DOCSLIB.ORG

Chinquapin the Newsletter of the Southern Appalachian Botanical Society

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Chinquapin the Newsletter of the Southern Appalachian Botanical Society chinquapin The Newsletter of the Southern Appalachian Botanical Society Volume 16, No. 4 Winter 2008 Happy Holidays from SABS Red spruce “hunkering down” for winter in the Great Smoky Mountains Photo by Scott Ranger 2 Chinquapin 16 (4) The Newsletter of the Southern Appalachian Botanical Society SABS Officers & Editors Conley K. McMullen, President Department of Biology, MSC 7801 Field Notes by Scott Ranger James Madison University Harrisonburg, VA 22807 3) Do weather conditions control flowering? (540) 568-3805 · fax (540) 568-3333 Three-birds Orchid Update I made a careful comparison of weather [email protected] conditions in 2007 (very hot with 14 days Howard S. Neufeld, Past President With another season of observing this > 90°F and 5 >100°F and dry with ~20% of Department of Biology ephemeral orchid at Pickett’s Mill Battlefield normal rainfall) and 2008 (nearly normal). 572 Rivers Street State Historic Site, I’ve come up with some The same flowering pattern occurred both Appalachian State University observations and questions. The photograph years. It seems weather, at least in these two Boone, NC 28608 below is illustrative for both. If anyone has years, didn’t have an effect on flowering. We (828) 262-2683 · fax (828) 262-2127 any answers, I’d love to hear them. counted a total of 460 stems in 2008, up [email protected] 61.5% from 2007. Weather probably had Charles N. Horn, Treasurer Observations: something to do with this. Biology Department • Even the smallest stems (>2 mm diameter 2100 College Street and >3 cm tall) have at least one well- 4) Is synchronicity overemphasized? I think Newberry College developed flower bud. it is. Most of the literature implies that the Newberry, SC 29108 • All the flowering and fruiting stems are flowers, sometime over a wide geographic (803) 321-5257 · fax (803) 321-5636 [email protected] subhorizontal on my many visits over the range, all flower at the same time. I interpret flowering period of two weeks. this as over a matter of hours and not days. Michael Held, Membership Secretary • The topmost buds are not open or are just Clearly the flowers at this single site did not Department of Biology barely open showing only a small part of a all open at the same time. Some don’t seem to Saint Peter’s College perianth during the entire flowering period. open at all! Many species flowers open over Jersey City, NJ 07306 • Only the bottom flowers have well-devel- a period of days, a common phenology not (201) 761-6439 [email protected] oped and expanding pistils. unique to three birds. • The uppermost pistils are small and with Ruth Douglas, Recording Secretary the perianth still showing white at the end 5) What myco-heterotrophy is going on? 108 Wildflower Drive of the flowering period. On my last day at the site I take Matt Rich- Charlottesville, VA 22911 • Expanding pistils and withering perianth ards of the Atlanta Botanical Garden with (434) 293-6538 of lower flowers are common before peak me. He plans to do some fungus trapping [email protected] flowering. during the late fruiting period and perhaps George Johnson, Editor-in-Chief of • Virtually every stem is a part of a small will find some answers. Is there a connection Castanea community of stems, almost none are with the grapefern? Department of Biological Sciences solitary. Arkansas Tech University • Nearly every clump includes at least one Russellville, AR 72801 Southern grapefern (Sceptridium biter- (479) 968-0312 ) within inches of it. [email protected] natum • Few insects are observed in the area. Audrey Mellichamp, Managing Editor • I discern no scent from these flowers. of Castanea 3036 Ventosa Drive Questions: Charlotte, NC 28205 [email protected] 1) Does this species self-pollinate? Scott Ranger, Editor of Chinquapin The evidence here seems to indicate that yes, 1963 Ferry Drive NE it does. What else could explain the develop- Marietta, GA 30066 ment of fruits when the flowers have not yet (770) 429-1836 · cell (404) 210-3088 opened? The only insects are pesky mosqui- [email protected] toes that pay now attention to these flowers. I was not at the site in twilight or nighttime to observe any insects at that time. 2) Do all the flowers even open? A week after the photograph on the right was