DOCSLIB.ORG

Flora of New Zealand Mosses

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Flora of New Zealand Mosses FLORA OF NEW ZEALAND MOSSES BRACHYTHECIACEAE A.J. FIFE Fascicle 46 – JUNE 2020 © Landcare Research New Zealand Limited 2020. Unless indicated otherwise for specific items, this copyright work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence Attribution if redistributing to the public without adaptation: "Source: Manaaki Whenua – Landcare Research" Attribution if making an adaptation or derivative work: "Sourced from Manaaki Whenua – Landcare Research" See Image Information for copyright and licence details for images. CATALOGUING IN PUBLICATION Fife, Allan J. (Allan James), 1951- Flora of New Zealand : mosses. Fascicle 46, Brachytheciaceae / Allan J. Fife. -- Lincoln, N.Z. : Manaaki Whenua Press, 2020. 1 online resource ISBN 978-0-947525-65-1 (pdf) ISBN 978-0-478-34747-0 (set) 1. Mosses -- New Zealand -- Identification. I. Title. II. Manaaki Whenua-Landcare Research New Zealand Ltd. UDC 582.345.16(931) DC 588.20993 DOI: 10.7931/w15y-gz43 This work should be cited as: Fife, A.J. 2020: Brachytheciaceae. In: Smissen, R.; Wilton, A.D. Flora of New Zealand – Mosses. Fascicle 46. Manaaki Whenua Press, Lincoln. http://dx.doi.org/10.7931/w15y-gz43 Date submitted: 9 May 2019 ; Date accepted: 15 Aug 2019 Cover image: Eurhynchium asperipes, habit with capsule, moist. Drawn by Rebecca Wagstaff from A.J. Fife 6828, CHR 449024. Contents Introduction..............................................................................................................................................1 Typification...............................................................................................................................................1 Taxa Brachytheciaceae ............................................................................................................................. 2 Brachythecium Schimp. .....................................................................................................................4 Brachythecium albicans (Hedw.) Schimp. ......................................................................................... 6 Brachythecium campestre (Müll.Hal.) Schimp. ..................................................................................7 Brachythecium fontanum Fife ............................................................................................................9 Brachythecium paradoxum (Hook.f. & Wilson) A.Jaeger .................................................................. 9 Brachythecium plumosum (Hedw.) Schimp. .................................................................................... 11 Brachythecium rutabulum (Hedw.) Schimp. .................................................................................... 12 Brachythecium salebrosum (F.Weber & D.Mohr) Schimp. .............................................................. 13 Brachythecium velutinum (Hedw.) Schimp. ..................................................................................... 14 Eriodon Mont. .................................................................................................................................. 15 Eriodon cylindritheca (Dixon) Dixon & Sainsbury ............................................................................ 16 Eurhynchium Schimp. ......................................................................................................................17 Eurhynchium asperipes (Mitt.) Dixon ...............................................................................................19 Eurhynchium praelongum (Hedw.) Schimp. .................................................................................... 20 Eurhynchium pulchellum (Hedw.) Jenn. .......................................................................................... 21 Eurhynchium speciosum (Brid.) Jur. ................................................................................................22 Palamocladium Müll.Hal. ................................................................................................................. 23 Palamocladium leskeoides (Hook.) E.Britton .................................................................................. 24 Platyhypnidium M.Fleisch. ...............................................................................................................25 Platyhypnidium austrinum (Hook.f. & Wilson) M.Fleisch. ................................................................ 26 Pseudoscleropodium (Limpr.) M.Fleisch. ........................................................................................ 27 Pseudoscleropodium purum (Hedw.) M.Fleisch. ............................................................................. 27 Rhynchostegium Schimp. ................................................................................................................29 Rhynchostegium laxatum (Mitt.) Paris .............................................................................................30 Rhynchostegium muriculatum (Hook.f. & Wilson) Reichardt ...........................................................32 Rhynchostegium tenuifolium (Hedw.) Reichardt ..............................................................................33 Scleropodium Schimp. .....................................................................................................................34 Scleropodium touretii (Brid.) L.F.Koch ............................................................................................. 35 Scorpiurium Schimp. ....................................................................................................................... 