by as full
a description as possible, according to the season.
Acknowledgements
That we were able to identify the taxa to such a degree is entirely due to the great help we received
from the exceptional kindness of Tony Primavesi, who refereed many specimens, giving us notes
and diagrams to help with particular problems. Not least, his enthusiasm, and encouragement to go
on looking and to learn more, helped us to persevere. The generosity of fellow naturalists is one of
the most rewarding aspects of such work!
We would also like to thank the Blackwell family and Mr. R. Cornish for allowing us access to their
farmland, and also the Thomas Phillips Price Trust (Markshall) as landowners of part of the area.
References
BROUGHTON, U.A. & WRIGHT, B.E. (2000) Witch, Willow, Flories and Bedding Woods of N.E. Essex:
their history and ecology and the people they served. Unpublished report - a copy of which has been
donated by the authors to the library of the Essex Field Club (contact Club General Secretary).
GIBBS, J.N., BURDEKIN, D.A. & BRASIER, C.M.. (1977) Dutch Elm Disease (Forestry Commission,
Forest Record 115) H.M.S.O.
GRAHAM, G.G. St. PRIMAVF.SI, A.L. (1993) Roses of Great Britain and Ireland B.S.B.I.
HANSON. M.W. (1990) Essex Elm Essex Naturalist (New Series) 10, Essex Field Club.
POLLARD, E.P., HOOPER, M.D. & MOORE, N.W. (1974) Hedges. Collins New Naturalist.
RACKHAM, O. (1980) Ancient woodland: its history vegetation and uses in England. Edward Arnold.
RICHENS, R.H. (1983) Elm C.U.P.
STACE, C. (1997) New Flora of the British Isles (2nd ed.) C'.U.P.
156
Essex Naturalist (New Series) 18 (2001)