CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Thomasia pauciflora

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 revisionAug 16, 2024
Entity authorityQ17580959 ↗
Source-derived summary

Thomasia pauciflora, commonly known as few-flowered thomasia, is a species of flowering plant in the family Malvaceae and is endemic to the south-west of Western Australia. It is a slender, erect or straggling shrub with egg-shaped leaves and pink to purple, occasionally white flowers.

Description

Thomasia pauciflora is a slender, erect or straggling shrub that typically grows to 0.2–1.5 m (7.9 in – 4 ft 11.1 in) high and up to 1 m (3 ft 3 in) wide, its new growth densely covered with rust-coloured, star-shaped hairs. The leaves are egg-shaped, 15–45 mm (0.59–1.77 in) long and 3–12 mm (0.12–0.47 in) wide on a petiole 6–18 mm (0.24–0.71 in) long with kidney-shaped stipules at the base. The edges of the leaves are wavy, sometimes lobed and both sides are covered with scattered rust-coloured, star-shaped hairs. The flowers are 12–15 mm (0.47–0.59 in) in diameter and arranged in racemes of up to 4 on a peduncle up to 20–25 mm (0.79–0.98 in) long. Each flower is on a pedicel 2–4 mm (0.079–0.157 in) long with egg-shaped bracts and similar bracteoles 3–5 mm (0.12–0.20 in) long at the base. The sepals are pink to purple, occasionally white, and covered with star-shaped hairs. Flowering occurs from August to February.

Taxonomy

Thomasia pauciflora was first formally described in 1839 by John Lindley in A Sketch of the Vegetation of the Swan River Colony.

Editorial summary

“Thomasia pauciflora” enters the record as species of plant. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Thomasia, pauciflora 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 lead gives the account dated anchors—1839—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Thomasia, pauciflora and species.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“Thomasia pauciflora” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Thomasia, pauciflora 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 Aug 16, 2024. The linked authority identifier is Q17580959. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1839.

Critical limits

Scientific names, classifications and consensus can change while older terminology persists in catalogues and historical literature. 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 “Thomasia pauciflora”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Thomasia pauciflora primary sources, Thomasia pauciflora archive and Thomasia 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 “Thomasia pauciflora”?
  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 “Thomasia pauciflora” 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.