36 Scorpiurium cucullatum (Mitt.) Hedenäs ..........................................................................................36 References ........................................................................................................................................... 38 Conventions ..........................................................................................................................................42 Acknowledgements ...............................................................................................................................44 Plates ....................................................................................................................................................45 Maps .....................................................................................................................................................61 Index .....................................................................................................................................................63 Image Information .................................................................................................................................64 Introduction The Brachytheciaceae are a large family of pleurocarps with a cosmopolitan distribution. Nine genera and 21 species are recognised in New Zealand, although several of the species and at least two of the genera are clearly adventive here. The Brachytheciaceae are placed in the order Hypnobryales (or Hypnales) in all influential 20th century classifications, but there is little consensus concerning the limits of many genera or, indeed, of the family itself. Consequently, both the family and the generic concepts presented here are traditional, and largely conform to concepts employed in recent Australian treatments. The family representatives are predominantly terrestrial, often robust plants with leaves that have a strong, single costa, and mostly elongate smooth laminal cells. The capsules of the core genus, Brachythecium, are relatively stout, asymmetric, and mostly darkly coloured, with thick-walled exothecial cells, darkly coloured double peristomes, and mostly bluntly conic opercula. Scabrose setae occur in many species of Brachythecium and elsewhere in the family. Many of the genera placed in the family show these sporophytic features, but in others the capsules can be more elongate, the peristomes reduced in complexity, and opercula variable in form. Many taxa exhibit a marked dimorphy between the stem and branch leaves, and this feature is useful in their identification. While some members are specific in their habitat requirements, many are “weedy” and catholic in this respect. Brachythecium, with several regionally weedy species, is sometimes considered to be among the most difficult of all moss genera to confidently identify, particularly when sporophytes are absent. Not all Brachythecium material can be adequately named regionally, and Rhynchostegium, while a smaller genus, poses comparable identification difficulties. Typification The following typification is designated in accordance with the International Code of Nomenclature for Plants, Algae and Fungi. Hypnum huttonii Hampe ex Beckett, Trans. & Proc. New Zealand Inst. 25: 300 (1893). Lectotype (designated here): N.Z., Westland, Greymouth, W.J. Gulliver s.n., CHR 585861! 1 Brachytheciaceae Plants delicate to robust, forming loose wefts, compact mats, or erect turves, terrestrial, epiphytic, or epilithic. Stems creeping or ascending, loosely and irregularly to densely and pinnately branched, mostly with a central strand, the branches straight or sometimes curved. Leaves mostly crowded in several rows, occasionally complanate, those of stems and branches differentiated or not, mostly erect-spreading, less often imbricate or wide-spreading, occasionally secund, ovate to lanceolate and mostly acuminate, rarely
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Revision of Schoenobryum (Cryphaeaceae, Bryopsida) in Africa1
    Revision of Schoenobryum 147 Tropical Bryology 24: 147-159, 2003 A revision of Schoenobryum (Cryphaeaceae, Bryopsida) in Africa1 Brian J. O’Shea 141 Fawnbrake Avenue, London SE24 0BG, U.K. Abstract. The nine species and two varieties of Schoenobryum reported for Africa were investigated, and no characters were found that uniquely identified any of the taxa to be other than the pantropical Schoenobryum concavifolium. The following nine names become new synonyms of S. concavifolium: Cryphaea madagassa, C. subintegra, Acrocryphaea robusta, A. latifolia, A. subrobusta, A. tisserantii, A. latifolia var. microspora, A. plicatula and A. subintegra var. idanreense; a lectotype is selected for Acrocryphaea latifolia var. microspora P.de la Varde. INTRODUCTION as the majority have not been examined since the type description, and many have never been A recent checklist of Sub-Saharan Africa illustrated. (O’Shea, 1999) included nine species and two varieties of Schoenobryum, most of quite limited The purpose of this paper is to provide an distribution. Recent collecting in both Malawi overview of the genus worldwide, and to review (O’Shea et al., 2001) and Uganda (Wigginton et the taxonomic position of the African taxa. al., 2001) has shown the genus to be not uncommon, although there was only one CRYPHAEACEAE SCHIMP. 1856. previously published collection from the two countries (O’Shea, 1993). Apart from one Cryphaeaceae Schimp., Coroll. Bryol. Eur. 97. African taxon occurring in nine countries, the 1856 [‘1855’]. Type: Cryphaea D.Mohr in other 10 occurred in an average of 1.7 countries. F.Weber This particular profile is typical of unrevised genera in Africa, and indicative of a possible A brief review of the circumscription and need for revision (O’Shea, 1997), particularly systematics of the family, and the distinctions from related families (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Fossil Mosses: What Do They Tell Us About Moss Evolution?
