Difference between revisions of "Abies magnifica"
Proc. Roy. Hort. Soc. London 3: 318. 1863.
FNA>Volume Importer |
imported>Volume Importer |
||
| (7 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
}} | }} | ||
|common_names=California red fir;Shasta red fir | |common_names=California red fir;Shasta red fir | ||
| + | |special_status={{Treatment/ID/Special_status | ||
| + | |code=E | ||
| + | |label=Endemic | ||
| + | }} | ||
|basionyms= | |basionyms= | ||
|synonyms= | |synonyms= | ||
| Line 17: | Line 21: | ||
}}<!-- | }}<!-- | ||
| − | --><span class="statement" id="st- | + | --><span class="statement" id="st-undefined" data-properties=""><b>Trees </b>to 57m; trunk to 2.5m diam.; crown narrowly conic. <b>Bark</b> grayish, thin, with age thickening and becoming deeply furrowed with ridges being often 4 times wider than furrows, plates reddish. <b>Branches</b> ascending in upper crown, descending in lower crown; twigs opposite to whorled, light yellow to ± tan, reddish pubescent for 1–2 years. <b>Buds</b> hidden by leaves or exposed, usually dark brown, ovoid, small, not resinous or with resin drop near tip, apex rounded; basal scales short, broad, equilaterally triangular, densely pubescent, not resinous, margins entire to crenate, apex sharp-pointed. <b>Leaves</b> 2–3.7cm × 2mm, mostly 1-ranked, flexible, the proximal portion often appressed to twig for 2–3mm (best seen on abaxial surface of twig), distal portion divergent; cross section flat, with or without weak groove adaxially toward leaf base, or cross section 3–4-sided on fertile branches; odor camphorlike; abaxial surface with 2 glaucous bands, each band with 4–5 stomatal rows; adaxial surface blue-green to silvery blue, with single glaucous band that may divide into 2 toward leaf base, band with (8–)10(–13) stomatal rows at midleaf; apex rounded or, on fertile branches, somewhat pointed; resin canals small, near margins and abaxial epidermal layer. <b>Pollen</b> cones at pollination ± purple or reddish brown. <b>Seed</b> cones oblong-cylindric, 15–20 × 7–10cm, purple at first but becoming yellowish brown or greenish brown, sessile, apex round; scales ca. 3 × 4cm, pubescent; bracts included to exserted and reflexed (Shasta red fir) over scales. <b>Seeds</b> 15 × 6mm, body dark reddish brown; wing about as long as body, rose; cotyledons 7–8. <b>2n</b> =24.</span><!-- |
-->{{Treatment/Body | -->{{Treatment/Body | ||
| Line 23: | Line 27: | ||
|elevation=1400–2700m | |elevation=1400–2700m | ||
|distribution=Calif.;Nev.;Oreg. | |distribution=Calif.;Nev.;Oreg. | ||
| − | |discussion=<p>Abies magnifica often exists in extensive high elevation stands in the Sierra Nevada; its close relative A. procera occurs in small mountaintop populations relatively isolated from one another. As expected for isolated populations, A. procera produces large interpopulation variation in morphology (J.Maze and W.H. Parker 1983) and chemistry (E.Zavarin et al. 1978). Where the two species meet in southern Oregon and northern California, many populations are intermediate; these have been called A. magnifica var. shastensis Lemmon. The status of such intermediates is unsettled. They may be accepted as hybrids between A. magnifica and A. procera (Liu T. S. 1971) or, alternatively, the paleontological record suggests that the two species may have originated from the intermediates (E.Zavarin et al. 1978). Individuals from this region should be assigned to A. magnifica, A. procera, or A. magnifica × procera (E.L. Parker 1963), depending on the morphologic criteria selected to differentiate the species, though clearly these individuals are genetically quite different from those near the type localities of the two species.</p><!-- | + | |discussion=<p><i>Abies magnifica</i> often exists in extensive high elevation stands in the Sierra <i>Nevada</i>; its close relative <i>A. procera</i> occurs in small mountaintop populations relatively isolated from one another. As expected for isolated populations, <i>A. procera</i> produces large interpopulation variation in morphology (J.Maze and W.H. Parker 1983) and chemistry (E.Zavarin et al. 1978). Where the two species meet in southern Oregon and northern California, many populations are intermediate; these have been called <i>A. magnifica</i> <i></i>var.<i> shastensis</i> Lemmon. The status of such intermediates is unsettled. They may be accepted as hybrids between <i>A. magnifica</i> and <i>A. procera</i> (Liu T. S. 1971) or, alternatively, the paleontological record suggests that the two species may have originated from the intermediates (E.Zavarin et al. 1978). Individuals from this region should be assigned to <i>A. magnifica</i>, <i>A. procera</i>, or <i>A. magnifica</i> × procera (E.L. Parker 1963), depending on the morphologic criteria selected to differentiate the species, though clearly these individuals are genetically quite different from those near the type localities of the two species.</p><!-- |