taken, the topmost buds were no larger and the perianth was withered. At least on this individual—and many others like it on this site—they never opened. The Newsletter of the Southern Appalachian Botanical Society Chinquapin 16 (4) 3 Botanical Excursionsby George Ellison form of resinous chemicals. Conical shapes minimize buildups of Hunkering Down in Winter snow or ice. It’s mid-December 2008 as I write this. This past weekend my wife, Elizabeth, and I spent most of our time in our cabin on the North Other evergreens have developed thick leaves with waxy coats to cut Carolina side of the Smokies, feeding wood into the two woodstoves down on evaporation. These tend to be shrubby or ground hugging. In in our living and kitchen areas. Out the back windows, we could see order to avoid having their leaf cells ruptured by frost, water is chan- birds foraging around the feeders. Through the front windows, across neled to spaces between the cells where expansion does less damage. the little creek that flows through our property, rhododendrons And finally, the sugar content of the cells is increased to lower their drooped their leaves like forlorn sheep, indicating beyond all doubt freezing points. that the first really cold snap of the winter was upon us. Individual evergreen species often have their own distinctive over- Animals make it through the cold by generating warmth from food, wintering devices. Everyone has observed how rhododendron leaves movement, shelter, or contrived means like fire. Plants, on the other curl and droop in extreme cold. Drooping (a dormant posture also hand, have devised a series of ingenious devices that allow them to assumed during periods of drought) lessens exposure to wind, while survive in potentially lethal curling temporarily shields conditions. and closes off air-circula- tion pores (stomata) on the All plants in upland or undersides of the leaves. northern environments face the double-edged dilemma of low In Life in the Cold: An temperature stress and lack of Introduction to Winter moisture in winter. Most opt Ecology (Hanover NH: to lay low: annuals survive as University Press of New over-wintering seeds; bien- England, 1987), Peter nials produce low-growing, J. Marchand provides first-year plants protected by interesting informa- leaf litter or a blanket of snow; tion on this topic. I was herbaceous perennials die back especially interested in the completely and over-winter as tables Marchand presents dormant corms or regenerative that provide the freezing root stock; and broadleaved (“killing temperature”) deciduous trees, shrubs, and for various tree species. various vines shed their leaves He makes the point that and assume other protective most species have adapted measures. Come spring, these to the cold by adjusting plants really have to hustle to their freezing tolerance so do their thing and produce seed that it closely matches the or fruit during the growing minimum temperature at season. their northern range limit. Evergreens have “chosen” the other fork in the evolutionary path. For instance, live oak, a southern tree of the Gulf Coast and lower They tough winter out with their foliage intact so as to obtain a Atlantic coastal plain will tolerate temperatures down to 15 or so head start when the growing season arrives. For this group of plants, degrees Fahrenheit. Eastern redbud, a tree that ranges northward photosynthesis can continue longer in the fall and begin earlier in the from the southern states to the Great Lakes, dies when subjected to coming year; indeed, keeping their leaves (or needles) actually helps temperatures approaching minus 31 degrees. these plants survive since they can use them in photosynthesis on mild winter days. Come spring, energy that would otherwise be channeled Other deciduous trees that range into the higher elevations here in the into producing leaves is saved for direct reproductive efforts. Smokies like northern red oak and yellow birch withstand tempera- tures in the minus 35-49 degree range. Red spruce and Fraser fir, trees Additional strategies allow evergreens to weather the drying winds that grow in our highest elevations above 6,000 feet, could make it in and freezing temperatures of winter. Conifers have needlelike leaves temperatures below minus 80 degrees. that expose less surface to cold drying winds than broader leaves. Their needles, stems, and roots are filled with “botanical antifreeze” in the continues on page 