    Bry. Div. Evo. 043 (1): 072–097 ISSN 2381-9677 (print edition) DIVERSITY & https://www.mapress.com/j/bde BRYOPHYTEEVOLUTION Copyright © 2021 Magnolia Press Article ISSN 2381-9685 (online edition) https://doi.org/10.11646/bde.43.1.7 Fossil mosses: What do they tell us about moss evolution? MicHAEL S. IGNATOV1,2 & ELENA V. MASLOVA3 1 Tsitsin Main Botanical Garden of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia 2 Faculty of Biology, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia 3 Belgorod State University, Pobedy Square, 85, Belgorod, 308015 Russia �[email protected], https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1520-042X * author for correspondence: �[email protected], https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6096-6315 Abstract The moss fossil records from the Paleozoic age to the Eocene epoch are reviewed and their putative relationships to extant moss groups discussed. The incomplete preservation and lack of key characters that could define the position of an ancient moss in modern classification remain the problem. Carboniferous records are still impossible to refer to any of the modern moss taxa. Numerous Permian protosphagnalean mosses possess traits that are absent in any extant group and they are therefore treated here as an extinct lineage, whose descendants, if any remain, cannot be recognized among contemporary taxa. Non-protosphagnalean Permian mosses were also fairly diverse, representing morphotypes comparable with Dicranidae and acrocarpous Bryidae, although unequivocal representatives of these subclasses are known only since Cretaceous and Jurassic. Even though Sphagnales is one of two oldest lineages separated from the main trunk of moss phylogenetic tree, it appears in fossil state regularly only since Late Cretaceous, ca.
    [Show full text]
  • Nzbotsoc No 107 March 2012
    NEW ZEALAND BOTANICAL SOCIETY NEWSLETTER NUMBER 107 March 2012 New Zealand Botanical Society President: Anthony Wright Secretary/Treasurer: Ewen Cameron Committee: Bruce Clarkson, Colin Webb, Carol West Address: c/- Canterbury Museum Rolleston Avenue CHRISTCHURCH 8013 Subscriptions The 2012 ordinary and institutional subscriptions are $25 (reduced to $18 if paid by the due date on the subscription invoice). The 2012 student subscription, available to full-time students, is $12 (reduced to $9 if paid by the due date on the subscription invoice). Back issues of the Newsletter are available at $7.00 each. Since 1986 the Newsletter has appeared quarterly in March, June, September and December. New subscriptions are always welcome and these, together with back issue orders, should be sent to the Secretary/Treasurer (address above). Subscriptions are due by 28 February each year for that calendar year. Existing subscribers are sent an invoice with the December Newsletter for the next years subscription which offers a reduction if this is paid by the due date. If you are in arrears with your subscription a reminder notice comes attached to each issue of the Newsletter. Deadline for next issue The deadline for the June 2012 issue is 25 May 2012. Please post contributions to: Lara Shepherd Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa P.O. Box 467 Wellington Send email contributions to [email protected]. Files are preferably in MS Word, as an open text document (Open Office document with suffix “.odt”) or saved as RTF or ASCII. Macintosh files can also be accepted. Graphics can be sent as TIF JPG, or BMP files; please do not embed images into documents.
