Difference between revisions of "Viola palmata"

Linnaeus

Sp. Pl. 2: 933. 1753.

Common names: Three-lobed violet
Endemic
Synonyms: Viola cucullata var. palmata (Linnaeus) A. Gray
Treatment appears in FNA Volume 6. Treatment on page 141. Mentioned on page 111, 115, 142, 158, 159.
FNA>Volume Importer
 
m (Bot: Adding category Revised Since Print)
 
(8 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 16: Line 16:
 
|name=Viola cucullata var. palmata
 
|name=Viola cucullata var. palmata
 
|authority=(Linnaeus) A. Gray
 
|authority=(Linnaeus) A. Gray
 +
|rank=variety
 
}}
 
}}
 
|hierarchy=Violaceae;Viola;Viola palmata
 
|hierarchy=Violaceae;Viola;Viola palmata
Line 27: Line 28:
  
 
-->{{Treatment/Body
 
-->{{Treatment/Body
|distribution=c;e North America.
+
|distribution=Ont.;Ala.;Ark.;Conn.;D.C.;Del.;Fla.;Ga.;Ill.;Ind.;Iowa;Kans.;Ky.;La.;Maine;Mass.;Md.;Mich.;Miss.;Mo.;N.C.;N.Dak.;N.J.;N.Mex.;Nebr.;Ohio;Okla.;Pa.;R.I.;S.C.;Tenn.;Tex.;Va.;Vt.;W.Va.
|discussion=<p>N. L. Gil-Ad (1997) presented evidence based on seed coat micromorphology that some plants known as Viola palmata are hybrids between plants with lobed and unlobed leaves and believed the type specimen to be hybrid in origin. He chose not to recognize the name V. palmata, choosing instead to recognize V. triloba. If the type specimen does represent a hybrid, Gil-Ad would be correct in recognizing V. triloba. Because the purity of the type specimen cannot be ascertained, we consider V. palmata the most appropriate name for this taxon. We acknowledge the presence of hybrids between lobed and unlobed plants; such hybrids obscure lines of demarcation. Some herbarium specimens may represent such hybrids; we feel most do not.</p><!--
+
|discussion=<p>N. L. Gil-Ad (1997) presented evidence based on seed coat micromorphology that some plants known as <i>Viola palmata</i> are hybrids between plants with lobed and unlobed leaves and believed the type specimen to be hybrid in origin. He chose not to recognize the name <i>V. palmata</i>, choosing instead to recognize <i>V. triloba</i>. If the type specimen does represent a hybrid, Gil-Ad would be correct in recognizing <i>V. triloba</i>. Because the purity of the type specimen cannot be ascertained, we consider <i>V. palmata</i> the most appropriate name for this taxon. We acknowledge the presence of hybrids between lobed and unlobed plants; such hybrids obscure lines of demarcation. Some herbarium specimens may represent such hybrids; we feel most do not.</p><!--
--><p>L. E. McKinney (1992) described the nomenclatural history of Viola palmata. Homophylly versus heterophylly differentiates V. palmata from V. subsinuata, the homophyllous violet most often called V. palmata. We know that the taxon described by Linnaeus was heterophyllous, with some undivided leaf blades.</p><!--
+
--><p>L. E. McKinney (1992) described the nomenclatural history of <i>Viola palmata</i>. Homophylly versus heterophylly differentiates <i>V. palmata</i> from <i>V. subsinuata</i>, the homophyllous violet most often called <i>V. palmata</i>. We know that the taxon described by Linnaeus was heterophyllous, with some undivided leaf blades.</p><!--
 
--><p>Varieties 2 (2 in the flora).</p>
 
--><p>Varieties 2 (2 in the flora).</p>
 
|tables=
 
|tables=
Line 53: Line 54:
 
-->{{#Taxon:
 
-->{{#Taxon:
 
name=Viola palmata
 
name=Viola palmata
|author=
 
 
|authority=Linnaeus
 
|authority=Linnaeus
 
|rank=species
 
|rank=species
Line 60: Line 60:
 
|basionyms=
 
|basionyms=
 
|family=Violaceae
 
|family=Violaceae
|distribution=c;e North America.
+
|distribution=Ont.;Ala.;Ark.;Conn.;D.C.;Del.;Fla.;Ga.;Ill.;Ind.;Iowa;Kans.;Ky.;La.;Maine;Mass.;Md.;Mich.;Miss.;Mo.;N.C.;N.Dak.;N.J.;N.Mex.;Nebr.;Ohio;Okla.;Pa.;R.I.;S.C.;Tenn.;Tex.;Va.;Vt.;W.Va.
 
|reference=None
 
|reference=None
 
|publication title=Sp. Pl.
 
|publication title=Sp. Pl.
 
