DOCSLIB.ORG

El Salvador Grasses: an Updated Catalogue and Nomenclator

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
El Salvador Grasses: an Updated Catalogue and Nomenclator Menjívar Cruz, J.E., R.M. Baldini, G. Davidse, and P.M. Peterson. 2021. El Salvador grasses: An updated catalogue and nomenclator. Phytoneuron 2021-22: 1–131. Published 20 April 2021. ISSN 2153 733 EL SALVADOR GRASSES: AN UPDATED CATALOGUE AND NOMENCLATOR JENNY ELIZABETH MENJÍVAR CRUZ Museo de Historia Natural de El Salvador Ministerio de Cultura de El Salvador San Salvador, El Salvador [email protected] RICCARDO M. BALDINI Centro Studi Erbario Tropicale Dipartimento di Biologia Università di Firenze Florence, Italy [email protected] GERRIT DAVIDSE Research Department Missouri Botanical Garden St. Louis, Missouri 63110 [email protected] PAUL M. PETERSON Department of Botany National Museum of Natural History Smithsonian Institution Washington, D.C. 20013-7012 [email protected] ABSTRACT An updated catalogue and nomenclator of the grasses in the Poaceae family is presented for El Salvador. The work is based on bibliographic and herbarium research and on recent collecting trips carried out by the first author in El Salvador between 2014−2017. The catalogue reports 371 species, 10 infraspecific names, and 381 total taxa. Herbarium vouchers, bibliographic reports, and distributions within El Salvador are reported for each accepted taxon. Synonyms are included in the list and these are all directed to the accepted name. A new combination, Rugoloa pilosa var. lancifolia (Griseb.) Baldini & Menjívar, comb. nov., is provided. RESUMEN Se presenta un catálogo y nomenclador actualizado de la familia Poaceae para El Salvador. El trabajo se basa en investigaciones bibliográficas de herbario, y en viajes de recolección recientes realizados por el primer autor en El Salvador entre 2014−2017. El catálogo informa 371 especies, 10 nombres infraespecíficos y 381 taxones en total. Los comprobantes de herbario, los informes bibliográficos y la distribución dentro de El Salvador se informan para cada taxón aceptado. Los sinónimos se incluyen en la lista y todos se dirigen al nombre aceptado. Una nueva combinación, Rugoloa pilosa var. lancifolia (Griseb.) Baldini y Menjívar, comb. nov., es aportada. Current knowledge on flora of El Salvador appears fragmentary and is relatively poorly reported (Menjívar & Cerén Lopéz 2017). If we exclude the first contributions of Standley & Caldéron (1925, 1941), a comprehensive taxonomic work for El Salvador does not exist, except for the dated “Flora Salvadoreña” published by Choussy (1926−1932). Most recent floristic contributions for plants of Central America are found in the Mesoamerican flora (Standley et al. 1946−1974), Costa Rica (Hammel et al. 2003−), Panama (Woodson et al. 1943−1981; Correa et al. 2004), Honduras (Sutherland Menjívar Cruz et al.: El Salvador grasses, updated catalogue and nomenclator 2 2008), and for Nicaragua (Stevens et al. 2001). Flora Mesoamericana (Davidse et al. 1994−) is the most detailed work on Central America, but still far from complete. Apart from Nicaragua (Stevens et al. 2001) and Costa Rica (Hammel et al. 2003−), we can argue that modern updated floras are still missing for the remaining countries of Central America. The most recent bibliographic review on partial studies of the flora of El Salvador is reported in Berendsohn et al. (2009, 2012) and Menjívar and Cerén Lopéz (2017). This work is specifically focused on the Poaceae, one of the most taxonomically and economically significant plant families in Mesoamerica. Apart from the older works on Central America and Caribbean areas (Hitchcock 1909, 1913, 1920, 1922, 1924, 1927, 1930, 1936; Hitchcock & Chase 1910, 1915, 1920; Standley 1937; Swallen 1936, 1943), and Flora Mesoamericana (Davidse et al. 1994), where citations for El Salvador are