Eremurus × isabellinus
species of flowering plant
Eremurus × isabellinus is a hybrid of garden origin, derived from the crossing of E. stenophyllus with E. olgae. The first crossing was made by Sir Michael Foster at Great Shelford, [2] England, at the end of the 19th century, and replicated in France by the Vilmorin nursery at Verrières-le-Buisson in 1902. The name of the hybrid is derived from the isabelline colour of the original F1 hybrid flowers. The genus is often known by the common names foxtail lily and desert candle.
Description
Eremurus × isabellinus produces stems 1.5 m high terminating in bottlebrush-like inflorescences in June and July. The narrow strap-like leaves form a mound of bluish green foliage at the base, which begins to die off as the plant flowers.
Cultivation
Eremurus × isabellinus is fully hardy, and best grown in full sun in a fertile, sandy, well-drained soil; it tolerates alkaline conditions.
The hybrid has given rise to around 20 cultivars, assembled into groups defined by origin: Shelfordi and Ruiter are the oldest; more recently, Amand, Highdown, and Erfo.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Eremurus × isabellinus” is species of flowering plant. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Eremurus, isabellinus and species, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “species of flowering plant” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
The date and method of observation matter as much as the stated conclusion, especially where classification or consensus has changed. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jan 29, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q28194735. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1902.
Current terminology should not be projected backward without checking the classification used when the underlying evidence was created. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.
- Current terminology
- Classification context
- Finding cited technical literature
Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Eremurus × isabellinus”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Eremurus × isabellinus primary sources, Eremurus × isabellinus archive and Eremurus research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Eremurus × isabellinus”?
- Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
- Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Eremurus × isabellinus” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.