Talk:Cotoneaster

Untitled

Is it too dumb to mention the pronunciation, "Co-TONE-ee-aster" not "Cotton Easter"? --Wetman 19:02, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I think that would be nice. What does it mean in latin? Puddytang 22:43, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It it too practical to suggest that the shrub is not planted anywhere near drains, as it finds it easy to prenetrate and block them! === Vernon White (talk) 18:29, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone mention whether the fruit of this shrub is edible?

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and carefull attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 18:43, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hylmo?

My web interface, the junky WebTV, has many limitations those with more modern systems take for granted. One of those is the alt-keys. I can't get any letters with umlauts, and Hylmo's "o" is supposed to be with the umlaut. Nor can I cut and paste, or type in the symbols used for o with umlaut. The only thing I can do is type "%C3%B6", which in some systems comes out as an o with an umlaut.
If anyone wants to correct this please do, because I cannot. Thanks (here you are...ö and Ö. See if you can can copy them)Hamamelis (talk) 16:20, 10 March 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Done! Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 19:36, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removed "closely related to Pyracantha"

To explain why I changed "closely related" to just "related" for these two genera: The morphological resemblance between these plants (particularly in the fruit) might not turn out to reflect their evolution. The verdict is still forthcoming on that. Combining chloroplast DNA sequences, nuclear DNA sequences, and morphology is an ongoing research effort that still hasn't settled the relationships within the Pyrinae. More sequences will need to be investigated ... (Campbell, C.S.; Evans, R.C.; Morgan, D.R.; Dickinson, T.A.; Arsenault, M.P. (2007). Phylogeny of subtribe Pyrinae (formerly the Maloideae, Rosaceae): Limited resolution of a complex evolutionary history. Plant Systematics and Evolution. 266(1–2): 119–145.) Nadiatalent (talk) 22:08, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Phantom species?

I have been unable to find out anything about Cotoneaster chaffanjonii H.Lév., one of the species listed on this page. If anyone can find any details about it, could they add a citation?

It is not listed in IPNI, which suggests (but is not conclusive evidence) that the name was never validly published. I can't see it in Catalogue des plantes de Yun-nan, avec renvoi aux diagnoses originales, observations et descriptions d'espèces nouvelles, par H. Léveillé, or in Catalogue illustré et alphabetique des plantes du Seu Tchouen par Hector Léveillé (both in the biodiversity heritage library). It also seems to be missing from Rehder, A. (1934–1937). Notes on the ligneous plants describe by Léveillé from eastern Asia. Journal of the Arnold Arboretum. xv(1934):1–27, 91–117, 267–326;xvi(1935):311–340;xvii(1936):53–82,316–340;xviii(1937):26–53, 206–257, 273–321 (also in the biodiversity heritage library). It almost looks as if this name might somehow have come about as a typographical error, perhaps based on synonymizing Diopspyros chaffanjonii under Cotoneaster horizontalis as for example at [1]. Or perhaps I'm just blind. Nadiatalent (talk) 21:50, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are they edible?

Or are there any requirements to be followed to make them edible? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.23.45.88 (talk) 17:33, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I do not htink they are edible. With that maybe they should be taken out of the food category? If anything they are a garnish.Beefcake6412 (talk) 17:58, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Cotoneaster. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:54, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wildlife Value

Although I think I see where the author was going with the sentence about "mostly not native... UK... source of nectar", it doesn't read very well. I assume the author is expressing that in the UK it is clearly a significant source and not assuming it for the world. When we expand what we know, we need to end up with a conclusion of if it is generally a significant source of nectar.

I suggest that even without refs - lets not make a fuss about refs for the sake of it, we will find them when we can- if anyone elsewhere sees, as I do in the UK, that LOTS of bees etc swarm over the flowers all the time, we break up this into talking about where it is native elsewhere and a BE BOLD statement about it being a significant source of nectar.

Good basic article, but we can build this up easily ! IceDragon64 (talk) 14:41, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]