8 4 Chinquapin 16 (4) The Newsletter of the Southern Appalachian Botanical Society proven worthy of taxonomic recognition. As seen in the examples Taxonomic Advisory! below, many of these decisions have important implications for our by Alan Weakley conservation and for our understanding of the evolution and biogeog- raphy of the eastern North American flora. Small’s small species, or there and Solidago pulchra (Beautiful Goldenrod; Asteraceae) back again. In his 1933 Manual, Small named Solidago pulchra, a species endemic As mentioned in earlier columns, John Kunkel Small was a prolific to wet pine savannas of eastern North Carolina. The species was (some would say profligate!) namer of new species in the Southeastern collected very few times in the next three decades, and Radford, Ahles, United States flora, from the 1890s to the 1930s. An index of his & Bell (1968) and Godfrey & Wooten (1981) synonymized it under taxonomic activity is The International Plant Names Index (2008): S.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Central Appalachian Broadleaf Forest Coniferous Forest Meadow Province
    Selecting Plants for Pollinators A Regional Guide for Farmers, Land Managers, and Gardeners In the Central Appalachian Broadleaf Forest Coniferous Forest Meadow Province Including the states of: Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia And parts of: Georgia, Kentucky, and North Carolina, NAPPC South Carolina, Tennessee Table of CONTENTS Why Support Pollinators? 4 Getting Started 5 Central Appalachian Broadleaf Forest 6 Meet the Pollinators 8 Plant Traits 10 Developing Plantings 12 Far ms 13 Public Lands 14 Home Landscapes 15 Bloom Periods 16 Plants That Attract Pollinators 18 Habitat Hints 20 This is one of several guides for Check list 22 different regions in the United States. We welcome your feedback to assist us in making the future Resources and Feedback 23 guides useful. Please contact us at [email protected] Cover: silver spotted skipper courtesy www.dangphoto.net 2 Selecting Plants for Pollinators Selecting Plants for Pollinators A Regional Guide for Farmers, Land Managers, and Gardeners In the Ecological Region of the Central Appalachian Broadleaf Forest Coniferous Forest Meadow Province Including the states of: Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia And parts of: Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee a nappc and Pollinator Partnership™ Publication This guide was funded by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, the C.S. Fund, the Plant Conservation Alliance, the U.S. Forest Service, and the Bureau of Land Management with oversight by the Pollinator Partnership™ (www.pollinator.org), in support of the North American Pollinator Protection Campaign (NAPPC–www.nappc.org). Central Appalachian Broadleaf Forest – Coniferous Forest – Meadow Province 3 Why support pollinators? In theIr 1996 book, the Forgotten PollInators, Buchmann and Nabhan estimated that animal pollinators are needed for the reproduction “ Farming feeds of 90% of flowering plants and one third of human food crops.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016
    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Revised February 24, 2017 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org C ur Alleghany rit Ashe Northampton Gates C uc Surry am k Stokes P d Rockingham Caswell Person Vance Warren a e P s n Hertford e qu Chowan r Granville q ot ui a Mountains Watauga Halifax m nk an Wilkes Yadkin s Mitchell Avery Forsyth Orange Guilford Franklin Bertie Alamance Durham Nash Yancey Alexander Madison Caldwell Davie Edgecombe Washington Tyrrell Iredell Martin Dare Burke Davidson Wake McDowell Randolph Chatham Wilson Buncombe Catawba Rowan Beaufort Haywood Pitt Swain Hyde Lee Lincoln Greene Rutherford Johnston Graham Henderson Jackson Cabarrus Montgomery Harnett Cleveland Wayne Polk Gaston Stanly Cherokee Macon Transylvania Lenoir Mecklenburg Moore Clay Pamlico Hoke Union d Cumberland Jones Anson on Sampson hm Duplin ic Craven Piedmont R nd tla Onslow Carteret co S Robeson Bladen Pender Sandhills Columbus New Hanover Tidewater Coastal Plain Brunswick THE COUNTIES AND PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES OF NORTH CAROLINA Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org This list is dynamic and is revised frequently as new data become available. New species are added to the list, and others are dropped from the list as appropriate.
