Atlas of the flora of New England: Pteridophytes and gymnosperms

79 Pages·1996·30 MB·English

by  R Angelo

RHODORA,
Vol. 98, No. 893, 1-79, 1996
pp.
NEW
ATLAS OF THE FLORA OF ENGLAND
AND GYMNOS
PTERIDOPHYTES
PERMS
Ray
Angelo
New
England
Botanical Club, 22 Divinity Avenue, Cambridge,
Massachusetts 02138-2020
David Boufford
E.
Harvard
University Herbaria, 22 Divinity Avenue, Cambridge,
Massachusetts 02138-2020
ABSTRACT.
Dot maps
provided
are to depict the distribution the county
at
level of the pteridophytes (Lycopodiophyta, Equisetophyta, Polypodiophyta) and
rm
gland states of the northeastern United States. The 171 taxa (species, subspecies,
and mapped
varieties hybrids, but not forms) arc at the county level based on
New
specimens major
in the herbaria of Maine, Hampshire, Vermont, Massachu-
Rhode
and
setts, Island Connecticut, with primary emphasis on the holdings of
New
the England Botanical Club Herbarium synonymy
(nebc). Brief account
to
names
for used in recent manuals and floras for the area, habitat and chromo-
some common
infonnation and names
also are provided.
Key New
Words:
Flora, England, gymnospcrms
atlas, distribution, pteridophytes,
This
article is the first in a series that will present the
New
distributions of the vascular flora of England in the form of
New
maps
dot distribution the county England com-
at level.
prises the six northeastern states of the United States: Maine,
New
Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode
Massachusetts, and
Island
Connecticut. These range from 4 °N
states in latitude to
1
67°W
47°28'N and longitude from 73^45'W. The
in to elevation
m
of the region extends from sea level to 1,898 (6,228 the
ft.) at
New
summit
of Mt. Washington, Hampshire, moun-
the highest
tain in eastern North America outside of North Carolina. The
km^
total area of the region 172,515 (66,608 mi.^) including
is
km^
bodies of water; the land area 163,157
total (62,995 mi.^).
is
The
of which
effects continental covered
glaciers, the entire
region several times during the Pleistocene, and the of
last
which
did not retreat until about 15,000 years ago, are
still
clearly evident throughout The by
the area. state state statistics
on and shown
size elevation are Table (Merriam-Webster,
in
1
Inc. 1984).
1
Rhodora
2 98
[Vol.
New
Tabic Total area, land area, and range in elevation for the six
1.
Eniiland
states.
Area and Area hlcvation Ran^e
Total
T
m
km^ km- 0-
Maine 86,028 80,117 ,606
1
m
New Hampshire 24,097 km^ 23,395 km^ 0-1,898
m
km- knr
Vermont 24,887 24,020 29 1,339
m
Massachusetts 21,386 knr 20,287 knr 0-1,064
m
Rhode km^ km^ 0-248
Island 3,144 2,725
m
km^ km^ 725
Connecticut 12,973 12,613
The more Rhode and
southerly states of Massachusetts, Island,
Connecticut densely populated densely populated
are (the least
of these three states, Connecticut, had an average of 262 persons
per km^ 1990; Hofftiian 1992). The northern states of Maine,
in
New
Hampshire, and Vermont mostly most densely
are rural (the
New
populated of these three Hampshire, had an average
states,
km" Hoffman
of 48 persons per in 1990; 1992).
This work encompasses vascular plants (pteridophytes and
all
and
spermatophytes) the rank of species, subspecies, variety
at
New
Hy-
growing England
outside of cultivation the
in states.
below
brids also will be included, but forms and other ranks the
level of variety will not. The dots are based primarily on voucher
New
specimens in the herbaria of England representing reproduc-
when
phmts
ing populations, or persisting after cultivation
is
it
uncertain that they are actually naturalized. This first installment
includes the pteridophytes (Lycopodiophyta, Equisetophyta, Poly-
gymnosperms
podiophyta) and (Coniferophyta). Future accounts
will treat the distribution of angiosperms.
We
intend to gather this series of articles, together with addi-
background volume upon comple-
material, into a separate
tional
tion of the maps, and to make available on the World Wide
all
it
Web
hope mean-
as various parts are finished. our that, in the
It is
work
time, these articles will stimulate additional field to supple-
New
ment maps. The England
the distributions portrayed in the
Botanical Club herbarium, which has proven to be the most im-
portant resource for this project, is especially eager to receive
We
specimens documenting range extensions. also would like to
be informed of such specimens other herbaria. Similarly, be-