also reported, only two extensive regional works on Poaceae have been published until now for Mesoamerica: “Grasses of Guatemala” by Swallen (1955) in collaboration with F.A. MaClure for bamboos, the “Gramineae” by Pohl (1980) as a part of Flora Costaricensis edited by William Burger, and the contributions to Cuba by Catasús Guerra (2011, 2015). A recent checklist of the monocots, including 243 native and introduced grass species, for El Salvador was published by Berendsohn & Araniva de González (1991), here considered the basis from which we have started the present taxonomic and nomenclatural updated checklist. Plants of the World online (POWO 2021) lists 257 grass species for El Salvador. Our updated catalogue and nomenclator treating the El Salvadorian Poaceae is an extension of a broader project sponsored by MHES herbarium and supported by Secretaria de Cultura of the El Salvador. MATERIALS AND METHODS We compiled this checklist by consulting many literature sources available on Mesoamerican Poaceae, including the Caribbean area. We are aware that in many cases the distribution for a taxon is approximate, and often expressed by “Mexico to Panama”, or “USA to Panama,” as acknowledged in Berendsohn et al. (2009, 2012). For most species, herbarium specimens are cited to document the occurrence in El Salvador. However, we also include in our checklist a small number of species that historically have been reported in the literature. This work not only focuses on new records (nuevos registros), that often are not so “new” but also endeavors to contribute to understanding the biodiversity of grasses by including observations often taken from recent monographs that include phylogenetic analyses. We assembled the information from the bibliographic and digital herbarium resources (e.g., JACQ: <http://herbarium.univie.ac.at/database/search.php>; United States National Herbarium Catalogue <http://collections.nmnh.si.edu/search/botany/>, C.V. Starr Virtual Herbarium at New York Botanical Garden <http://sweetgum.nybg.org/science/vh/>, Field Museum Botany/database <http:// emuweb.fieldmuseum.org/botany/taxonomic.php?_ga=1.169204770.2036561786.1492616024>, and from important herbaria such as F, K, ITIC, LAGU, MHES, MO, NY, US, as reported in the literature (abbreviations follow Thiers 2019). Recently collected material from El Salvador (2014−2017) by the staff and associates of the Natural History Museum of El Salvador (MHES), the Jardin Botanico “La Laguna” in San Salvador (LAGU), and the Tropical herbarium of the University of Florence (FT) also was included. The distribution in El Salvador for most taxa is given by listing the Department where it occurs, all verified by the first author. Taxonomic and nomenclatural evaluation was made using THE PLANT LIST (http://www.theplantlist.org) and TROPICOS (http://www.tropicos.org). The general classification at subfamily and genus level follows Zuloaga et al. (2007), Teerawatananon et al. (2011), Vorontsova & Simon (2012), GPWG II (2012), Kellogg (2015), Soreng et al. (2015, 2017), and Washburn et al. (2015). In several occasions we have followed specific monographic works (see Literature Cited). The accepted name is always in bold type and native taxa have no attached symbol. Menjívar Cruz et al.: El Salvador grasses, updated catalogue and nomenclator 3 Symbols used here: * newly reported taxon ? dubious, to be confirmed # cultivated taxon § introduced taxon + endemic to El Salvador ** endemic genus to the New World RESULTS AND DISCUSSION For El Salvador we list 381 grass taxa (372 species) in 110 genera, of which 297 (288 species) are native. We also recognize: 19 newly reported taxa, 5 dubious, 1 endemic, 44 cultivated, 77 introduced and many of these (36) extensively cultivated, and 30 genera endemic to the New World. Paspalum is the largest genus with 47 species, followed by Digitaria (19), Eragrostis (16), Bouteloua (14), Cenchrus (14), Panicum (14), Aristida (11), Muhlenbergia (11), Lasiacis (10), and Setaria (10). Chusquea pittieri Hack. and C. simpliciflora Munro are included as occurring in El Salvador in the Plants of the World online (POWO 2021) but were not verified in our study. Clark (1994) indicates the former species is common in cloud forests and the latter species is found in tropical and lower montane forests. Other differences with the Plants of the World online and our list are referable to taxonomic rank where they include a specific subspecies or variety as occurring in El Salvador and we usually do not make a distinction. The impact of alien species from other tropical areas of the World, especially from Central and Southern Africa is remarkable and has made us aware of the need to monitor the grass flora in the future. El Salvador's territory has been subjected to severe anthropization and many native species, including grasses, have become rare if not completely extirpated. The expansion of open environments has favored a large component of non native grass species, these becoming very aggressive in the absence of natural competitors. Introductions from the Paleotropics, such as: Arthraxon hispidus, Cenchrus spp., Hyparrhenia bracteata, H. rufa, Hyperthelia dissoluta, Melinis minutiflora, M. repens, Setaria spp., and Urochloa spp., are now dominant in the open habitats throughout the country. Likewise, introductions from temperate genera, i.e., Bouteloua, Eragrostis, and Muhlenbergia, are now well represented in the flora. Pantropical taxa are also included in the grass flora, such as Aristida, Axonopus, Digitaria, Morronea, Panicum, Paspalum, and Rugoloa. Neotropical genera with centers of diversity in Mesoamerica, such as Chusquea, Lasiacis, Paspalum, Trachypogon, Zeugites, are still well represented and preserved in areas such as the Ahuachápan Mountains, Montecristo National Park (near Metapán),
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A REVISION of TRISETUM Victor L. Finot,' Paul M
    A REVISION OF TRISETUM Victor L. Finot,' Paul M. Peterson,3 (POACEAE: POOIDEAE: Fernando 0 Zuloaga,* Robert J. v sorene, and Oscar Mattnei AVENINAE) IN SOUTH AMERICA1 ABSTRACT A taxonomic treatment of Trisetum Pers. for South America, is given. Eighteen species and six varieties of Trisetum are recognized in South America. Chile (14 species, 3 varieties) and Argentina (12 species, 5 varieties) have the greatest number of taxa in the genus. Two varieties, T. barbinode var. sclerophyllum and T longiglume var. glabratum, are endemic to Argentina, whereas T. mattheii and T nancaguense are known only from Chile. Trisetum andinum is endemic to Ecuador, T. macbridei is endemic to Peru, and T. foliosum is endemic to Venezuela. A total of four species are found in Ecuador and Peru, and there are two species in Venezuela and Colombia. The following new species are described and illustrated: Trisetum mattheii Finot and T nancaguense Finot, from Chile, and T pyramidatum Louis- Marie ex Finot, from Chile and Argentina. The following two new combinations are made: T barbinode var. sclerophyllum (Hack, ex Stuck.) Finot and T. spicatum var. cumingii (Nees ex Steud.) Finot. A key for distinguishing the species and varieties of Trisetum in South America is given. The names Koeleria cumingii Nees ex Steud., Trisetum sect. Anaulacoa Louis-Marie, Trisetum sect. Aulacoa Louis-Marie, Trisetum subg. Heterolytrum Louis-Marie, Trisetum subg. Isolytrum Louis-Marie, Trisetum subsect. Koeleriformia Louis-Marie, Trisetum subsect. Sphenopholidea Louis-Marie, Trisetum ma- lacophyllum Steud., Trisetum variabile E. Desv., and Trisetum variabile var. virescens E. Desv. are lectotypified. Key words: Aveninae, Gramineae, Poaceae, Pooideae, Trisetum.
    [Show full text]
  • "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."
