• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Bulletin of the California Lichen Society Volume 2 No. 2 Winter 1995 The California Lichen Society seeks to promote the appreciation, conservation, and study of the lichens. The focus of the Society is on California, but its interests include the entire western part of the continent. Dues are $15 per year payable to The California Lichen Society, 1200 Brickyard Way, #302, Point Richmond, CA 94801 . Members receive the Bulletin and notices of meetings, field trips, and workshops. The Bulletin of the California Lichen Society is edited by Isabelle Tavares, Shirley Tucker, and Darrell Wright and is produced by Darrell Wright with help from Nancy Brewer. The Bulletin welcomes manuscripts on technical topics in lichenology relating to western North America and on conservation of the lichens, as well as news of lichenologists and their activities. The best way to submit manuscripts apart from short articles and announcements is on 1.2 or 1 .44 Mb diskette in Word Perfect 4.1, 4 .2 or 5.1 format; ASCII format is an alternative. A review process is followed, and typed manuscripts should be double-spaced and submitted as two copies. Figures are the usual line drawings and sharp black and white glossy photos, unmounted. Nomenclature follows Egan's Fifth Checklist and supplements (Egan 1987, 1989, 1990: this bibliography is in the article on the Sonoma-Mendocino County field trip, Bull. Cal. Lich . Soc. 1 (2):3). Style follows this issue. Reprints w ill be provided for a nominal charge. Address submittals and correspondence to The California Lichen Society, c/o Darrell Wright, 2337 Prince Street, Berkeley, CA 94705, 510-644-8220, voice and FAX; E-mail: [email protected] (new address as of this issue). Volume 2(2) of the Bulletin was issued December 30, 1995. Contributors were Isabelle Tavares, University Herbarium, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720; Richard Riefner, Jr., and Peter Bowler, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, Irvine CA, 92717; Bruce Ryan, Department of Botany, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287-1601 ; Shirley Tucker, Department of Biological Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 931 06-961 O; Charis Bratt, Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, 2559 Puesta del Sol Road, Santa Barbara, CA 93105; Mikki McGee, 200 Monterey Street, #11, Brisbane, CA 94005; Barbara Lechelt, 76 Angela Avenue, San Anselmo, CA 94960; and Janet Doell, CALS, 1200 Brickyard Way, #302, Pt. Richmond, CA 94801. Cover: A panel of Niebla species from Marin County (see diagram below). 1. N. ceruchoides Rundel & Bowler, det. P.W. Runde!, Angel Island, W.P. Jordan 998 (SFSU}. 1.5x. 2. N. robusta (R.H. Howe, Jr.) Runde! & Bowler, mouth of the Estero Americano, Wright 4699, 1.9x. 3. N. /aevigata Bowler & Rundel (form with "cauliflower" lobe tips, verified by P.A. Bowler), mouth of the Estero Americana, Wright 4701, 1 .6x. 4. N. cephalota (Tuck.) Rundel & Bowler, Little Mountain west of Novato, Wright 5069, 2x. 5. N. homalea (Ach.l Rundel & Bowler (stout form), Vincent Land ing, Tomales Bay, Wright 3308, 1 x. 6. N. homalea (slender form), Solinas Ridge N of Pt. Reyes Station, Wright 2467, 1 .3x. For N. ceruchoides and N. /aevigata, see P.A. Bowler and R.E. Riefner, Jr., Phytologia 77(1 ): 23-37, 1994; for N. cephalota and N. robusta, R.H. Howe, Jr., The Bryologist 16: 65-74, 1913; and P.W. Rundel and P.A. Bowler, Mycotaxon 6: 497-499, 1978. All Wright collections are in herb. Wright. Photography by R. Stewart and D. Wright . 1 2 3 4 5 6 Bulletin of the California Lichen Society Volume 2 No. 2 Winter 1995 The Lichen Herbarium, University Herbarium (UC), New and Interesting Records of Lichens from California University of California at Berkeley Richard E. Riefner, Jr., Peter A. Bowler, and Isabelle Tavares Bruce D. Ryan The UC lichen herbarium consists of about 18,000 Abstract: Twenty lichen species are reported from accessioned specimens and several thousand unaccess­ California for the first time. New information for 59 ioned specimens. It is housed in the University Herbari­ species considered rare, local, or which represent um (acronym is UC) on the first floor of the Valley Life noteworthy extensions of range, v s also presented. Sciences Building on the campus. Seven unidentified taxa are discussed. Early records indicate that the first lichens deposited in Tucker and Jordan (19791 published a catalog of 999 this herbarium were exchange specimens received in species, 4 subspecies, 57 varieties, and 42 forms of 1893 from Clara E. Cummings, Wellesley, Massachu­ lichens thought to occur in California. This was compiled setts. About this time Marshall A. Howe added a series by reviewing taxa reported in the literature. Since this of lichens from the upper Sacramento River area. Many checklist was published, a large number of additional lichens collected by W. A. Setchell