Hello Luc. The picture you posted is the Israeli form of I. Bismarckiana. And the Israelis are the only ones who have done any "official" work on distinguishing the various forms of the oncocycli. By and large I find it easy to accept most of their findings, including the division into baiscally 4 "tribes" of the species, an idea, that I think was first proposed either in the BISY and/or in correspondence to me and Clay Osborne by Ken Bastow (hobbyist, ) of the British Iris Society. Back in the 60s. His ideas were based on phenotype, and an analysis of livie plants in geographical locations and gardens together with what was available in the literature. I do not know if he actually saw the materials in the old Post Herbarium in Palestine. As you note the plants still exist along the Israel Lebanon border. The taxonomy of the oncocyli has been the usual mess, with the Russians being "splitters" and the Brits being "lumpers" over the last 120 years or so, and nobody getting out into the field or reexamining the old herbarium specimens collected by Dinsmore or Mouterde because of border disputes and other warring matters. At this point, to my knowledge ( the Israelis have done the only respectable work on systematizing this group. For me the type specimens (live) of I. bismarckiana are those from the Crak des Chevaliers provenance and are distinct enough to be, if not the holotype for the species, a variant distinct anough to merit a forma or ssp. Designation.; Now as to the challenge of "put up or shut up " (which is in order) mI have to refer to a slide.