CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Diplacus aurantiacus

species of flowering 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 revisionAug 19, 2026
Entity authorityQ3314656
Source-derived summary

Diplacus aurantiacus, the sticky monkey-flower or orange bush monkey-flower, is a flowering plant that grows in a subshrub form, native to western North America from southwestern Oregon south through Northern and Central California. It is a member of the lopseed family, Phrymaceae, and was formerly known as Mimulus aurantiacus.

Description

Diplacus aurantiacus grows up to 1.2 meters (4 feet) tall, has deep green, sticky leaves 3 to 7 centimeters long and up to a centimeter broad and flowering stems that grow vertically. The flowers are tubular at the base and about 2 centimeters long with five broad lobes; they occur in a variety of shades from white to red, the most common color being a light orange. They are honey plants pollinated by bees and hummingbirds.

It grows in many climates and will thrive in many types of soil, wet, dry, sandy, or rocky. It even grows in serpentine, a soil that most plants have difficulty thriving in because of its unique mineral composition.

Diplacus aurantiacus is an important host plant for the larvae of the common buckeye butterfly (Junonia coenia) and the variable checkerspot (Euphydryas chalcedona), despite a phenolic resin in the leaves which deter its feeding. This resin also helps the plant retain water in dry environments.

Cultivation

This bushy evergreen shrub can be short-lived in cultivation.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Diplacus aurantiacus” as species of flowering plant. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Diplacus, aurantiacus and species.

Editorial reviewA sound reference starting point where classification, measurement and the date of the underlying evidence remain visible. The current 219-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 value is orientation rather than verdict, with Diplacus, aurantiacus and species providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Diplacus aurantiacus”, the useful work is to connect “species of flowering plant” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

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 Aug 19, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q3314656. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

Scientific names, classifications and consensus can change while older terminology persists in catalogues and historical literature. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. 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 “Diplacus aurantiacus”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Diplacus aurantiacus primary sources, Diplacus aurantiacus archive and Diplacus 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 “Diplacus aurantiacus”?
  2. Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
  3. Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Diplacus aurantiacus” 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.