Vesicularia vesicularis var. crassicaulis (Mitt.) W.R.Buck
-
Authority
Buck, William R. 1998. Pleurocarpous mosses of the West Indies. Mem. New York Bot. Gard. 82: 1-400.
-
Family
Hypnaceae
-
Scientific Name
-
Description
Deprecated: mb_convert_encoding(): Handling HTML entities via mbstring is deprecated; use htmlspecialchars, htmlentities, or mb_encode_numericentity/mb_decode_numericentity instead in /home/emu/nybgweb/www-dev/htdocs/science-dev/wp-content/themes/nybgscience/lib/VHMonographsDetails.php on line 179
Variety Description - Plants relatively robust, golden, often bronze-tinged. Leaves falcate-secund dry or moist, ± stiff, ovate-lanceolate, gradually acuminate; margins not bordered, serrulate; cells long-hexagonal, 5-10:1, firm-walled; ventral leaves not differentiated in shape or areolation.
-
Discussion
1d. Vesicularia vesicularis var. crassicaulis (Mitt.) W. R. Buck, Brittonia 36: 181. 1984; Ectropothecium crassicaule Mitt., J. Linn. Soc., Bot. 12: 517. 1869; Vesicularia crassicaulis (Mitt.) Broth, in Engl. & Prantl, Nat. Pflanzenfam. 1(3): 1094. 1908. Plate 123, figures 9-14 Discussion. Although Mitten (1869) stressed the size and branching of the stem when describing this taxon, no differences could be found, either in surface features or in cross-section. The name has been widely misused for other varieties that are occasionally more or less falcate-secund when dry (but not moist). The falcate-secund leaves are this variety’s only claim to recognition. Plants that are virtually identical but with straight leaves are referable to the var. portoricensis. It is therefore not surprising that from within the same collections (Wright 120) from which E. crassicaule was described, Mitten also proposed E. flavoviride, treated here as a synonym of the var. portoricensis. The restricted distribution adds justification for recognition of var. crassicaule.
Distribution and ecology - Range. Cuba (apparently rare and endemic); growing on rotten wood, in mesic habitats, below 1000 m. All other West Indian reports are in error. I have not seen the specimen cited by Crum and Anderson (1981: 1202) from southern Florida that formed the basis of their report, but others they cited (but did not see) are not this variety. I am inclined to think the Florida material referred here is really one of the the occasionally somewhat falcate forms of var. portoricensis.
-
Distribution
Cuba South America|