    Intro 1996 National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands The Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (1996 National List). The 1996 National List is a draft revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988) (1988 National List). The 1996 National List is provided to encourage additional public review and comments on the draft regional wetland indicator assignments. The 1996 National List reflects a significant amount of new information that has become available since 1988 on the wetland affinity of vascular plants. This new information has resulted from the extensive use of the 1988 National List in the field by individuals involved in wetland and other resource inventories, wetland identification and delineation, and wetland research. Interim Regional Interagency Review Panel (Regional Panel) changes in indicator status as well as additions and deletions to the 1988 National List were documented in Regional supplements. The National List was originally developed as an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al.1979) to aid in the consistent application of this classification system for wetlands in the field.. The 1996 National List also was developed to aid in determining the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in the Clean Water Act Section 404 wetland regulatory program and in the implementation of the swampbuster provisions of the Food Security Act. While not required by law or regulation, the Fish and Wildlife Service is making the 1996 National List available for review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • Types of American Grasses
    z LIBRARY OF Si AS-HITCHCOCK AND AGNES'CHASE 4: SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM oL TiiC. CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE United States National Herbarium Volume XII, Part 3 TXE&3 OF AMERICAN GRASSES . / A STUDY OF THE AMERICAN SPECIES OF GRASSES DESCRIBED BY LINNAEUS, GRONOVIUS, SLOANE, SWARTZ, AND MICHAUX By A. S. HITCHCOCK z rit erV ^-C?^ 1 " WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1908 BULLETIN OF THE UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM Issued June 18, 1908 ii PREFACE The accompanying paper, by Prof. A. S. Hitchcock, Systematic Agrostologist of the United States Department of Agriculture, u entitled Types of American grasses: a study of the American species of grasses described by Linnaeus, Gronovius, Sloane, Swartz, and Michaux," is an important contribution to our knowledge of American grasses. It is regarded as of fundamental importance in the critical sys- tematic investigation of any group of plants that the identity of the species described by earlier authors be determined with certainty. Often this identification can be made only by examining the type specimen, the original description being inconclusive. Under the American code of botanical nomenclature, which has been followed by the author of this paper, "the nomenclatorial t}rpe of a species or subspecies is the specimen to which the describer originally applied the name in publication." The procedure indicated by the American code, namely, to appeal to the type specimen when the original description is insufficient to identify the species, has been much misunderstood by European botanists. It has been taken to mean, in the case of the Linnsean herbarium, for example, that a specimen in that herbarium bearing the same name as a species described by Linnaeus in his Species Plantarum must be taken as the type of that species regardless of all other considerations.
    [Show full text]
  • The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts
    The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts: The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts: A County Checklist • First Revision Melissa Dow Cullina, Bryan Connolly, Bruce Sorrie and Paul Somers Somers Bruce Sorrie and Paul Connolly, Bryan Cullina, Melissa Dow Revision • First A County Checklist Plants of Massachusetts: Vascular The A County Checklist First Revision Melissa Dow Cullina, Bryan Connolly, Bruce Sorrie and Paul Somers Massachusetts Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program The Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program (NHESP), part of the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, is one of the programs forming the Natural Heritage network. NHESP is responsible for the conservation and protection of hundreds of species that are not hunted, fished, trapped, or commercially harvested in the state. The Program's highest priority is protecting the 176 species of vertebrate and invertebrate animals and 259 species of native plants that are officially listed as Endangered, Threatened or of Special Concern in Massachusetts. Endangered species conservation in Massachusetts depends on you! A major source of funding for the protection of rare and endangered species comes from voluntary donations on state income tax forms. Contributions go to the Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Fund, which provides a portion of the operating budget for the Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program. NHESP protects rare species through biological inventory,
    [Show full text]
  • 2007 Vol. 10, Issue 1
    Department of Botany & the U.S. National Herbarium TheThe PlantPlant PressPress New Series - Vol. 10 - No. 1 January-March 2007 Botany Profile Taking Aim at the GSPC Targets By Gary A. Krupnick and W. John Kress n 2002, the Convention on Biologi- are the contributions that the Department The data and images of more than cal Diversity (CBD), a global treaty has made towards achieving the 16 targets 95,000 type specimens of algae, Isigned by 188 countries addressing since the Strategy’s inception in 2002. lichens, bryophytes, ferns, gymno- the conservation and sustainable use of sperms and angiosperms are available on biological diversity, adopted the Global Understanding and Documenting Plant USNH’s Type Specimen Register at Strategy for Plant Conservation (GSPC), Diversity <http://ravenel.si.edu/botany/types/>. A the first CBD document that defines Target 1: A widely accessible working multi-DVD set containing images of specific targets for conserving plant list of known plant species, as a step 89,000 vascular type specimens from diversity. The 16 targets are grouped towards a complete world flora USNH has been produced and distrib- under five major headings: (a) under- uted to institutions around the world. In standing and documenting plant diversity; One of the Department’s core mis- addition, data from 778,054 specimen (b) conserving plant diversity; (c) using sions is to discover and describe plant life records have been inventoried in the plant diversity sustainably; (d) promoting in marine and terrestrial environments. EMu catalogue software. education and awareness about plant Thus, one primary objective is to conduct In addition, USNH is a partner in diversity; and (e) building capacity for field work in poorly known areas of high producing the Global Working Check- the conservation of plant diversity.