were deposited in species have been described or reported from California the herbarium following an Alaskan expedition in 1899. in articles on taxonomy, nomenclature, and phytogeogra­ Prof. Setchell added his New England lichen collections phy, and in books and guides such as Hale and Cole to the herbarium in 1903. During the 1920s, lichens (1988). were collected for UC by Setchell and H. E. Parks in Tahiti and other South Pacific islands. Among the In comparison, the vascular flora includes more than exchanges received from European herbaria was a series 5,800 species, of which about 24% are endemic (Wilken of Brazilian lichens collected by G. Malme, received 1993). California lichens, however, exhibit a very low about 1935. In the 1940s, T. H. Goodspeed's expedi­ 1 % endemism rate in the foliose and fruticose forms as tions to the Andes began to accumulate lichens of discussed by Hale and Cole (1988). According to Wilken western South America for UC. As a result of various (1995), as much as 79.5% of the California Floristic exchanges, the lichen herbarium incorporated consider­ Province and 73% of the entire State remain poorly able material from northern and central Europe, as well inventoried. The recent description of numerous new as eastern North America, which has been useful for taxa in common and conspicuous lichen genera such as making comparisons with local taxa. Among the Califor­ Cladonia, Lecanora, Niebla, and Ramalina, and reports of nian collections are specimens collected by H. N. many lichens new to North America clearly indicate that Bolander, H. E. Hasse, A. W. C. T. Herre, and W. A. our knowledge of the lichen flora of California is even Weber. The lichen herbarium of T. Elliot Weier, recently weaker. Shevock and Taylor (1987) reported that the incorporated into UC, is rich in crustose specimens from overwhelming majority of vascular plant collections the Sierra Nevada. occurred adjacent to existing roads, with the more remote areas of California receiving only cursory atten­ Although there has always been some interest in tion. In this paper as well, most of the new records are lichens here, the only formal lichen class may have been made from surveys conducted along easily accessible a seminar course offered by Vernon Ahmadjian during highways in the coastal lowlands. Two forays into the his 1 966 visit to Berkeley. Shortly thereafter, Doris E. more remote areas of the southern Sierra Nevada by the Baltzo and I began the effort to acquire sufficient know­ senior author both yielded new State records! Our ledge to be able to annotate the collections and started ignorance of the relative abundance and distribution of the process of bringing the generic designations up-to­ many lichen species, both common and historically rare, date that has continued until the present time. Prior to has hindered conservation action, since dubious or poorly this time, the herbarium had relied heavily on many known taxa have a low priority, especially when resource lichenologists, such as E. Vainio, C. W. Dodge, A. W. C. management dollars are scarce. Carefully designed T. Herre, and W. A. Weber, for identifications. systematic and field studies are needed to adequately document the lichen flora of California if we hope to In keeping with the public service tradition of the protect one of California's most overlooked and diminish­ herbarium, we have provided lichen identifications and ing natural resources. information about lichens for students of various California colleges and universities, many organizations, All Riefner and Bowler collections are deposited in the and members of the general public. herbarium of the University of California, Irvine's Museum Riefner et al.: New and Interesting Records from California of Systematic Biology (IRVC) with duplicates cited (WIS); Avila Rd ., Riefner 87-21 (WIS). SANTA where appropriate, while all Ryan collections are deposit­ BARBARA CO .: on Ouercus along Constellation Rd ., ed in the herbarium of Arizona State University (ASU). Riefner 87-235 & 87-285 (WIS). TLC: atranorin and A few of the species reported as new State records are zeorin. Separated from H. erinacea (Ach.) Hale by being actually locally abundant or widespread in the State, but esorediate and from H. leucomelos (L.) Poelt (H. #leuco­ only a few representati_ve collections of the taxon are melaena #) by its smaller thallus which lacks salazinic acid cited for the purposes of this paper. Thin layer chromat­ (W.L. Culberson 1966). California H. galactophylla has ography (TLC) data may be included where secondary lobes that are generally narrower than in typical material product chemistry is diagnostic or when new informa­ from the SE U.S., and J.W. Thomson (pers. comm.) tion on the chemical content of a taxon is reported. believes this may turn out to be a new Cal ifornia endem­ ic. New State Records Leprocaulon subalbicans (Lamb) Lamb & Ward.

Load more

  20

Copy Link