    [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]
  • Guide to the Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- LILIACEAE
    Guide to the Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- LILIACEAE LILIACEAE de Jussieu 1789 (Lily Family) (also see AGAVACEAE, ALLIACEAE, ALSTROEMERIACEAE, AMARYLLIDACEAE, ASPARAGACEAE, COLCHICACEAE, HEMEROCALLIDACEAE, HOSTACEAE, HYACINTHACEAE, HYPOXIDACEAE, MELANTHIACEAE, NARTHECIACEAE, RUSCACEAE, SMILACACEAE, THEMIDACEAE, TOFIELDIACEAE) As here interpreted narrowly, the Liliaceae constitutes about 11 genera and 550 species, of the Northern Hemisphere. There has been much recent investigation and re-interpretation of evidence regarding the upper-level taxonomy of the Liliales, with strong suggestions that the broad Liliaceae recognized by Cronquist (1981) is artificial and polyphyletic. Cronquist (1993) himself concurs, at least to a degree: "we still await a comprehensive reorganization of the lilies into several families more comparable to other recognized families of angiosperms." Dahlgren & Clifford (1982) and Dahlgren, Clifford, & Yeo (1985) synthesized an early phase in the modern revolution of monocot taxonomy. Since then, additional research, especially molecular (Duvall et al. 1993, Chase et al. 1993, Bogler & Simpson 1995, and many others), has strongly validated the general lines (and many details) of Dahlgren's arrangement. The most recent synthesis (Kubitzki 1998a) is followed as the basis for familial and generic taxonomy of the lilies and their relatives (see summary below). References: Angiosperm Phylogeny Group (1998, 2003); Tamura in Kubitzki (1998a). Our “liliaceous” genera (members of orders placed in the Lilianae) are therefore divided as shown below, largely following Kubitzki (1998a) and some more recent molecular analyses. ALISMATALES TOFIELDIACEAE: Pleea, Tofieldia. LILIALES ALSTROEMERIACEAE: Alstroemeria COLCHICACEAE: Colchicum, Uvularia. LILIACEAE: Clintonia, Erythronium, Lilium, Medeola, Prosartes, Streptopus, Tricyrtis, Tulipa. MELANTHIACEAE: Amianthium, Anticlea, Chamaelirium, Helonias, Melanthium, Schoenocaulon, Stenanthium, Veratrum, Toxicoscordion, Trillium, Xerophyllum, Zigadenus.
    [Show full text]
  • Narthecium Ossifragum – Moorlilie (Nartheciaceae), Blume Des Jahres
    Jahrb. Bochumer Bot. Ver. 3 246-250 2012 Narthecium ossifragum – Moorlilie (Nartheciaceae ), Blume des Jahres 2011 ARMIN JAGEL & HUBERT SUMSER 1 Einleitung Im Jahr 2011 wurde die Moorlilie (andere Namen z. B. Beinbrech, Ährenlilie, Stablilie oder Knochenbruchgras) zur Blume des Jahres 2011 gewählt, zum letzten Mal von der bekannten Naturschützerin HANNELORE SCHMIDT , die auch die Rede zur Ernennung noch selbst verfasste (http://www.stiftung-naturschutz-hh.de/blume/rede2011.htm), aber kurz vor der Bekanntgabe mit 91 Jahren verstarb. Seit 1980 wird eine "Blume des Jahres" gekürt. Sie soll "Menschen immer wieder über den ökologischen Wert der Pflanzenwelt und über die Notwendigkeit des Schutzes aller bedrohten Arten informieren" (LOKI SCHMIDT , http://www.stiftung-naturschutz-hh.de/blumedj.htm). Mit der in Deutschland stark zurück- gegangenen Moorlilie will die LOKI -SCHMIDT -STIFTUNG den Lebensraum Moor ins öffentliche Bewusstsein rücken, stellvertretend für alle weiteren charakteristischen und ebenfalls oft gefährdeten Arten dieses stark gefährdeten Lebensraums. Abb. 1: Narthecium ossifragum , blühender Bestand im Further Moor zwischen Leichlingen und Langenfeld, Bergisches Land, NRW (05.07.2010, H. SUMSER ). Abb. 2: Narthecium ossifragum , Blütenstand (05.07.2010, H. SUMSER ). 2 Systematik Die Moorlilie gehörte traditionell in die artenreiche und sehr heterogene Pflanzenfamilie der Liliengewächse ( Liliaceae s. l.). Diese Großfamilie wurde nach und nach immer weiter aufgeteilt und man stellte Narthecium zunächst zu den Germergewächsen ( Melanthiaceae ), die z. B. in den deutschen Alpen noch mit dem Weißen Germer ( Veratrum album ) und der Simsenlilie ( Tofieldia calyculata ) vertreten sind. In jüngerer Zeit teilte man diese Familie erneut auf. Dabei wurde die Familie Nartheciaceae gebildet (MABBERLEY 2008). In Deutschland kommt davon neben der Moorlilie keine weitere Art vor.