    [Show full text]
  • (Gramineae) Background Concerned, It
    BLUMEA 31 (1986) 281-307 Generic delimitationof Rottboelliaand related genera (Gramineae) J.F. Veldkamp R. de Koning & M.S.M. Sosef Rijksherbarium,Leiden, The Netherlands Summary Generic delimitations within the Rottboelliastrae Stapf and Coelorachidastrae Clayton (for- mal name) are revised. Coelorachis Brongn., Hackelochloa O. Ktze, Heteropholis C.E. Hubb., in Ratzeburgia Kunth, and Rottboellia formosa R. Br, are to be included Mnesithea Kunth. Heteropholis cochinchinensis (Lour.) Clayton and its variety chenii (Hsu) Sosef & Koning are varieties of Mnesithea laevis (Retz.) Kunth. Robynsiochloa Jacq.-Félix is to be included in Rottboellia L.f. The necessary new combinations, a list of genera and representative species, and a key to the genera are given. In the Appendix a new species of Rottboellia, R. paradoxa Koning & Sosef, is described from the Philippines. The enigmatic species Rottboellia villosa Poir. is transferred to Schizachyrium villosum (Poir.) Veldk., comb. nov. Introduction Historical background The of the within the of taxa delimitation genera group represented by Rottboel- lia L. f. and its closest relatives, here taken in the sense of Clayton (1973), has always posed a considerable problem. former In times Rottboellia contained many species. It was divided up in various the of Hackel seemed most ways, but system 5 subgenera as proposed by (1889) authoritative: Coelorachis (Brongn.) Hack., Hemarthria (R. Br.) Hack., Peltophorus (Desv.) HackPhacelurus (Griseb.) Hack., and Thyrsostachys Hack. When at the end of the last century and in the beginning of the present one many large grass genera were split up, e.g. Andropogon, Panicum, Stapf (1917) raised Hackel's subgenera to generic rank, reviving some old names formerly treated as synonyms, and created several new of the of other unable finish his ones.
    [Show full text]
  • Introductory Grass Identification Workshop University of Houston Coastal Center 23 September 2017
    Broadleaf Woodoats (Chasmanthium latifolia) Introductory Grass Identification Workshop University of Houston Coastal Center 23 September 2017 1 Introduction This 5 hour workshop is an introduction to the identification of grasses using hands- on dissection of diverse species found within the Texas middle Gulf Coast region (although most have a distribution well into the state and beyond). By the allotted time period the student should have acquired enough knowledge to identify most grass species in Texas to at least the genus level. For the sake of brevity grass physiology and reproduction will not be discussed. Materials provided: Dried specimens of grass species for each student to dissect Jewelry loupe 30x pocket glass magnifier Battery-powered, flexible USB light Dissecting tweezer and needle Rigid white paper background Handout: - Grass Plant Morphology - Types of Grass Inflorescences - Taxonomic description and habitat of each dissected species. - Key to all grass species of Texas - References - Glossary Itinerary (subject to change) 0900: Introduction and house keeping 0905: Structure of the course 0910: Identification and use of grass dissection tools 0915- 1145: Basic structure of the grass Identification terms Dissection of grass samples 1145 – 1230: Lunch 1230 - 1345: Field trip of area and collection by each student of one fresh grass species to identify back in the classroom. 1345 - 1400: Conclusion and discussion 2 Grass Structure spikelet pedicel inflorescence rachis culm collar internode ------ leaf blade leaf sheath node crown fibrous roots 3 Grass shoot. The above ground structure of the grass. Root. The below ground portion of the main axis of the grass, without leaves, nodes or internodes, and absorbing water and nutrients from the soil.
