The particular plant in the photo is currently very common in upstate South Carolina, especially along roadsides, and in yards that haven't been mowed for several days.
I'm too lazy to do a lot of research to identify this plant. The closest I can come to a common name for it is colts-foot, or colts foot or, possibly, catsear. Don't ask me why it (may) have either one of those names. The plant, nor its flower, seem to resemble a colt's foot, or a cat's ear. Perhaps it did to someone.
Scientific names are important, because they identify plants so that there is (usually-sometimes there is controversy between scientists on how to classify something) no ambiguity over the identification. However, common names are important, too.
During my first year of teaching in South Carolina, when I, no doubt, had some arrogance, due to my recent Ph. D., and also some arrogance due to my midwestern origin, I rebuked a student for calling an animal a "toad-frog." I had never heard that term. I have come to realize that, if he knew what he meant by a toad-frog, and his audience did, too, he was communicating as well as if he had called it Rana pipiens, or, as I would have, simply a frog. Common names are fine for communicating within your own culture. They can cause problems when trying to communicate between cultures. That's one reason why we know so little about the exact identification of living things in the Bible.