| − | --><p>An extensive study of this variation, as proposed by E.Zavarin et al. (1978), is warranted. Such a study should consider data from the type localities as a basis of comparison. Moreover, to evaluate this situation critically, one should first determine if any genetic exchange occurs between Abies lasiocarpa and A. procera that may complicate an evaluation.</p> | + | --><p>An extensive study of this variation, as proposed by E.Zavarin et al. (1978), is warranted. Such a study should consider data from the type localities as a basis of comparison. Moreover, to evaluate this situation critically, one should first determine if any genetic exchange occurs between <i>Abies lasiocarpa</i> and <i>A. procera</i> that may complicate an evaluation.</p> |
|tables= | |tables= | ||
|references= | |references= | ||
| Line 33: | Line 37: | ||
-->{{#Taxon: | -->{{#Taxon: | ||
name=Abies magnifica | name=Abies magnifica | ||
| − | |||
|authority=A. Murray bis | |authority=A. Murray bis | ||
|rank=species | |rank=species | ||
| Line 46: | Line 49: | ||
|publication title=Proc. Roy. Hort. Soc. London | |publication title=Proc. Roy. Hort. Soc. London | ||
|publication year=1863 | |publication year=1863 | ||
| − | |special status= | + | |special status=Endemic |
| − | |source xml=https:// | + | |source xml=https://bitbucket.org/aafc-mbb/fna-data-curation/src/2e0870ddd59836b60bcf96646a41e87ea5a5943a/coarse_grained_fna_xml/V2/V2_299.xml |
|genus=Abies | |genus=Abies | ||
|species=Abies magnifica | |species=Abies magnifica | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
}}<!-- | }}<!-- | ||
-->[[Category:Treatment]][[Category:Abies]] | -->[[Category:Treatment]][[Category:Abies]] | ||
Latest revision as of 20:22, 5 November 2020
Trees to 57m; trunk to 2.5m diam.; crown narrowly conic. Bark grayish, thin, with age thickening and becoming deeply furrowed with ridges being often 4 times wider than furrows, plates reddish. Branches ascending in upper crown, descending in lower crown; twigs opposite to whorled, light yellow to ± tan, reddish pubescent for 1–2 years. Buds hidden by leaves or exposed, usually dark brown, ovoid, small, not resinous or with resin drop near tip, apex rounded; basal scales short, broad, equilaterally triangular, densely pubescent, not resinous, margins entire to crenate, apex sharp-pointed. Leaves 2–3.7cm × 2mm, mostly 1-ranked, flexible, the proximal portion often appressed to twig for 2–3mm (best seen on abaxial surface of twig), distal portion divergent; cross section flat, with or without weak groove adaxially toward leaf base, or cross section 3–4-sided on fertile branches; odor camphorlike; abaxial surface with 2 glaucous bands, each band with 4–5 stomatal rows; adaxial surface blue-green to silvery blue, with single glaucous band that may divide into 2 toward leaf base, band with (8–)10(–13) stomatal rows at midleaf; apex rounded or, on fertile branches, somewhat pointed; resin canals small, near margins and abaxial epidermal layer. Pollen cones at pollination ± purple or reddish brown. Seed cones oblong-cylindric, 15–20 × 7–10cm, purple at first but becoming yellowish brown or greenish brown, sessile, apex round; scales ca. 3 × 4cm, pubescent; bracts included to exserted and reflexed (Shasta red fir) over scales. Seeds 15 × 6mm, body dark reddish brown; wing about as long as body, rose; cotyledons 7–8. 2n =24.
Habitat: Mixed coniferous forests
Elevation: 1400–2700m
Distribution
Calif., Nev., Oreg.
Discussion
Abies magnifica often exists in extensive high elevation stands in the Sierra Nevada; its close relative A. procera occurs in small mountaintop populations relatively isolated from one another. As expected for isolated populations, A. procera produces large interpopulation variation in morphology (J.Maze and W.H. Parker 1983) and chemistry (E.Zavarin et al. 1978). Where the two species meet in southern Oregon and northern California, many populations are intermediate; these have been called A. magnifica var. shastensis Lemmon. The status of such intermediates is unsettled. They may be accepted as hybrids between A. magnifica and A. procera (Liu T. S. 1971) or, alternatively, the paleontological record suggests that the two species may have originated from the intermediates (E.Zavarin et al. 1978). Individuals from this region should be assigned to A. magnifica, A. procera, or A. magnifica × procera (E.L. Parker 1963), depending on the morphologic criteria selected to differentiate the species, though clearly these individuals are genetically quite different from those near the type localities of the two species.
An extensive study of this variation, as proposed by E.Zavarin et al. (1978), is warranted. Such a study should consider data from the type localities as a basis of comparison. Moreover, to evaluate this situation critically, one should first determine if any genetic exchange occurs between Abies lasiocarpa and A. procera that may complicate an evaluation.
Selected References
None.
Lower Taxa
None.