Lotus subbiflorus
Lotus krylovii
hairy bird's-foot trefoil
krylov's bird's-foot trefoil, krylov's trefoil
erect to decumbent, solid, not succulent.
erect or decumbent, solid, not succulent.
8–15[–25] mm;
rachis 2–4 mm;
leaflet blades: basal 2 ovate, terminal 3 obovate to oblong or lanceolate, 5–10[–20] × 1–5.5[–8] mm, length 2–4 times width, apex acute to obtuse, often mucronate.
8–16 mm;
rachis 1.5–5 mm;
leaflet blades: basal 2 obliquely ovate, terminal 3 obovate to obovate-elliptic or obovate-lanceolate, 5–15 × 1–4 mm, length 3.2–5 times width, apex rounded to ± acute.
(1 or)2–4(–6)-flowered;
bracts 3-foliolate.
1(or 2[–4]-flowered;
bracts 1–3-foliolate.
ascending to declined, 0.7–3[–15] cm.
ascending, 1–4.5(–6) cm.
5.5–7[–10] mm;
calyx 3.3–4.7 mm, lobes not recurved in bud, linear, 2.5–3.2 mm, longer than tube, tube hirsute;
petals yellow, turning reddish, 5–6.7[–10] mm, wings shorter than angled and beaked keel.
7–9.2[–10] mm;
calyx 4–6 mm, lobes erect in bud, triangular to deltate-acuminate, (1.5–)2–2.8[–3.5] mm, ± equaling tube, tube glabrate;
petals light yellow, ± pink-tinged abaxially, turning pinkish or red, 6.6–8.5 mm, wings equaling keel.
brown, cylindric, 7–10 × 0.7–1.2 mm, not or partially septate.
brown, cylindric, 15–25[–35] × 2–3 mm, not septate.
8–10, brown to greenish brown, ± mottled, globose to round-oblong, 1 mm, smooth.
6–10[–30], brown, finely mottled, globose, 0.8–1.4 mm, smooth.
= 12, 24 (Europe).
= 12.
Lotus subbiflorus
Lotus krylovii
Lotus subbiflorus is easily distinguished by its very hirsute foliage and its sharply angled, beaked keel that is longer than the wings.
The introduced Lotus subbiflorus was collected first in 2009 at four locations in Curry County. The taxon is introduced elsewhere in the world, reported under the names L. hispidus, L. subbiflorus, or L. suaevolens (R. P. Randall 2002); when plotted worldwide, reports of L. hispidus and L. subbiflorus have similar overall distributions. Thus, it seems that in areas outside the native range, only a single entity is present that should be called L. subbiflorus.
The name Lotus hispidus Desfontaines (1804) was considered an invalid name by T. E. Kramina (2006). Kramina, however, appears to have been unaware of the subsequent validation of the name by de Candolle: L. hispidus Desfontaines ex de Candolle in J. Lamarck and A. P. de Candolle, Fl. Franç. ed. 3, 4: 556. 17 Sep 1805. The exact publication date of the name L. subbiflorus by Lagasca, however, is not known, but it may have been late in 1805 because Varied. Ci. 2(4) has 6 numbers (19–24) that were issued in 1805, and the name was published in number 22. Without an exact date for that publication, it is not possible to decide which name has priority, and currently the name L. subbiflorus is adopted for the species.
(Discussion copyrighted by Flora of North America; reprinted with permission.)
Lotus krylovii is known in the flora area only from the the Okanagan Valley of British Columbia, near White Lake. I. I. Zandstra and W. F. Grant (1968) reported it in their study of Lotus in Canada, and it is still extant there.
S. I. Ali (1977) synonymized this species with an expanded Lotus corniculatus var. tenuifolius Linnaeus (synonym of L. tenuis), but the taxa are distinct in morphology, distribution, and ecology.
(Discussion copyrighted by Flora of North America; reprinted with permission.)
OR
Flora NW
USDA Plants Database- Local floras:
BC - Local Web sites:
PNW Herbaria 
WildflowerSearch
iNaturalist (observations)- LBJ Wildflower Center
- SEINet
- Plants of the World Online
- Encyclopedia of Life
- Wikipedia
- Google Image Search