|publication year=1753
 
|publication year=1753
 
|special status=Endemic
 
|special status=Endemic
|source xml=https://jpend@bitbucket.org/aafc-mbb/fna-data-curation.git/src/9216fc802291cd3df363fd52122300479582ede7/coarse_grained_fna_xml/V6/V6_243.xml
+
|source xml=https://bitbucket.org/aafc-mbb/fna-data-curation/src/2e0870ddd59836b60bcf96646a41e87ea5a5943a/coarse_grained_fna_xml/V6/V6_243.xml
 
|genus=Viola
 
|genus=Viola
 
|species=Viola palmata
 
|species=Viola palmata
 
}}<!--
 
}}<!--
  
-->[[Category:Treatment]][[Category:Viola]]
+
-->
 +
 
 +
[[Category:Treatment]]
 +
[[Category:Viola]]
 +
[[Category:Revised Since Print]]

Latest revision as of 17:10, 6 November 2020

Plants perennial, acaulescent, not stoloniferous, 6–50 cm; rhizome thick, fleshy. Leaves basal, 2–3, ascending to erect; stipules linear-lanceolate, margins entire, apex acute; petiole 1–20 cm, glabrous or pubescent; earliest leaf blades unlobed, mid-season blades 3–9-lobed, lobes sometimes appearing petiolate and sometimes further lobed; earliest leaf blades reniform to ovate, mid-season blades with middle lobes usually ovate or elliptic to widely obovate, sometimes narrowly elliptic, narrowly ovate, lanceolate, or spatulate to narrowly obovate, lateral lobes elliptic, obdeltate, or spatulate to falcate, smaller lobes similar, 1–14 × 1–10 cm, base truncate to cordate, margins serrate or entire, usually ciliate, apex acute, rounded, blunt, or obtuse, surfaces glabrous or pubescent throughout or along veins. Peduncles 3–13 cm, glabrous or pubescent. Flowers: sepals lanceolate, margins ciliate or eciliate, auricles 0.5–1 mm; petals violet on both surfaces, lower 3 white basally, lower 3 and upper 2 sometimes purple-veined, lateral 2 bearded, spur sometimes bearded, lowest 15–25 mm, spur white, gibbous, 2–3 mm; style head beardless; cleistogamous flowers on prostrate to ascending peduncles. Capsules ellipsoid, 5–15 mm, glabrous. Seeds beige, mottled to bronze, 1.5–2.5 mm. 2n = 54.

Distribution

V6 243-distribution-map.jpg

Ont., Ala., Ark., Conn., D.C., Del., Fla., Ga., Ill., Ind., Iowa, Kans., Ky., La., Maine, Mass., Md., Mich., Miss., Mo., N.C., N.Dak., N.J., N.Mex., Nebr., Ohio, Okla., Pa., R.I., S.C., Tenn., Tex., Va., Vt., W.Va.

Discussion

N. L. Gil-Ad (1997) presented evidence based on seed coat micromorphology that some plants known as Viola palmata are hybrids between plants with lobed and unlobed leaves and believed the type specimen to be hybrid in origin. He chose not to recognize the name V. palmata, choosing instead to recognize V. triloba. If the type specimen does represent a hybrid, Gil-Ad would be correct in recognizing V. triloba. Because the purity of the type specimen cannot be ascertained, we consider V. palmata the most appropriate name for this taxon. We acknowledge the presence of hybrids between lobed and unlobed plants; such hybrids obscure lines of demarcation. Some herbarium specimens may represent such hybrids; we feel most do not.

L. E. McKinney (1992) described the nomenclatural history of Viola palmata. Homophylly versus heterophylly differentiates V. palmata from V. subsinuata, the homophyllous violet most often called V. palmata. We know that the taxon described by Linnaeus was heterophyllous, with some undivided leaf blades.

Varieties 2 (2 in the flora).

Selected References

None.

Key

1 Petioles, leaf surfaces, and peduncles usually pubescent, rarely glabrous; apex of middle leaf lobe acute; plants of dry to mesic habitats. Viola palmata var. palmata
1 Petioles, leaf surfaces, and peduncles usually glabrous, rarely pubescent; apex of middle leaf lobe rounded, blunt, or obtuse; plants of wet ground. Viola palmata var. heterophylla
... more about "Viola palmata"
R. John Little +  and Landon E. McKinney† +
Linnaeus +
Three-lobed violet +
Ont. +, Ala. +, Ark. +, Conn. +, D.C. +, Del. +, Fla. +, Ga. +, Ill. +, Ind. +, Iowa +, Kans. +, Ky. +, La. +, Maine +, Mass. +, Md. +, Mich. +, Miss. +, Mo. +, N.C. +, N.Dak. +, N.J. +, N.Mex. +, Nebr. +, Ohio +, Okla. +, Pa. +, R.I. +, S.C. +, Tenn. +, Tex. +, Va. +, Vt. +  and W.Va. +
Viola cucullata var. palmata +
Viola palmata +
species +