> > the overall image coverage of species is still very
> > spotty right now.
>
> Rick, is there any way to get a list of the species not yet
> covered? A list would help us focus our efforts where they are
> most needed.
Yep, I just wrote a script to generate this info.
Out of 604 valid species in Jan's DB, only 106 currently have images,
leaving 498 with no pictures.
Here's a summary, by Genus, of what we currently have:
3 +[Byblis]
1 +[Cephalotus]
1 +[Darlingtonia]
1 +[Dionaea]
10 +[Drosera]
2 +[Genlisea]
3 +[Heliamphora]
1 +[Ibicella]
29 +[Nepenthes]
26 +[Pinguicula]
7 +[Sarracenia]
22 +[Utricularia]
Here's a summary of what is missing:
1 +[Aldrovanda]
1 +[Dioncophyllum]
158 +[Drosera]
1 +[Drosophyllum]
17 +[Genlisea]
1 +[Habropetalum]
9 +[Heliamphora]
51 +[Nepenthes]
51 +[Pinguicula]
2 +[Roridula]
9 +[Sarracenia]
1 +[Triphyophyllum]
196 +[Utricularia]
Actually, I think this is great - we've achieved 16% coverage in only
a year! I'd like to propose 50% coverage as the CDROM "go-ahead"
target...
Chris Cole has offered a bunch of photos to fill out the remaining
Sarracenia. Maybe we should try again to get Peter Taylor's permission
to scan in some drawings from his monograph, or to contribute some
photos. Does anyone know Allen Lowrie well enough to see if we could
get some Drosera photos?
I won't post the complete list here as it is too big, but if anyone would
like a copy, I'll be happy to email it.
Best regards,
-- Rick Walker