Difference between revisions of "Potentilla arenosa subsp. chamissonis"
J. Bot. Res. Inst. Texas 1: 813. 2007.
FNA>Volume Importer |
FNA>Volume Importer |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
}} | }} | ||
|common_names=Potentille de Chamisso | |common_names=Potentille de Chamisso | ||
| − | |basionyms={{Treatment/ID/ | + | |basionyms={{Treatment/ID/Basionym |
|name=Potentilla chamissonis | |name=Potentilla chamissonis | ||
|authority=Hultén | |authority=Hultén | ||
| + | |publication_title=Bot. Not. | ||
| + | |publication_place=1945: 140, fig. 5b. 1945 | ||
}} | }} | ||
|synonyms={{Treatment/ID/Synonym | |synonyms={{Treatment/ID/Synonym | ||
| Line 33: | Line 35: | ||
|elevation=0–1000 m | |elevation=0–1000 m | ||
|distribution=Greenland;Man.;N.W.T.;Nunavut;Que.;Europe. | |distribution=Greenland;Man.;N.W.T.;Nunavut;Que.;Europe. | ||
| − | |discussion=<p>Reports of <i></i>subsp.<i> chamissonis</i> from Alaska or Yukon (E. Hultén 1968) have not been confirmed; they are unlikely.</p><!-- | + | |discussion=<p>Reports of <i></i></i>subsp.<i><i> chamissonis</i> from Alaska or Yukon (E. Hultén 1968) have not been confirmed; they are unlikely.</p><!-- |
| − | --><p>The current use of <i></i>subsp.<i> chamissonis</i> differs from that of J. Soják (1989, pers. comm.), who included <i>Potentilla</i> chamissonis among the hybrids of <i>P. arenosa</i> and <i>P. nivea</i>. He instead provided the combination <i>P. nivea</i> var. nipharga (Rydberg) Soják for the taxon currently under discussion, using <i>P. nivea</i> in its unconserved sense. He also noted, however, that P. nipharga Rydberg might instead be based on an unstabilized hybrid between <i>P. arenosa</i> and <i>P. crebridens</i> or <i>P. nivea</i>. The latter interpretation is provisionally accepted here; if treated as conspecific with <i>P. arenosa</i>, then P. nipharga would have priority. The name has traditionally been applied in Greenland and northeastern Canada; the type from the Mackenzie River does not conform with how the name has been used.</p> | + | --><p>The current use of <i></i></i>subsp.<i><i> chamissonis</i> differs from that of J. Soják (1989, pers. comm.), who included <i>Potentilla</i> chamissonis among the hybrids of <i>P. arenosa</i> and <i>P. nivea</i>. He instead provided the combination <i>P. nivea</i> var. nipharga (Rydberg) Soják for the taxon currently under discussion, using <i>P. nivea</i> in its unconserved sense. He also noted, however, that P. nipharga Rydberg might instead be based on an unstabilized hybrid between <i>P. arenosa</i> and <i>P. crebridens</i> or <i>P. nivea</i>. The latter interpretation is provisionally accepted here; if treated as conspecific with <i>P. arenosa</i>, then P. nipharga would have priority. The name has traditionally been applied in Greenland and northeastern Canada; the type from the Mackenzie River does not conform with how the name has been used.</p> |
|tables= | |tables= | ||
|references= | |references= | ||
| Line 58: | Line 60: | ||
|publication year=2007 | |publication year=2007 | ||
|special status= | |special status= | ||
| − | |source xml=https://jpend@bitbucket.org/aafc-mbb/fna-data-curation.git/src/ | + | |source xml=https://jpend@bitbucket.org/aafc-mbb/fna-data-curation.git/src/f6b125a955440c0872999024f038d74684f65921/coarse_grained_fna_xml/V9/V9_303.xml |
|subfamily=Rosaceae subfam. Rosoideae | |subfamily=Rosaceae subfam. Rosoideae | ||
|tribe=Rosaceae tribe Potentilleae | |tribe=Rosaceae tribe Potentilleae | ||
Revision as of 20:36, 24 September 2019
Petioles with only or almost only long verrucose hairs, sometimes mixed with sparse short and/or soft crisped hairs.
Phenology: Flowering summer.
Habitat: Cliffs, dry heath tundra, ridge tops
Elevation: 0–1000 m
Distribution
Greenland, Man., N.W.T., Nunavut, Que., Europe.
Discussion
Reports of subsp. chamissonis from Alaska or Yukon (E. Hultén 1968) have not been confirmed; they are unlikely.
The current use of subsp. chamissonis differs from that of J. Soják (1989, pers. comm.), who included Potentilla chamissonis among the hybrids of P. arenosa and P. nivea. He instead provided the combination P. nivea var. nipharga (Rydberg) Soják for the taxon currently under discussion, using P. nivea in its unconserved sense. He also noted, however, that P. nipharga Rydberg might instead be based on an unstabilized hybrid between P. arenosa and P. crebridens or P. nivea. The latter interpretation is provisionally accepted here; if treated as conspecific with P. arenosa, then P. nipharga would have priority. The name has traditionally been applied in Greenland and northeastern Canada; the type from the Mackenzie River does not conform with how the name has been used.
Selected References
None.