>>486309It depends.
If you are identifying plants that have deadly look-alikes then you'll have a problem and it won't go away for some time. If you are identifying plants that are nearly impossible to misidentify then it should go away fast.
Take a look at this image. List all the differences between the two images. Pretend one side is a poisonous plant, but you don't know which one it is unless you identify all the things that are different. If you can't do this extremely simple thing then you're going to have lots of problems out in real life.
This isn't a test for intelligence. This is a test for thoroughness, alertness, and object discrimination. Note that I flipped one image and misaligned it with the other so that people simply can't cross their eyes and use stereoscopic view to instantly discern the differences between the two images.
If you pass this test 100% then you know you have proper thoroughness, alertness, and object discrimination. If you fail it then you have cause for concern. However, even if you pass 100% you still have to find proper sources for plant identification. That can be difficult sometimes, even with several photos in a book, because the author may not be discerning a few of the taxonomic markers.
For instance, Plantago major (Common Plantain) and Plantago rugelii (American Plantain) can often times be called the same thing in books simply because the author doesn't realize they are two different plants. Luckily, both are edible. Another is, Daucus carota (Queen Anne's Lace) and Conium maculatum (Poison Hemlock). The Daucus carota is edible, but the Conium maculatum is deadly poison. Often times the author shows that the best identifying marker for those two is the flower. Specifically a little black speck in the center of the Daucus carota flower head. There's a couple problems with that. 1, that black speck is not always present in Daucus carota.
Continued....