    [Show full text]
  • Plant Life Magill’S Encyclopedia of Science
    MAGILLS ENCYCLOPEDIA OF SCIENCE PLANT LIFE MAGILLS ENCYCLOPEDIA OF SCIENCE PLANT LIFE Volume 4 Sustainable Forestry–Zygomycetes Indexes Editor Bryan D. Ness, Ph.D. Pacific Union College, Department of Biology Project Editor Christina J. Moose Salem Press, Inc. Pasadena, California Hackensack, New Jersey Editor in Chief: Dawn P. Dawson Managing Editor: Christina J. Moose Photograph Editor: Philip Bader Manuscript Editor: Elizabeth Ferry Slocum Production Editor: Joyce I. Buchea Assistant Editor: Andrea E. Miller Page Design and Graphics: James Hutson Research Supervisor: Jeffry Jensen Layout: William Zimmerman Acquisitions Editor: Mark Rehn Illustrator: Kimberly L. Dawson Kurnizki Copyright © 2003, by Salem Press, Inc. All rights in this book are reserved. No part of this work may be used or reproduced in any manner what- soever or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy,recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without written permission from the copyright owner except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews. For information address the publisher, Salem Press, Inc., P.O. Box 50062, Pasadena, California 91115. Some of the updated and revised essays in this work originally appeared in Magill’s Survey of Science: Life Science (1991), Magill’s Survey of Science: Life Science, Supplement (1998), Natural Resources (1998), Encyclopedia of Genetics (1999), Encyclopedia of Environmental Issues (2000), World Geography (2001), and Earth Science (2001). ∞ The paper used in these volumes conforms to the American National Standard for Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, Z39.48-1992 (R1997). Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Magill’s encyclopedia of science : plant life / edited by Bryan D.
    [Show full text]
  • Molecular Phylogeny of Chinese Thuidiaceae with Emphasis on Thuidium and Pelekium
    Molecular Phylogeny of Chinese Thuidiaceae with emphasis on Thuidium and Pelekium QI-YING, CAI1, 2, BI-CAI, GUAN2, GANG, GE2, YAN-MING, FANG 1 1 College of Biology and the Environment, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China. 2 College of Life Science, Nanchang University, 330031 Nanchang, China. E-mail: [email protected] Abstract We present molecular phylogenetic investigation of Thuidiaceae, especially on Thudium and Pelekium. Three chloroplast sequences (trnL-F, rps4, and atpB-rbcL) and one nuclear sequence (ITS) were analyzed. Data partitions were analyzed separately and in combination by employing MP (maximum parsimony) and Bayesian methods. The influence of data conflict in combined analyses was further explored by two methods: the incongruence length difference (ILD) test and the partition addition bootstrap alteration approach (PABA). Based on the results, ITS 1& 2 had crucial effect in phylogenetic reconstruction in this study, and more chloroplast sequences should be combinated into the analyses since their stability for reconstructing within genus of pleurocarpous mosses. We supported that Helodiaceae including Actinothuidium, Bryochenea, and Helodium still attributed to Thuidiaceae, and the monophyletic Thuidiaceae s. lat. should also include several genera (or species) from Leskeaceae such as Haplocladium and Leskea. In the Thuidiaceae, Thuidium and Pelekium were resolved as two monophyletic groups separately. The results from molecular phylogeny were supported by the crucial morphological characters in Thuidiaceae s. lat., Thuidium and Pelekium. Key words: Thuidiaceae, Thuidium, Pelekium, molecular phylogeny, cpDNA, ITS, PABA approach Introduction Pleurocarpous mosses consist of around 5000 species that are defined by the presence of lateral perichaetia along the gametophyte stems. Monophyletic pleurocarpous mosses were resolved as three orders: Ptychomniales, Hypnales, and Hookeriales (Shaw et al.
    [Show full text]
  • About the Book the Format Acknowledgments
    About the Book For more than ten years I have been working on a book on bryophyte ecology and was joined by Heinjo During, who has been very helpful in critiquing multiple versions of the chapters. But as the book progressed, the field of bryophyte ecology progressed faster. No chapter ever seemed to stay finished, hence the decision to publish online. Furthermore, rather than being a textbook, it is evolving into an encyclopedia that would be at least three volumes. Having reached the age when I could retire whenever I wanted to, I no longer needed be so concerned with the publish or perish paradigm. In keeping with the sharing nature of bryologists, and the need to educate the non-bryologists about the nature and role of bryophytes in the ecosystem, it seemed my personal goals could best be accomplished by publishing online. This has several advantages for me. I can choose the format I want, I can include lots of color images, and I can post chapters or parts of chapters as I complete them and update later if I find it important. Throughout the book I have posed questions. I have even attempt to offer hypotheses for many of these. It is my hope that these questions and hypotheses will inspire students of all ages to attempt to answer these. Some are simple and could even be done by elementary school children. Others are suitable for undergraduate projects. And some will take lifelong work or a large team of researchers around the world. Have fun with them! The Format The decision to publish Bryophyte Ecology as an ebook occurred after I had a publisher, and I am sure I have not thought of all the complexities of publishing as I complete things, rather than in the order of the planned organization.