    [Show full text]
  • El Género Muhlenbergia
    www.unal.edu.co/icn/publicaciones/caldasia.htm CaldasiaGiraldo-Cañas 31(2):269-302. & Peterson 2009 EL GÉNERO MUHLENBERGIA (POACEAE: CHLORIDOIDEAE: CYNODONTEAE: MUHLENBERGIINAE) EN COLOMBIA1 The genus Muhlenbergia (Poaceae: Chloridoideae: Cynodonteae: Muhlenbergiinae) in Colombia DIEGO GIRALDO-CAÑAS Instituto de Ciencias Naturales, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Apartado 7495, Bogotá D.C., Colombia. [email protected] PAUL M. PETERSON Department of Botany, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC 20013-7012, U.S.A. [email protected] RESUMEN Se presenta un estudio taxonómico de las especies colombianas del género Muhlenbergia. Se analizan diversos aspectos relativos a la clasificación, la nomenclatura y la variación morfológica de los caracteres. El género Muhlenbergia está representado en Colombia por 14 especies. Las especies Aegopogon bryophilus Döll, Aegopogon cenchroides Humb. & Bonpl. ex Willd., Lycurus phalaroides Kunth y Pereilema crinitum J. Presl se transfi eren al género Muhlenbergia. El binomio Muhlenbergia cleefi i Lægaard se reduce a la sinonimia de Muhlenbergia fastigiata (J. Presl) Henrard. Las especies Muhlenbergia beyrichiana Kunth, Muhlenbergia ciliata (Kunth) Trin. y Muhlenbergia nigra Hitchc. se excluyen de la fl ora de Colombia. Se presentan las claves para reconocer las especies presentes en Colombia, así como también las descripciones de éstas, sus sinónimos, la distribución geográfi ca, se comentan algunas observaciones morfológicas y ecológicas, los usos y los números cromosómicos. Del tratamiento taxonómico se excluyen las especies Muhlenbergia erectifolia SwallenSwallen [[== Ortachne erectifolia (Swallen)(Swallen) CClayton]layton] y Muhlenbergia wallisii Mez [= Agrostopoa wallisii (Mez) P. M. Peterson, Soreng & Davidse]. Palabras clave. Aegopogon, Lycurus, Muhlenbergia, Pereilema, Chloridoideae, Poaceae, Gramíneas neotropicales, Flora de Colombia.
    [Show full text]
  • Supporting Information
    Supporting Information Piperno et al. 10.1073/pnas.0812525106 SI Materials and Methods structures which are homologous to each other, have been shown Modern Reference Collections and Microfossil Identification. Our to be controlled primarily by tga1, a major domestication gene reference collections of phytoliths and starch grains include with significant effects (10, 17, 18). tga1 underwrites the degree more than 2,000 and about 500 species, respectively, and include of silicification of the glumes and rachids (cupules) of the many wild taxa of economic importance, most of the known fruitcases and cobs. In teosinte, the entire epidermis, consisting domesticated plants native to Central and South America, and of both the long and short cells, is silicified, whereas in maize wild progenitors and other close wild relatives of the crop plants. (which requires less natural protection from its herbivores), Investigating the history of maize and squash in the study region silicification is greatly reduced, and only the short epidermal was one of our priorities; therefore, our reference collections cells (which produce the phytoliths called rondels) are filled with include all known species and subspecies of teosinte; 24 maize silica. In addition, the rondels produced in teosinte are more races from Central and South America, including 10 traditional highly decorated than those in maize (a result also of more Mexican land races; and all domesticated and most known wild extensive lignification in teosinte), and the rondel phytoliths in species of Cucurbita, including all those found in Mesoamerica, maize cobs have a more diverse morphology and are in forms not such as C.
    [Show full text]
  • Spread of African Pasture Grasses to the American Tropics1
    Spread of African Pasture Grasses to the American Tropics Item Type text; Article Authors Parsons, J. J. Citation Parsons, J. J. (1972). Spread of African pasture grasses to the American tropics. Journal of Range Management, 25(1), 12-17. DOI 10.2307/3896654 Publisher Society for Range Management Journal Journal of Range Management Rights Copyright © Society for Range Management. Download date 03/10/2021 04:34:23 Item License http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ Version Final published version Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/647510 Spread of African Pasture Grasses variably they are more palatable to livestock than the native American to the American Tropics1 species, and more productive. Such adaptability to grazing clearly must JAMES J. PARSONS be related to their simultaneous evolutionary development with Professor of Geography, Department of Geography, University of California, Berkeley. grazing animals in their areas of origin during the late Pliocene and Pleistocene. Highlight the north coast of Colombia, on the There are no data on how much Andean spurs of eastern Venezuela, Most of the economically important of Tropical America today supports pasture grasses of the tropics have in the interior of Brazil, on the is- a grass cover. It is a patchwork originated in Africa. Introduced into lands of the Greater Antilles-today quilt. Excluding the Amazon basin, the New World, they have often be- one sees pasture lands stretching to come naturalized, spreading rapidly it must approach 40 per cent. What the horizon, interrupted only by and widely. Six species have been part of this surface supports natu- scattered palms, remnant woodlots, principally involved in this massive ralized African species is not known.
