It looks off

incorrect foliage and bloom height

I trust Missouri Botanical Garden with generally accurate signage. But regardless, I always verify that online images match the plant. In this case, I felt the flowers match online images of E flettii. Here is the sign from MoBot with the plant in question. Growth conditions here in St Louis are woefully different from its usual haunts on the Olympic Peninsula, which I suspect may affect many aspects of growth, habit, bloom time, etc.

hi,
I am talking about the leaves. The flowers of Erigonum all look quite similar, but the leaves on the plant in the photo do not match any other photos of E. flettii I could find.

From "eFloras.org", this is a publication from Missouri Botanical Garden....

"Leaves mostly basal (persistent; petioles equaling or longer than blades); blades spatulate to oblanceolate-spatulate, 10–50 × 4–12 mm, cauline abruptly reduced distally, margins entire (apices rounded), faces sparsely hirsute or glabrous, eglandular"
For starters, the leaves in your photo are most definitely not glabrous, nor spatulate to oblanceolate-spatulate.

Link; http://www.efloras.org/florata...

This photo is a different Erigeron sp.

We get a lot of well respected botanical gardens with incorrect tags!

And the other photos in the entry appear incorrect too.

https://inaturalist.ca/taxa/16...
http://www.efloras.org/florata...
https://wildflowersearch.org/s...
https://nwwildflowers.com/comp...