December 2012 Number 1 - Utah Native Plant Society

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Utah Native Plant Society Figure 8. Strict consensus of 16 most parsimonious trees of length 110 showing pod inflation (podin) character state changes. The letters above branches are the only highly supported clades in the tree (above 70% bootstrap support; see the results section for values for each of these lettered clades). Table one contains the legend of letter codes used for specific vouchers shown to the right of the taxon labels. Figure 9. Cluster analysis dendrogram of the morphological data from 30 specimens of the Palantia based on a Euclidean distance matrix calculated by PAST ver. 1.76. Table one contains the legend of letter codes used for specific vouchers shown to the right of the taxon labels. 146
Calochortiana December 2012 Number 1 ilar morphologically than A. lentiginosus var. maricopae is to A. lentiginosus var. wilsonii. The morphological similarity and geographic proximity of A. lentiginosus var. mokiacensis and A. lentiginosus var. ursinus (the nearest populations are at least 20 km apart in adjacent mountain ranges) has been the primary evidence for placing them into the same taxon in the latest monograph (Welsh 2007). The morphological distinctiveness of A. lentiginosus var. ursinus is subtle, but it is, nevertheless, present. In the A. lentiginosus var. mokiacensis PCoA analysis, specimens of A. lentiginosus var. ursinus appear to grade into the specimens of A. lentiginosus var. mokiacensis (including the type specimens of A. lentiginosus var. trumbullensis). The parsimony and cluster analyses also show A. lentiginosus var. ursinus in the same region of the tree as A. lentiginosus var. mokiacensis. However, A. lentiginosus var. ursinus does not share haplotypes with A. lentiginosus var. mokiacensis. It shares the most haplotypes with A. lentiginosus var. wilsonii (Alexander & Liston, in prep). Based on the lack of shared haplotypes with A. lentiginosus var. mokiacensis and a trend toward smaller pods and flowers (see the taxonomic treatment below for more specific morphological differences), A. lentiginosus var. ursinus is recognized herein at the varietal level following the delimitation proposed by Barneby (1945, 1964). Taxonomic Treatment The taxonomic revision herein is a first step in a full monograph of the Astragalus lentiginosus complex. As such, the specimens used in the morphological analysis are labeled in a separate voucher list. Where applicable, a list of specimens examined by the author but not yet included in morphological analyses is also included. Species delimitations in the taxonomic revision follow a phenetic species concept (Sokal, 1973; Luckow 1995). The original goal of this study was to apply a phylogenetic species concept, however, the genetic and morphologic data obtained could not be analyzed robustly using cladistic methodologies. Primarily, population level data are largely ignored since the smallest taxonomic units of phylogenetic analyses are species (Nixon & Wheeler 1990, Cracraft 1983, Luckow 1995). Table 1 is a list of notable specimens identified in maps in this revision. Following the key are complete taxonomic treatments for A. lentiginosus var. maricopae and A. lentiginosus var. ursinus. Treatments for the other taxa in the key can be found in Alexander (2008). Key to the Palantia and related varieties of Astragalus lentiginosus 1. Pod, in longitudinal section, linear, lanceolate, oblong, or elliptic, the shape cylindrical and not inflated or ventricose and scarcely inflated dorsally or laterally, the valves stiffly papery to coriaceous, bilocular, semibilocular, or sub-unilocular, the septum to 2.5 mm wide and not fused to the funicular flange. 2. Pods long-persistent, sessile on a minute boss on the receptacle or contracted at the base into an incipient stipe 0.4 to 0.7 (1.0) mm long. 3. Banner light yellow, without a central white or striped spot (immaculate); keel slightly darker than the banner, drying yellowish brown and immaculate; wings slightly darker than the banner, drying yellowish brown. …………………………………………………………………………………..A. lentiginosus var. maricopae 3. Banner light to dark purple with a white & purple striate central spot; keel light purple & dark purple maculate; wings light to dark purple, sometimes with white tips. 4. Pods straight or slightly incurved, 20-28 (-32) mm long, 4-7.1x longer than wide, the pedicel ascending or spreading, straight or curved; leaflets glabrous to moderately pubescent adaxially, at least sparsely pubescent abaxially; [=A. mokiacensis, A. lentiginosus var. trumbullensis]……………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………….A. lentiginosus var. mokiacensis 4. Pods incurved, 13-20 (-23) mm long, 2.4-4.7x longer than wide; the pedicel ascending or erect, straight or curved; leaflets glabrous adaxially, glabrous or sparsely pubescent abaxially; [=A. ursinus] ………. ………………………………………………………………………………………A. lentiginosus var. ursinus 2. Pods deciduous (sometimes tardily so) by a cellular abscission layer between the receptacle and gynoecium, sessile on a minute boss on the receptacle or contracted at the base into an incipient stipe or gynophore 0.3 to 0.5 (0.7) mm long. 5. Pods semi-bilocular to nearly bilocular, the septum 1-2.5 mm wide, the body incurved 120-180°, incurved less than 90°, or straight, the valves in cross section cordate, obcordate, or terete, in longitudinal section elliptic, linear, or oblong. 6. Pods falcate to hamate (nearly circular), occasionally lunate, incurved to 120-180°, the pedicel deflexed or declined…………………………………………………………………. A. lentiginosus var. palans 6. Pods lunate to falcate, incurved less than 90° to nearly straight, the pedicel erect, ascending, or spreading. 147
Page 1 and 2:
Calochortiana December 2012 Number
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Species # Training Samples Calochor
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96: Calochortiana December 2012 Number
Page 97 and 98: case of the former lake beds a duri
Page 139 and 140: A. lentiginosus var. ursinus (publi
Page 145: Calochortiana December 2012 Number
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Pot Score Min Score Trend Threat In
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
show all

December 2012 Number 1 - Utah Native Plant Society

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?