    [Show full text]
  • Hypnaceaeandpossiblyrelatedfn
    Hikobial3：645-665.2002 Molecularphylo窪enyOfhypnobrJ/aleanmOssesasin化rredfroma lar淫e-scaledatasetofchlOroplastlｂｃＬ，withspecialre他rencetothe HypnaceaeandpOssiblyrelatedfnmilies1 HIRoMITsuBoTA，ＴｏＭｏＴｓｕＧｕＡＲＩＫＡｗＡ，ＨＩＲｏＹｕＫＩＡＫＩＹＡＭＡ，ＥＦＲＡＩＮＤＥＬｕＮＡ，DoLoREs GoNzALEz,MASANoBuHIGucHIANDHIRoNoRIDEGucHI TsuBoTA,Ｈ､,ARIKAwA,Ｔ,AKIYAMA,Ｈ,,ＤＥＬｕＮＡ,Ｅ,GoNzALEz,，.,HIGucHI,Ｍ ４ ＆DEGucHI，Ｈ、2002.Ｍolecularphylogenyofhypnobryaleanmossesasinferred fiPomalarge-scaledatasetofchloroplastr6cL,ｗｉｔｈspecialreferencetotheHypnaceae andpossiblyrelatedfamiliesl3:645-665． ▲ Phylogeneticrelationshipswithinthehypnobryaleanmosses(ｉｅ,theHypnales,Leuco- dontales,andHookeriales）havebeenthefbcusofmuchattentioninrecentyears Herewepresentphylogeneticinfierencesonthislargeclade，andespeciallyonthe Hypnaceaeandpossiblyrelatedftlmilies，basedonmaximumlikelihoodanalysisof l81r6cLsequences、Oursmdycorroboratesthat（１）theHypnales(ｓｓｔｒ.[＝sensu Vittl984])andLeucodontalesareeachnotmonophyleticentities、TheHypnalesand LeucodontalestogethercompriseawellsupportedsistercladetotheHookeriales;(2) theSematophyllaceae(s」at［＝sensuTsubotaetaL2000,2001a,ｂ])andPlagiothecia‐ ceae(s・str.［＝sensupresentDareeachresolvedasmonophyleticgroups,whileno particularcladeaccommodatesallmembersoftheHypnaceaeandCryphaeaceae;ａｎｄ (3)theHypnaceaeaswellasitstypegenusﾉﾘDlwz"川tselfwerepolyphyletioThese resultsdonotconcurwiththesystemsofVitt(1984)andBuckandVitt(1986),who suggestedthatthegroupswithasinglecostawouldhavedivergedfiFomthehypnalean ancestoratanearlyevolutionarystage，fbllowedbythegroupswithadoublecosta (seealsoTsubotaetall999;Bucketal2000）OurresultsfiPomlikelihoodanalyses
    [Show full text]
  • Neckera Inopinata (Neckeraceae, Bryophyta), a New Species from Hunan and Zhejiang, China
    Polish Botanical Journal 57(1): 63–68, 2012 NECKERA INOPINATA (NECKERACEAE, BRYOPHYTA), A NEW SPECIES FROM HUNAN AND ZHEJIANG, CHINA JOHANNES ENROTH Abstract. Neckera inopinata Enroth (Neckeraceae) is described as a new species from Hunan Province and Zhejiang Province, China. It can be distinguished by the following suite of characters: plants of relatively small stature; leaves variably undulate, shortly decurrent, ovate-lingulate to ovate; costa reaching to midleaf or above; leaf margins very sharply serrulate; and upper laminal cells solid-walled. An identifi cation key to the species of Neckera s.l. in China is provided. Key words: moss fl ora of China, new species, taxonomy, morphology Johannes Enroth, Department of Biosciences and Botanical Museum, P.O. Box 7, FI-00014 University of Helsinki, Finland; e-mail: johannes.enroth@helsinki.fi INTRODUCTION As a result of recent phylogenetic analyses based 2011). Those changes were not included in the on several genomic regions (Olsson et al. 2009a, most recently published treatment of the Chinese b, 2010, 2011), the taxonomy and systematics of Neckera by Wu (2011), who recognized a total the moss family Neckeraceae have undergone of 17 species, neglecting some recently described profound modifi cations at all taxonomic levels. ones (Ji & Miao 2009; Enroth & Ji 2010), as well The family circumscription and generic con- as some that were recently reported for the fi rst tent have changed, and some of the traditional time for China (Ji & Enroth 2010). Wu (2011) genera have been split into smaller genera. One did not treat N. complanata at all, although it has of those traditional (and heterogeneous) group- been reported from Shaanxi Province and Shanxi ings is Neckera Hedw., which was divided into Province (cf.