    [Show full text]
  • Outline of Angiosperm Phylogeny
    Outline of angiosperm phylogeny: orders, families, and representative genera with emphasis on Oregon native plants Priscilla Spears December 2013 The following listing gives an introduction to the phylogenetic classification of the flowering plants that has emerged in recent decades, and which is based on nucleic acid sequences as well as morphological and developmental data. This listing emphasizes temperate families of the Northern Hemisphere and is meant as an overview with examples of Oregon native plants. It includes many exotic genera that are grown in Oregon as ornamentals plus other plants of interest worldwide. The genera that are Oregon natives are printed in a blue font. Genera that are exotics are shown in black, however genera in blue may also contain non-native species. Names separated by a slash are alternatives or else the nomenclature is in flux. When several genera have the same common name, the names are separated by commas. The order of the family names is from the linear listing of families in the APG III report. For further information, see the references on the last page. Basal Angiosperms (ANITA grade) Amborellales Amborellaceae, sole family, the earliest branch of flowering plants, a shrub native to New Caledonia – Amborella Nymphaeales Hydatellaceae – aquatics from Australasia, previously classified as a grass Cabombaceae (water shield – Brasenia, fanwort – Cabomba) Nymphaeaceae (water lilies – Nymphaea; pond lilies – Nuphar) Austrobaileyales Schisandraceae (wild sarsaparilla, star vine – Schisandra; Japanese
    [Show full text]
  • Conserving Europe's Threatened Plants
    Conserving Europe’s threatened plants Progress towards Target 8 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation Conserving Europe’s threatened plants Progress towards Target 8 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation By Suzanne Sharrock and Meirion Jones May 2009 Recommended citation: Sharrock, S. and Jones, M., 2009. Conserving Europe’s threatened plants: Progress towards Target 8 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation Botanic Gardens Conservation International, Richmond, UK ISBN 978-1-905164-30-1 Published by Botanic Gardens Conservation International Descanso House, 199 Kew Road, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 3BW, UK Design: John Morgan, [email protected] Acknowledgements The work of establishing a consolidated list of threatened Photo credits European plants was first initiated by Hugh Synge who developed the original database on which this report is based. All images are credited to BGCI with the exceptions of: We are most grateful to Hugh for providing this database to page 5, Nikos Krigas; page 8. Christophe Libert; page 10, BGCI and advising on further development of the list. The Pawel Kos; page 12 (upper), Nikos Krigas; page 14: James exacting task of inputting data from national Red Lists was Hitchmough; page 16 (lower), Jože Bavcon; page 17 (upper), carried out by Chris Cockel and without his dedicated work, the Nkos Krigas; page 20 (upper), Anca Sarbu; page 21, Nikos list would not have been completed. Thank you for your efforts Krigas; page 22 (upper) Simon Williams; page 22 (lower), RBG Chris. We are grateful to all the members of the European Kew; page 23 (upper), Jo Packet; page 23 (lower), Sandrine Botanic Gardens Consortium and other colleagues from Europe Godefroid; page 24 (upper) Jože Bavcon; page 24 (lower), Frank who provided essential advice, guidance and supplementary Scumacher; page 25 (upper) Michael Burkart; page 25, (lower) information on the species included in the database.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2012
