It’s a contest! But first, an article for you to read.
Usually these are just local stories in local papers around the world. But apparently this one made the BBC.
Rare cactus flowers after 50 years
An Agave Victorinae Reginae cactus has flowered in a UK garden after 50 years of growth.
The plant, which belongs to Barbara and John Long, recently grew to more than nine ft… according to the BBC.
I don’t know if the errors are the BBC’s or the local newspaper’s.
Now the CONTEST part:
Shall we catalog? I count 4 major errors in this excerpt alone. Add your guesses to the comments. One lucky winner correctly naming a botanical error, chosen at random, will win a free cactus greeting card from my collection of cactus greeting cards. Cactus Jungle employees not eligible, Keith.
You can also bookmark this on del.icio.us or check the cosmos
RSS feed for comments on this post. | TrackBack URI
August 27th, 2010 at 11:56 am
1) Agave is not in the cactus family.
2a) The species name is capitalized. Species names, even those memorializing people, are not capitalized anymore.
2b) The second part of the species name, like the first, should not be capitalized.
3a) The species name is spelled incorrectly.
3b) The species name should be hyphenated.
August 27th, 2010 at 12:26 pm
_wait a minute; there IS something wrong with this article? derp-de-derp…
August 27th, 2010 at 12:47 pm
Why are UK papers reporting heights in feet? Don’t they have the metric system?
Or was that one of the errors we’re supposed to be cataloging?
Never mind. Forget I said anything.
August 27th, 2010 at 1:21 pm
The picture is not of an Agave
August 27th, 2010 at 2:07 pm
Gracious, guys! How will you split the prize among you?!
August 27th, 2010 at 2:46 pm
1. The picture is of a Saguaro.
2. The picture was not taken in the UK.
3. Agave victoriae-reginae doesn’t grow to nine feet. The main plant only gets up to around 18in. in diameter.
4. Agave’s are not cacti.
5. The name should be spelled/ capitalized Agave victoriae-reginae.
August 27th, 2010 at 5:05 pm
Here’s the original (?) article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/threecounties/hi/front_page/newsid_8936000/8936755.stm
and another: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1303896/A-cactus-finally-grew–52-years-waiting.html
While the BBC got their facts straight, a little dry; Daily Mail has a little more ‘human interest’ and a great shot of the couple and their ‘cactus’ flower.
Pretty funny this was published in an online florist trade site, not to mention who it’s named to honor. What would Vicky think?
August 27th, 2010 at 5:07 pm
That’s a lot of errors. But there’s more wrong than just all that.
Added from twitter: @Suburban_Farmer Off the top of my head, that’s not a pic of an agave, and for 2, agaves are not cacti..hehehe
Since there is more wrong with the excerpt, and if you click through to the article I count at least 3 more botanical errors that I didn’t quote, so I’ll give it a little more time before closing the entries.
August 27th, 2010 at 5:09 pm
Added from our facebook page:
J. Russ: That’s a cactus in the photo. Who edited that?
August 27th, 2010 at 7:17 pm
6. The Aloe mentioned at the bottom of Thomas’ second article is not a cactus.
7. Agave victoriae-reginae is called the Queen Victoria Agave not “The Victoria Regina Cactus.”
August 28th, 2010 at 8:24 am
The article say that upon flowering, century plants “…often die shortly afterwards.” Don’t they ALWAYS die after flowering?
August 28th, 2010 at 11:49 am
The contest is now over, and Tom J in Denver is the random winner among those who correctly identified a botanical error.
Other errors that would also have been accepted:
1. The plant is not “rare”.
And from the original article:
2. A hot spell did not “make it grow”, it was at the end of its life and ready to bloom.
3. I know there was one more, but I can’t find it! Oh noes! Any help out there?
August 28th, 2010 at 12:41 pm
Re: Austin’s #3:
The leaves don’t get to be nine feet tall, but the bloom of the plant, which counts as part of the plant, could.
@Cactus:
I think the one you’re missing is: it didn’t even belong to Barbara and John Long. They stole it!!!!!
I have no proof, but I think it’s a fair guess, based on the accuracy of the rest of the article.
August 28th, 2010 at 3:08 pm
Señor S has scored the final indignity.