    [Show full text]
  • Patterns of Flammability Across the Vascular Plant Phylogeny, with Special Emphasis on the Genus Dracophyllum
    Lincoln University Digital Thesis Copyright Statement The digital copy of this thesis is protected by the Copyright Act 1994 (New Zealand). This thesis may be consulted by you, provided you comply with the provisions of the Act and the following conditions of use: you will use the copy only for the purposes of research or private study you will recognise the author's right to be identified as the author of the thesis and due acknowledgement will be made to the author where appropriate you will obtain the author's permission before publishing any material from the thesis. Patterns of flammability across the vascular plant phylogeny, with special emphasis on the genus Dracophyllum A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of philosophy at Lincoln University by Xinglei Cui Lincoln University 2020 Abstract of a thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of philosophy. Abstract Patterns of flammability across the vascular plant phylogeny, with special emphasis on the genus Dracophyllum by Xinglei Cui Fire has been part of the environment for the entire history of terrestrial plants and is a common disturbance agent in many ecosystems across the world. Fire has a significant role in influencing the structure, pattern and function of many ecosystems. Plant flammability, which is the ability of a plant to burn and sustain a flame, is an important driver of fire in terrestrial ecosystems and thus has a fundamental role in ecosystem dynamics and species evolution. However, the factors that have influenced the evolution of flammability remain unclear.
    [Show full text]
  • An Annotated Checklist of Tasmanian Mosses
    15 AN ANNOTATED CHECKLIST OF TASMANIAN MOSSES by P.I Dalton, R.D. Seppelt and A.M. Buchanan An annotated checklist of the Tasmanian mosses is presented to clarify the occurrence of taxa within the state. Some recently collected species, for which there are no published records, have been included. Doubtful records and excluded speciei. are listed separately. The Tasmanian moss flora as recognised here includes 361 species. Key Words: mosses, Tasmania. In BANKS, M.R. et al. (Eds), 1991 (3l:iii): ASPECTS OF TASMANIAN BOTANY -- A TR1BUn TO WINIFRED CURTIS. Roy. Soc. Tasm. Hobart: 15-32. INTRODUCTION in recent years previously unrecorded species have been found as well as several new taxa described. Tasmanian mosses received considerable attention We have assigned genera to families followi ng Crosby during the early botanical exploration of the antipodes. & Magill (1981 ), except where otherwise indicated in One of the earliest accounts was given by Wilson (1859), the case of more recent publications. The arrangement who provided a series of descriptions of the then-known of families, genera and species is in alphabetic order for species, accompanied by coloured illustrations, as ease of access. Taxa known to occur in Taslnania ami Part III of J.D. Hooker's Botany of the Antarctic its neighbouring islands only are listed; those for Voyage. Although there have been a number of papers subantarctic Macquarie Island (politically part of since that time, two significant compilations were Tasmania) are not treated and have been presented published about the tum of the century. The first was by elsewhere (Seppelt 1981).