    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2012 Edited by Laura E. Gadd, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Office of Conservation, Planning, and Community Affairs N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources 1601 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2012 Edited by Laura E. Gadd, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Office of Conservation, Planning, and Community Affairs N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources 1601 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 www.ncnhp.org NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM LIST OF THE RARE PLANTS OF NORTH CAROLINA 2012 Edition Edited by Laura E. Gadd, Botanist and John Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Office of Conservation, Planning, and Community Affairs Department of Environment and Natural Resources, 1601 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 www.ncnhp.org Table of Contents LIST FORMAT ......................................................................................................................................................................... 3 NORTH CAROLINA RARE PLANT LIST ......................................................................................................................... 10 NORTH CAROLINA PLANT WATCH LIST ..................................................................................................................... 71 Watch Category
    [Show full text]
  • Vascular Flora and Vegetation Classification of the South Atlantic Coastal Plain Limestone Forest Association of Central Georgia
    VASCULAR FLORA AND VEGETATION CLASSIFICATION OF THE SOUTH ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN LIMESTONE FOREST ASSOCIATION OF CENTRAL GEORGIA by PATRICK SUMNER LYNCH (Under the Direction of J.L. Hamrick) ABSTRACT The South Atlantic Coastal Plain Limestone forest is a globally imperiled (G2) forest association known only from the upper Coastal Plain of central Georgia. These calcareous forest communities support diverse floristic assemblages unique among the Georgia Coastal Plain, but have not been subject to detailed floristic study. I conducted a comprehensive floristic inventory, multivariate community analyses and floristic quality assessments to document composition, elucidate community structure and underlying physiographic regimes, and assess habitat integrity for seven sites in Houston, Bleckley and Twiggs counties. Community analyses revealed twelve community types within two floristically defined domains corresponding to uplands and slopes, and bottomlands, respectively, and governed largely by moisture content and degree of inclination. Floristic quality assessments revealed varying degrees of floristic quality and habitat integrity corresponding primarily to local physiography and disturbance history. Floristic inventory recovered 339 vascular plant taxa representing 218 genera in 98 families, including 17 rare Georgia species. INDEX WORDS: Limestone forest, community analysis, floristic inventory, floristic quality assessment, Georgia, Coastal Plain. VASCULAR FLORA AND VEGETATION CLASSIFICATION OF THE SOUTH ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN LIMESTONE FOREST ASSOCIATION OF CENTRAL GEORGIA by PATRICK SUMNER LYNCH B.S., The University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, 2006 A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF SCIENCE ATHENS, GEORGIA 2010 © 2012 Patrick Sumner Lynch All Rights Reserved VASCULAR FLORA AND VEGETATION CLASSIFICATION OF THE SOUTH ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN LIMESTONE FOREST ASSOCIATION OF CENTRAL GEORGIA by PATRICK SUMNER LYNCH Major Professor: J.L.
