Difference between revisions of "Sabatia angularis"
Fl. Amer. Sept. 1: 137. 1813. (as Sabbatia)
imported>Volume Importer |
imported>Volume Importer |
||
Line 61: | Line 61: | ||
|publication year=1813 | |publication year=1813 | ||
|special status=Illustrated;Endemic | |special status=Illustrated;Endemic | ||
− | |source xml= | + | |source xml=https://bitbucket.org/aafc-mbb/fna-data-curation/src/master/coarse_grained_fna_xml/V14/V14_756.xml |
|genus=Sabatia | |genus=Sabatia | ||
|species=Sabatia angularis | |species=Sabatia angularis |
Latest revision as of 13:16, 24 November 2024
Herbs biennial. Stems single, 4-angled with wings 0.2–0.3 mm wide, (0.5–)3–7.5(–9) dm, branching proximally mostly opposite, distally mostly alternate. Leaves all cauline at flowering time or basal sometimes persistent; basal blades oblong-spatulate to ovate-orbiculate; cauline blades lanceolate to widely ovate, 1–4 cm × 5–30(–40) mm. Inflorescences open cymes; pedicels 10–60 mm. Flowers 5(or 6)-merous; calyx tube shallowly campanulate, 1–2 mm, mid- and commissural veins about equally prominent, low-ridged, lobes linear to narrowly oblong-lanceolate or occasionally ± foliaceous, 4–15(–18) mm; corolla pink or occasionally white (sometimes drying orange), eye greenish yellow, projections of eye into corolla lobes triangular, usually with dark red border, tube 4–7 mm, lobes ± narrowly spatulate-obovate, 6–22 × 2–9(–11) mm, apex rounded to subacute; anthers coiling circinately. 2n = 38.
Phenology: Flowering late spring–summer.
Habitat: Open pine and mixed woods, prairies, fields, marshes, shores, granite outcrops, roadsides.
Elevation: 0–800 m.
Distribution
Ala., Ark., Del., Fla., Ga., Ill., Ind., Kans., Ky., La., Md., Mich., Miss., Mo., N.J., N.Mex., N.Y., N.C., Ohio, Okla., Pa., S.C., Tenn., Tex., Va., W.Va.
Discussion
Sabatia angularis has been reported as weakly naturalized in New Mexico (K. W. Allred 1999). Historically, S. angularis has also been found introduced in Ontario, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, and Massachusetts, and can be expected elsewhere. An old report from Maine is not implausible, but no documentation has been located. A report from Wisconsin likewise is also plausible, but the provenance of the specimen is doubtful.
Selected References
None.