Knittlin covered most of what I intended to say... nice synopsis. With one exception, perhaps: "Let's say there's someone out there who is the only person to have an unusual type of seed. The holder of the unusual seed sends a small portion of seeds to Svalbard. He continues to grow out and share the seeds. If, for some unknown reason, the only people who accept the seed from him all lose their seeds at the same time the original holder of them does, the original holder requests some of the seed he sent to Svalbard and is able to start over again." As I'm sure you already know, Svalbard does not accept seed from individuals, regardless of the merits of the seed. To get into their bank, the seed would need to be deposited into another bank first, and that bank would need to back it up into a second bank. So in the end, Svalbard + two other banks + the original grower would all have the seed. The good news is, that because SSE (Seed Savers Exchange) is now a depositor at Svalbard, it is possible for heirloom varieties to be protected. Don't get me wrong; I am still somewhat critical of the project. As another poster stated, if the great calamity does occur, it may be difficult or impossible to get the seeds from Svalbard to the depositor. Nor am I satisfied that all legal situations have been addressed... such as what happens to the seeds if the depositor no longer exists, has been taken over legally/politically, or lacks the means to propagate the seed. I am also apprehensive of corporate involvement, regardless of what rules might presently be in place. Governments change. Rules change. Greed is a constant. There are clauses in the Depositors Agreement that could, IMO, be abused to benefit the large multi-national seed companies. But for those that see Svalbard as the salvation from famine, it may never fill that role - or not directly. It is designed to preserve germplasm, not to propagate seed on a worldwide scale. That will always be the role of the the original depositors, their supporting governments, and the private sector. Were a major disaster to suddenly occur with one of the food staples (wheat, for example) it would take many years to multiply seed stocks, and in the interim, millions would starve. Sorry to end on a dark note, but that's the reality. Svalbard is something we hope we will never need to use.

The three yellow species in Arkansas are Baptisia bracteata var. leucophaea, B. nuttalliana, and B. sphaerocarpa. Your plant is too upright for B. bracteata, and does not appear to be clumped enough for B. nuttalliana, which is mostly found in the southwest corner of the state, southwest of Hot Springs. We do have lots of variation in B. sphaerocarpa, and the leaves on your plant remind me of that. The plants growing in full sun tend to be bright yellow, and those in heavy shade are more pale. I agree with morz8 that your plants look most like B. sphaerocarpa.

Last fall I purchased Baptisia 'Purple Smoke' and 'Twilight Prairie Blues' and placed them both in the ground in their pots to over-winter them. My 'Twilight Prairie Blues' appeared in late April, and is now in bud, and should flower soon. I almost threw out my 'Purple Smoke', since I thought it had died, but when I went to remove the pot last week, I noticed that it had a shoot about 1" long coming up.

My Baptisia ("Purple Smoke") thrives in a climate closer to that of nanasflowers, and it's in average soil (not especially well-draining). B. australis and its hybrids are tough, adaptable plants. Interestingly, you see advice about not "disturbing" the roots, but evidently some abuse is well-tolerated. I'm especially fond of "Purple Smoke" for its mass of attractive foliage which is ornamental throughout the season, and striking even after a hard freeze, turning near-black which contrasts nicely with volunteer goldenrod.