    [Show full text]
  • Pl (Sarracenia Tcher Plant
    Green Pll tcher Plant (Sarracenia U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Southeast Region Atlanta, Georgia GREEN PITCHER PLANT Sar.raceni a oreophi 1a RECOVERY PLAN (Original Approved: May 11, 1983) (First Revision Approved: April 5, 1985) (Second Revision Approved: Dec. 12, 1994 Prepared by Green Pitcher Plant Recovery Team Dennis Jordan, Leader Revised by Cary Norquist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Jackson, Mississippi for Southeast Region Atlanta, Georgia Approved: Acting Regional Director, outheast Region U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Date: Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions which are believed to be required to recover and/or protect the listed species. Plans are prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, sometimes with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, State agencies, and others. Objectives will only be attained and funds expended contingent upon appropriations, priorities, and other budgetary constraints. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views nor the official positions or approvals of any individuals or agencies, other than the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, involved in the plan formulation. They represent the official position of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ~~jy after they have been signed by the Regional Director or Director as approved. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species’ status, and the completion of recovery tasks. Acknowledgement Appreciation is expressed to the University of Georgia Press for permission to use Barbara Culbertson’s illustration from Aauatic & Wetland Plans of Southeastern United States: Dicotyledons, authors Godfrey and Wooten, on the front cover. Literature citations should read as follows: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • TELOPEA Publication Date: 13 October 1983 Til
    Volume 2(4): 425–452 TELOPEA Publication Date: 13 October 1983 Til. Ro)'al BOTANIC GARDENS dx.doi.org/10.7751/telopea19834408 Journal of Plant Systematics 6 DOPII(liPi Tmst plantnet.rbgsyd.nsw.gov.au/Telopea • escholarship.usyd.edu.au/journals/index.php/TEL· ISSN 0312-9764 (Print) • ISSN 2200-4025 (Online) Telopea 2(4): 425-452, Fig. 1 (1983) 425 CURRENT ANATOMICAL RESEARCH IN LILIACEAE, AMARYLLIDACEAE AND IRIDACEAE* D.F. CUTLER AND MARY GREGORY (Accepted for publication 20.9.1982) ABSTRACT Cutler, D.F. and Gregory, Mary (Jodrell(Jodrel/ Laboratory, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, England) 1983. Current anatomical research in Liliaceae, Amaryllidaceae and Iridaceae. Telopea 2(4): 425-452, Fig.1-An annotated bibliography is presented covering literature over the period 1968 to date. Recent research is described and areas of future work are discussed. INTRODUCTION In this article, the literature for the past twelve or so years is recorded on the anatomy of Liliaceae, AmarylIidaceae and Iridaceae and the smaller, related families, Alliaceae, Haemodoraceae, Hypoxidaceae, Ruscaceae, Smilacaceae and Trilliaceae. Subjects covered range from embryology, vegetative and floral anatomy to seed anatomy. A format is used in which references are arranged alphabetically, numbered and annotated, so that the reader can rapidly obtain an idea of the range and contents of papers on subjects of particular interest to him. The main research trends have been identified, classified, and check lists compiled for the major headings. Current systematic anatomy on the 'Anatomy of the Monocotyledons' series is reported. Comment is made on areas of research which might prove to be of future significance.
    [Show full text]
  • (Sarracenia) Provide a 21St-Century Perspective on Infraspecific Ranks and Interspecific Hybrids: a Modest Proposal* for Appropriate Recognition and Usage
    Systematic Botany (2014), 39(3) © Copyright 2014 by the American Society of Plant Taxonomists DOI 10.1600/036364414X681473 Date of publication 05/27/2014 Pitcher Plants (Sarracenia) Provide a 21st-Century Perspective on Infraspecific Ranks and Interspecific Hybrids: A Modest Proposal* for Appropriate Recognition and Usage Aaron M. Ellison,1,5 Charles C. Davis,2 Patrick J. Calie,3 and Robert F. C. Naczi4 1Harvard University, Harvard Forest, 324 North Main Street, Petersham, Massachusetts 01366, U. S. A. 2Harvard University Herbaria, Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, 22 Divinity Avenue, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138, U. S. A. 3Eastern Kentucky University, Department of Biological Sciences, 521 Lancaster Avenue, Richmond, Kentucky 40475, U. S. A. 4The New York Botanical Garden, 2900 Southern Boulevard, Bronx, New York 10458, U. S. A. 5Author for correspondence ([email protected]) Communicating Editor: Chuck Bell Abstract—The taxonomic use of infraspecific ranks (subspecies, variety, subvariety, form, and subform), and the formal recognition of interspecific hybrid taxa, is permitted by the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants. However, considerable confusion regarding the biological and systematic merits is caused by current practice in the use of infraspecific ranks, which obscures the meaningful variability on which natural selection operates, and by the formal recognition of those interspecific hybrids that lack the potential for inter-lineage gene flow. These issues also may have pragmatic and legal consequences, especially regarding the legal delimitation and management of threatened and endangered species. A detailed comparison of three contemporary floras highlights the degree to which infraspecific and interspecific variation are treated inconsistently.
    [Show full text]