Susan, I don't rely on any of the species maps on-line or on the taxonomy used in them for many reasons. I worked closely with Paul Opler and Ray Stanford when they were first being established, including making verification field trips with Paul. Some of the data they contain are taken from my personal field journals (I established many state/county species and other species records over the years). But the maps do have errors both ways IMO, with county records that are erroneous and others that are not recognized and should be. That is in part because of the taxonomy problems of what was considered species, subspecies or form level, and to some extent verification. Instead, I rely on my personal field work and my vast library of published books and papers for species accounts. I don't side completely with any one author, but do have several I follow mostly within their own specialty families of Lepidoptera. Much the same as why some folks follow mine within my specialty families. While I still may error, at least I error to the side of the majority of accepted researchers. BTW, state/county records only scratch the surface of the records recorded by some researchers. Early/late flight, high/low elevation, carried in flight, oviposit numbers, larval food plant, nectaring food plant, habitat, stage characteristics, intergrades, aberrations, interactions, flight and habit patterns, parasitoids, etc, etc, etc are some of the other datum recorded by researchers with an eye for detail. And that datum sometimes helps in straightening out the taxonomy wars. Elisabeth - "Fritillary" is just another example of why common names are worthless and often misleading. Boloria, Euptoieta and Agraulis and not hard to identify between each other, or often between the species within each genus. But Speyeria can be quite variable and difficult for anyone but researchers who specialize in that genus. You learn that real quick when you do field work where several species/subspecies all fly together at the same time in the same location, and there are intergrades between species from within the same complex (there are four complexes of Speyeria in NA). I did extensive work with the Boloria and Euptoieta complexes, and quite a bit with Agraulis, so have little trouble with them. But even after all these years the Speyeria can still throw me for a loop. Luckily my field research partner for many years included Speyeria in his list of specialties, so he taught me a lot and kept me somewhat straight on them. But like anything else, you get out of practice by not doing, and I haven't actively sought Speyeria for many years (except for the S. carolae that is only found in a small area near where I live). So I am rusty on them. At least most here only try to remember and deal with their local species. Try remembering the world species you've worked with sometime, especially those you did decades ago and haven't...

I think I may have discovered the yellow iris is called a Historic Flavescens, 'Flavescens' De Candolle 1813; is that right? Still searching on the purple iris, so many purple ones look so similar to one another.

I think your choice is beautiful. I have the creamy white cabinets on the perimeter with Hanstone Magellan counter. On the website it looks really dark, but it is a lovely grey pattern which doesn't show anything (dust, food) and is not too shiny. My island is a red stained wood (similar to mahogany in colour). I chose Zodiaq Bianca Carerra. I love each of them equally. I have had them for almost 2 years now and have thrown just about everything at them (messy and kids aren't any neater) and they look like brand new. I think anything you choose you will LOVE. Good luck and enjoy your new kitchen. It will be fabulous!

Crassula ovata ‘Minima’ aka mini jade