Great Basin Naturalist Volume 58 Number 1 Article 4 1-30-1998 Identity of Mertensia oblongifolia (Nutt.) G. Don (Boraginaceae) and its allies in western North America Ahmed M. Warfa Brigham Young University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn Recommended Citation Warfa, Ahmed M. (1998) "Identity of Mertensia oblongifolia (Nutt.) G. Don (Boraginaceae) and its allies in western North America," Great Basin Naturalist: Vol. 58 : No. 1 , Article 4. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn/vol58/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Western North American Naturalist Publications at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Great Basin Naturalist by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Great Basin Naturalist 58(1), © 1998, pp. 38-44 IDENTITY OF MERTENSIA OBLONGIFOLIA (NUTT) G. DON (BORAGINACEAE) AND ITS ALLIES IN WESTERN NORTH AMERICA Ahmed M. Warfal ABSTRACT.-The current status of Mertensia oblongifoUa (Nutt.) G. Don and its allied taxa is surveyed. On the bases of continuously coherent morphological characters and/or regionally correlated variations, more than 30 taxa, including species, subspecies, varieties, and 1 forma, previously considered different from M. oblongifolia, are now placed under synonymy of this species. Those taxa currently known as M. fusiformis Greene, M. bakeri Greene, and M. bakeri var. osterhoutii Williams are among the new synonyms. Typification, taxonomy, and morphological problems ofM. oblongifo­ lia are discussed. Key words: Mertensia oblongifolia, typification, Wxorwmy, morphology, allied taxa. Nuttall (1834) described and depicted Pul­ represents an important additional morpholog­ monaria oblongifolia from a collection ofplants ical feature in the taxon. made by N.B. Wyeth in 1834 chiefly in the Machride (1916) also argued that M. oblon­ valleys of the Rocky Mountains, toward the gifolw had been misinterpreted. He examined sources of the Columbia River (corresponding fragments of a specimen in the Gray Herbar­ to present-day states ofIdabo and Wyoming). ium (GH) which were labeled, in Dr. Gray's As the Linnaean species of Pulmonaria hand, "M. oblongifolia Nutt.! ex sp. Wyeth! (1753) in Nortb America were placed within misit Durand 1861." He noted that pedicels of Mertensia (Roth 1797), P oblongifolia Nutt. these fragments were very sparsely hispid; calyx was transferred by Don (1838) into Mertensia. divided nearly to the base, the lobes 5 mm Except for a few additions, Don maintained long, linear-Ianceolate; corolla-tube glabrous Nuttall's description of P oblongifolia for his within, 10 mm long, limb 5 mm long; fIlaments species and was followed by de Candolle as broad and as long as the anthers; style (1846), Gray (1875), and Coulter (1885). slightly exceeds. He concluded that the mor­ M. oblongifolia was later treated as Cerin­ phological characters of the fragments and thodes oblongifolium (Nutt.) Kuntze (1891). Nuttall's description agreed perfectly. Williams Kuntze's contemporary botanists, such as Nel­ (1937:124) also reported the above-mentioned son (1899, 1900), Rydberg (1899, 1900), and fragments in his monograph: "a fragment Piper (1906), and subsequent workers on the marked in Dr. Gray's hand ... is prohably genus Mertensia (Macbride 1916, Johnston from the type specimen, Wyeth (G)." The word 1932, Williams 1937, Higgins 1993) have rec­ probably indicates doubt as to the identity of ognized M. oblongifolia (Nutt.) G. Don as the the fragment, and actually Williams' doubt correct name. In fact, Cerinthodes oblongifol­ leads to lectotypification ofthe fragment. ium has remained inadequately known since However, the key problems in this study Kuntze's time and seems never to have been concern the typification, taxonomy, and mor­ mentioned again in the literature under Mer­ phology of the species, questions that I have tensia species in North America. examined in connection with a proposed revi­ De Candolle (1846:91) pointed out that M. sion of the genus Mertensia in North America oblongifolia was one ofthe least known species (Warfa in preparation). of the genus Mertensia, but added no further Pulmonaria oblongifolia was described by discussion. However, de Candolle's report that Nuttall (1834:43) as follows: "Glabriuscula, caule the leaves were more or less pubescent beneath simplici erecto, foWs lanceolato-oblongis IMonle L. Beun Lile SdellCt: Museum, Brighiltn Young University, Provo, ur84602, USA (present address); 558 North Redwood Road #3-1, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, USA (permanent uddress), 38 1998] IDENTITY OF MERTENSIA OBWNGIFOLIA 39 obtusiuscuHs, superioribus acutis, floribus tubu­ apparently rejected by Rydberg (1922:732), loso-carnpanulatis paniculatis pedicellatis, caly­ who kept M. longiflora a separate species. cibus abbreviatis, laciniis linearihus acutis cili­ Rydberg's position was later supported by atis." Nuttall's description implies that he had Jepson (1925:842), Williams (1937:136), Davis