Difference between revisions of "Claytonia lanceolata"
Fl. Amer. Sept. 1: 175, plate 3. 1814.
FNA>Volume Importer |
imported>Volume Importer |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
}} | }} | ||
|common_names=Western spring beauty | |common_names=Western spring beauty | ||
| + | |special_status={{Treatment/ID/Special_status | ||
| + | |code=E | ||
| + | |label=Endemic | ||
| + | }} | ||
|basionyms={{Treatment/ID/Basionym | |basionyms={{Treatment/ID/Basionym | ||
|name=Claytonia lanceolata subsp. chrysantha | |name=Claytonia lanceolata subsp. chrysantha | ||
| Line 74: | Line 78: | ||
|publication title=Fl. Amer. Sept. | |publication title=Fl. Amer. Sept. | ||
|publication year=1814 | |publication year=1814 | ||
| − | |special status= | + | |special status=Endemic |
| − | |source xml=https:// | + | |source xml=https://bitbucket.org/aafc-mbb/fna-data-curation/src/2e0870ddd59836b60bcf96646a41e87ea5a5943a/coarse_grained_fna_xml/V4/V4_932.xml |
|genus=Claytonia | |genus=Claytonia | ||
|species=Claytonia lanceolata | |species=Claytonia lanceolata | ||
Latest revision as of 22:01, 5 November 2020
Plants perennial, with globose tubers 5–20 mm diam.; periderm 1–5 mm. Stems 1–10 cm. Leaves: basal leaves 1–6, often absent at flowering, blade linear to lanceolate, 5–40 × 0.2–1.6 cm; cauline leaves sessile, blade ovate to narrowly lanceolate, 1–6 × 0.5–2 cm. Inflorescences 1-bracteate (rarely with 2 bracts). Flowers 8–14 mm diam.; sepals 4–6 mm; petals white to pink, rose, magenta, yellow, or deep orange, 5–20 mm; ovules 6. Seeds 2–2.5 mm diam., shiny and smooth; elaiosome 1–2 mm. 2n = 12, 16, 24, 32, 36, 44, 48, 52, 64, 74, ca. 90.
Phenology: Flowering Apr–Jul.
Habitat: Sagebrush and montane foothills to alpine areas, particularly where snow persists
Elevation: 500-3000 m
Distribution
Alta., B.C., Sask., Ariz., Calif., Colo., Idaho, Mont., Nev., N.Mex., Oreg., Utah, Wash., Wyo.
Discussion
Some differences of opinion exist regarding the relationships of Claytonia lanceolata and C. rosea. The work of D. K. Halleck and D. Wiens (1966) and J. S. Shelly et al. (1998) provides ample justification for their recognition as distinct species.