Cuckooflower "flore plena"

I have started creating a project for double form cuckooflowers.

This is a recognised variety/cultivar/version/form - different sources take different views on whether they are a variety or cultivar: see these pages

I believe it would be sensible to have a separate taxon for this variant/cultivar, for a few reasons:

  • they are visually very distinct, leading to confusion for people trying to identify them. Looking through the observation records, many identifiers have been hesitant to label these as cuckooflowers because they do not have the standard four petals.

  • They are less beneficial for insects. The double form is favoured for sale in garden centres and the like, as they are more decorative and ornamental. However double flowers do not offer the same nectar supply for insects. Reference:

Could a Cardamine Pratensis “Flore Plena” taxon be created?

Welcome to the forum! You can flag the taxon under where it says “Curation” and ask if the taxon could be added.

You can copy and paste your post from here and put it onto the flag.


In a botanical sense, ‘flore plena’ flowers are what we call a form. A doubled flower is probably due to one mutated gene, and the pattern of where they pop up is random and not tied to a particular habitat or niche. For that reason, we don’t generally bother to give them official taxonomic names. Horticulturalists are more interested in and likely to name forms because they can be interesting-looking and fun to cultivate (ex. forma rubra, forma alba, forma flore pleno).


Interesting! Thanks for the insight!

I do agree with your comment, but the names for formae names still seem to be pretty much “standard”, even if not officially so. Also, there are a few species who have multiple formae as separate taxa on iNat (I know this of Harmonia axyridis). I think it’s great to have that as an option for people who care about it. :)

I found a double cactus flower this year, super rare I assume