seen a collection or a specimen with simple, (1952:592), and John (1956:348). Both Williams erect, and subglabrous stem, etc. In his foot­ and John not only recognized M. longiflora as note Nuttall reported: "Stem ... six to eight a species, but also recognized a number of inches; lower leaves commencing some dis­ synonyms under this species. However, the tance above the base of the stem ... and all status ofM. longiflora has remained at the spe­ more or less pubescent above; panicle formed cific level since then. ofaxillary approximating clusters offlowers ... ; M. foliosa Nelson (1899:243), erected from corolla bright blue; style somewhat exserted." a collection made by Evanston and again ten­ Nuttall thus explicitly stated that he studied a tatively identified and distributed as M. ablongi­ collection or at least a specimen with a com­ folia, was also placed in synonymy of M. ob­ plete habit "six to eight inches." His careful longifolio by Macbride (1916:18-19). Macbride examination of the position of the lower leaves placed M. nutans Howell, M. nevadensis A. above the base of the stem and other Nels., M. puhescens Piper, and M. nutans subsp. described features further confirms his posses­ suhealva Piper together with M. foliosa in syn­ sion of an entire specimen. Don (1838:372) also onymy of M. oblongifolia, making 3 new com­ mentioned a plant of 1/2 to 3/4 feet. Unlike binations: M. foliosa var. suheolva (Howell) both Nuttall and Don, Gray (1875:53), Mac­ Macbr., M. foliosa var. nevadensis (A. Nels.) bride (1916:17), and Williams (1937:123) appear Macbr., and M. foliosa var. puhescens (Piper) to have seen only the fragments of Nuttall's Macbr. Except for a few modifications, Mac­ specimen at the Gray Herbarium (GH). bride's synonyms under M. oblangifolia were 1 have seen Nuttall's plant collection at later supported by Williams (1937:123, 125, British Museum (BM) and the fragmentary 130). Contrary to Macbride, Rydberg (1922: specimen preserved at GH, the same scraps 732-733) treated M. faliasa and M. nutans as seen by Gray (1875), Macbride (1916), and different species from M. oblongifolia. Simi­ Williams (1937). The fragmentary specimen is larly, Tidestrom (1925:467) considered M. very poor, consisting mostly of dissected flow­ nevadensis, M. foliosa, and M. nutans subsp. ers and a single small leaf As correctly pointed subcalva entities of their own and recognized out by Macbride (1916), this fragmentary mater­ Pulmonario oblongifolia as the only synonym ial is in accordance with Nuttall's description under M. oblongifolia. and the type specimen. Besides Macbride's observation on the rela­ On the same sheet of the type specimen at tionship between M. oblongifolia and M. foli­ BM are 2 other non-type specimens. Although osa, Nelson (1909) studied the affinities be­ these 2 latter specimens were collected much tween M. fusiformis Greene and M. eongesta later and originate from different localities, Greene on the one hand, and M. bakeri Greene, they agree with M. oblongifolia. However, as M. laterifolia Greene, and M. amoena A. Nels. duplicates of the type collection may possibly on the other. Based on these affinities, Nelson exist at the Herbarium of Kew Gardens (K) established 3 new combinations: M. papillosa and/or elsewhere, I choose to desigoate the fWJifarmis (Greene) A. Nels., M. bakeri omoeoo specimen deposited at BM as a lectotype and (A. Nels.) A. Nels., and M. bakeri laterifolia the fragmentary specimen preserved at GH as (Greene) A. Nels. Nelson then placed M. papil­ an isolectotype. lasa fusiformis under M. papillosa Greene, The synonymy ofM. oblongifolio has a long, while M. bakeri amoena and M. bakeri laterifo­ complicated bistory. Mertensia longiflora lia were both placed under M. bakeri. He also Greene (1898:261) was based on a collection placed M. eongesta under M. papillosa, and M. made by Sandberg and Leiberg in 1893, tenta­ eaneseens Rydb. under M. bakeri. Nelsons com­ tively identified and distributed as M. oblongi­ binations and synonymy arrangements were folia. It was placed in synonymy ofM. oblongi­ apparently rejected by both Rydberg (1922: folia by Piper (1906:479), who was followed 734, 1932) and Tidestram (1925:467), who by Macbride (1916:18). This synonymy was treated M. bakeri, M. fWJiformis, M. amoena, 40 GREAT BASIN NATURALIST [Volume 58 and M. la.te!ifolia as species. While Rydberg in this study. As a result of this review, I pres­ placed M. congesta under M. fusiformis, M. eutly treat the species M. oblnngifolia, M. bak­ secundorum Cockerell under M. laterifolia, eri, M. fusiformis, M. foliosa, and M. amoena, as and made nomenclatural transfer of M. well as most of their current synonyms, as a canescens into M. cana Rydb., Tidcstrom placed single morphologically variable but allied group M. paniculata Val: nivalis S. Wats. under M. (see Taxonomic Remarks and Variations). There­ bakeri. As did both Rydberg and Tidestrom, fore, M. oblnngifolia is the only species recog­ Williams (1937:100, 118) considered M.