Talk:NPG-CHN-ZHE-0019090001
More actions
Discussion for: NPG-CHN-ZHE-0019090001 • View • Links • Related changes
Use this page for verification notes, disputes, and action items. Keep narrative content on the article.
Discussion
Evidentiary scope
The accession rests on two sources: the department's printed inventory entry for plant introduction 24853 (Inventory No. 18 (1909), p. 47) and the entry for PI 24853 in GRIN-Global, the database of the National Plant Germplasm System, as it stood on 27 October 2026. The inventory names the city, the donor and his one-line note. GRIN-Global states that the lot "no longer exists and can not be requested", so the page gives the lot as gone. No conservation priority is assigned.
Identifier
The identifier NPG-CHN-ZHE-0019090001 follows the wiki's seed-accession grammar: holder, ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 country, province segment, month, year, sequence. The department's own number for the lot is PI 24853.
NPGstands for the National Plant Germplasm System of the United States Department of Agriculture, whose database, GRIN-Global, carries the department's plant introductions.CHNis the ISO code for China.ZHEstands for Zhejiang.- Month
00: the date the seed was gathered is not known. - Year 1909 is the year the department received the lot.
0001is the lot's place, in plant-introduction order, among the holder's lots from the same country, province, month and year.
Classification
The seed was a gift sent from a city. Sweet's note ties it to a hemp grown in Kentucky without saying where this seed was grown or by whom, so the accession is classified Unknown.
Collectors and donors
GRIN-Global lists W. S. Sweet, of Wayland Academy, as its source; the printed inventory says he presented the seed. No one is said to have gathered it, so the infobox gives no collector.
Location and georeferencing
The inventory names Hangchow, today's Hangzhou, and nothing finer. The point 30.25, 120.21 is the point OpenStreetMap gives for the city of Hangzhou (relation 3221112), a locality georeference for the place the source names, not a collection point. Basis: settlement point. Uncertainty: about 8 km, the radius of the city's central districts.
Dates
The date the seed was gathered is not known, so the collection date is empty. Both sources give 5 March 1909 as the date of receipt, the lot's received date. The identifier therefore carries month 00 and the year of receipt.
Sweet's note
The note "This is the Stewart hemp grown in Kentucky" does not say whether the seed was of a Chinese hemp that Kentucky growers knew under that name or of seed that had come back to China from Kentucky. Neither source says more, and the page repeats the note without reading either meaning into it.