CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Nothoscordum × borbonicum

species of plant

Specimen drawers, botanical folios and brass scientific instruments under study light
Science and natureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionOct 30, 2021
Entity authorityQ7062986 ↗
Source-derived summary

Nothoscordum × borbonicum, also known as honeybells, fragrant false garlic and onion weed, is a bulbous perennial. It has become naturalized as a nearly cosmopolitan weed. The whitish flowers are sweetly scented. It is a hybrid between N. entrerianum and N. gracile.

The binomial names Nothoscordum fragrans and Nothoscordum gracile have also been applied to this plant.

Editorial summary

“Nothoscordum × borbonicum” enters the record as species of plant. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Nothoscordum, borbonicum and species can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewA sound reference starting point where classification, measurement and the date of the underlying evidence remain visible. The current 57-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Nothoscordum, borbonicum and species.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“Nothoscordum × borbonicum” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Nothoscordum, borbonicum and species provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

Stable identifiers, scientific names and standards terminology offer the best bridge between this overview and specialist evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Oct 30, 2021. The linked authority identifier is Q7062986. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

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.

Best used for
  • Current terminology
  • Classification context
  • Finding cited technical literature
Verify next

Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Nothoscordum × borbonicum”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Nothoscordum × borbonicum primary sources, Nothoscordum × borbonicum archive and Nothoscordum research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Nothoscordum × borbonicum”?
  2. Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
  3. Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Nothoscordum × borbonicum” 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.