    [Show full text]
  • Identifying and Appreciating the Native and Naturalized Grasses of California
    IDENTIFYING AND APPRECIATING THE NATIVE AND NATURALIZED GRASSES OF CALIFORNIA Materials Selected and Presented by David Amme for class offered on May 8, 2003, Seaside, CA under the auspices of California Native Grass Association P.O Box 72405 • Davis, CA 95617 Voice: 530-759-8458 FAX 530-753-1553 Email: [email protected] Web: http://www.cnga.org Identifying and Appreciating the Native and Naturalized Grasses of California California Native Grass Association California Native Grass Association Identifying and Appreciating the Native and Naturalized Grasses of California WHAT IS A GRASS? KEY TO GRASSES, SEDGES AND RUSHES 1a Flowers with stiff, greenish or brownish, 6 parted perianth (calyx and corolla); stamens 6 or 3; fruit a many-seeded capsule; leaves usually wiry and round in cross section . RUSH FAMILY (Juncaceae) lb Flowers without evident calyx or corolla, gathered into short scaly clusters (spikelets); stamens 3; fruit with a single seed. 2 2a Leaves in 2 vertical rows or ranks; leaf sheaths usually split, with overlapping edges; stems usually round in cross section and hollow between the joints; each flower of the spikelet contained between 2 bracts, the lemma and the palea . GRASS FAMILY (Cramineae) 2b Leaves in 3 vertical rows or ranks; leaf sheaths tubular, not split; stems often triangular in cross section and solid between joints; each flower of the spikelet in the axil of a single bract, the glume . SEDGE FAMILY (Cyperaceae) From: HOW TO KNOW THE GRASSES by Richard W. Pohl; Wm. C. Brown Company Publishers; Dubuque, Iowa. Identifying
    [Show full text]
  • Checklist Das Spermatophyta Do Estado De São Paulo, Brasil
    Biota Neotrop., vol. 11(Supl.1) Checklist das Spermatophyta do Estado de São Paulo, Brasil Maria das Graças Lapa Wanderley1,10, George John Shepherd2, Suzana Ehlin Martins1, Tiago Egger Moellwald Duque Estrada3, Rebeca Politano Romanini1, Ingrid Koch4, José Rubens Pirani5, Therezinha Sant’Anna Melhem1, Ana Maria Giulietti Harley6, Luiza Sumiko Kinoshita2, Mara Angelina Galvão Magenta7, Hilda Maria Longhi Wagner8, Fábio de Barros9, Lúcia Garcez Lohmann5, Maria do Carmo Estanislau do Amaral2, Inês Cordeiro1, Sonia Aragaki1, Rosângela Simão Bianchini1 & Gerleni Lopes Esteves1 1Núcleo de Pesquisa Herbário do Estado, Instituto de Botânica, CP 68041, CEP 04045-972, São Paulo, SP, Brasil 2Departamento de Biologia Vegetal, Instituto de Biologia, Universidade Estadual de Campinas – UNICAMP, CP 6109, CEP 13083-970, Campinas, SP, Brasil 3Programa Biota/FAPESP, Departamento de Biologia Vegetal, Instituto de Biologia, Universidade Estadual de Campinas – UNICAMP, CP 6109, CEP 13083-970, Campinas, SP, Brasil 4Universidade Federal de São Carlos – UFSCar, Rod. João Leme dos Santos, Km 110, SP-264, Itinga, CEP 18052-780, Sorocaba, SP, Brasil 5Departamento de Botânica – IBUSP, Universidade de São Paulo – USP, Rua do Matão, 277, CEP 05508-090, Cidade Universitária, Butantã, São Paulo, SP, Brasil 6Departamento de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Estadual de Feira de Santana – UEFS, Av. Transnordestina, s/n, Novo Horizonte, CEP 44036-900, Feira de Santana, BA, Brasil 7Universidade Santa Cecília – UNISANTA, R. Dr. Oswaldo Cruz, 266, Boqueirão, CEP 11045-907,
    [Show full text]