    [Show full text]
  • Flora Mediterranea 26
    FLORA MEDITERRANEA 26 Published under the auspices of OPTIMA by the Herbarium Mediterraneum Panormitanum Palermo – 2016 FLORA MEDITERRANEA Edited on behalf of the International Foundation pro Herbario Mediterraneo by Francesco M. Raimondo, Werner Greuter & Gianniantonio Domina Editorial board G. Domina (Palermo), F. Garbari (Pisa), W. Greuter (Berlin), S. L. Jury (Reading), G. Kamari (Patras), P. Mazzola (Palermo), S. Pignatti (Roma), F. M. Raimondo (Palermo), C. Salmeri (Palermo), B. Valdés (Sevilla), G. Venturella (Palermo). Advisory Committee P. V. Arrigoni (Firenze) P. Küpfer (Neuchatel) H. M. Burdet (Genève) J. Mathez (Montpellier) A. Carapezza (Palermo) G. Moggi (Firenze) C. D. K. Cook (Zurich) E. Nardi (Firenze) R. Courtecuisse (Lille) P. L. Nimis (Trieste) V. Demoulin (Liège) D. Phitos (Patras) F. Ehrendorfer (Wien) L. Poldini (Trieste) M. Erben (Munchen) R. M. Ros Espín (Murcia) G. Giaccone (Catania) A. Strid (Copenhagen) V. H. Heywood (Reading) B. Zimmer (Berlin) Editorial Office Editorial assistance: A. M. Mannino Editorial secretariat: V. Spadaro & P. Campisi Layout & Tecnical editing: E. Di Gristina & F. La Sorte Design: V. Magro & L. C. Raimondo Redazione di "Flora Mediterranea" Herbarium Mediterraneum Panormitanum, Università di Palermo Via Lincoln, 2 I-90133 Palermo, Italy [email protected] Printed by Luxograph s.r.l., Piazza Bartolomeo da Messina, 2/E - Palermo Registration at Tribunale di Palermo, no. 27 of 12 July 1991 ISSN: 1120-4052 printed, 2240-4538 online DOI: 10.7320/FlMedit26.001 Copyright © by International Foundation pro Herbario Mediterraneo, Palermo Contents V. Hugonnot & L. Chavoutier: A modern record of one of the rarest European mosses, Ptychomitrium incurvum (Ptychomitriaceae), in Eastern Pyrenees, France . 5 P. Chène, M.
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogeny of Neckeropsis and Himantocladium (Neckeraceae, Bryophytina)
    Bry. Div. Evo. 38 (2): 053–070 ISSN 2381-9677 (print edition) DIVERSITY & http://www.mapress.com/j/bde BRYOPHYTE EVOLUTION Copyright © 2016 Magnolia Press Article ISSN 2381-9685 (online edition) http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/bde.38.2.4 Phylogeny of Neckeropsis and Himantocladium (Neckeraceae, Bryophytina) SANNA OLSSON1,2*, JOHANNES ENROTH3*, SANNA HUTTUNEN4 & DIETMAR QUANDT5 1Department of Agricultural Sciences, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 27, FI-00014 Helsinki, Finland 2INIA Forest Research Centre (INIA-CIFOR), Dept. Forest Ecology and Genetics, Carretera de A Coruña km 7.5, E-28040 Madrid, Spain 3Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences and Botanical Museum, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 7, FI-00014 Helsinki, Finland 4Department of Biology, FI-20014 University of Turku, Finland 5Nees-Institute for Biodiversity of Plants, University of Bonn, Meckenheimer Allee 170, 53115 Bonn, Germany *Corresponding author: Sanna Olsson, e-mail: [email protected], tel.: +34634509635 or Johannes Enroth, e-mail: Johannes. [email protected], tel.:+3580294157792 Abstract Two closely related tropical genera from the pleurocarpous moss family Neckeraceae are revised: the second largest genus in the family, Neckeropsis, currently with 29 species, and Himantocladium, comprising six species. Twenty-one species of Neckeropsis and five of Himantocladium were included in this study, which is based on phylogenetic analyses using sequence level data from the plastid (rps4)-trnT-trnL-trnF cluster and rpl16 as well as nuclear ITS1 & 2. Neckeropsis ap- peared as polyphyletic. Neckeropsis s. str. comprises 12 species and a further four species, not included in the analysis, are tentatively retained in the genus based on morphology.
    [Show full text]