in
New
cause the atlas of the England flora will be continuously
new becomes we
updated as information available, are eager to
receive notification of published corrections of cytological infor-
—
New
Angelo
and Boufford Atlas of England Flora
3
1996J
mation and new, documented chromosome counts for taxa in the
New
England
flora.
AND METHODS
MATERIALS
New
This grew out of an inventory of England Bo-
atlas the
tanical Club vascular plant herbarium. The purpose of the inven-
conducted county was
tory, at the level, to serve as a filter for
number unmounted
the processing of a large of specimens being
considered for accession. Consequently, the core of the database
for this atlas consists of specimens in the herbarium of vascular
NEBC
New
England Club The
plants of the Botanical (nebc).
New
herbarium, which geographical scope En-
limits to the
its
more
gland presently comprises than 251,000 specimens
states,
New
and the largest collection of plants for the England re-
is
gion.
In the mid 1980s the herbarium inventory was expanded into
NEBC
an from herbarium
atlas project, since data the essentially
New
depict the distributions of the vascular pkmts of England.
Additional data from specimens other major herbaria with large
in
New
holdings of England plants have allowed us to portray the
more
distributions completely.
New
The data represented currently by specimens England
in
when
herbaria best depict vascular plant distributions displayed
at the county level. Attempting to display such data by the exact
geographical coordinates of each collection locality, or even at
By
township such
the level, distorts the actual distributions. de-
tailed mapping, patterns tend to reflect concentrated collecting
along major highways and clustering near popular resort areas or
was from some
botanical hot spots. This evident of the detailed
maps
distribution produced about 15 years ago by the plant dis-
New
committee (now England
tribution defunct) of the Botanical
Club. The distortions portrayed by such detailed mapping are re-
solved by using data only at the county level.
New
The counties of England range in size from Bristol County,
Rhode Island (65 km", or 25 mi.^), to Aroostook County, Maine
—
The
(17,666 km^, or 6821 mi.^ land only). great majority of
km
counties, however, are between 1300 (500 mi.") and 3900
km
To
(1500 mi.*"). reduce the size disparity at the large end, and
more Maine
to depict distributions evenly, the largest counties are
subdivided. Penobscot, Piscataquis, Somerset, and Oxford Coun-
ties are divided arbitrarily into roughly equal-sized, north and
Rhodora
4
98
Vol.
south sectors along township boundaries. Aroostook County, the
New
Coos
largest county, divided into three sectors. County,
is
The
Hampshire, divided into north and south sectors. division
is
Coos County White Mountains, which an
of isolates the harl^or
New
alpine flora associated mostly with England's highest peak.
Mount Washington, Figure shows the location of states and
1
New
counties of England and the subdivisions of the largest coun-
ties.
Data were collected primarily from herbarium specimens of
New
major herbaria in England. The herbaria used to compile data
New
for this work were those of the Enuland Botanical Club
(ncbc). Harvard University ames, University of Maine
(a, c,h).
New
University of Massachusetts (mass). University of
(MAiNtz),
Hampshire Rhode
(nha), University of Island University
(kiri),
Brown
of Vermont (vt), and University (bru). Records from the
herbaria the University of Connecticut (conn), Connecticut Bo-
at
Society (ncbs), and Yale University (yu) were accessed
tanical
from data compiled by Leslie Mehrhoff. Lastly, the notebooks of
Harry Ahles the University of Massachusetts were consulted.
at
Ahles visited these same herbaria, plus one or two others, in the
1960s and 1970s to gather locality information at the county level.
We
some where
obtained records from systematic treatments the
information on voucher specimens was specific enough to pro-
name
vide county data and the of the herbarium where the speci-
mens
were
deposited.
no was made
In recording the collection data attempt to verify
the accuracy of the identification of every specimen, but obvious
Even
misidentifications were cumotated with corrections. though
the basis for a particular dot might be a misidentified specimen,
New
common
for plants within England, our view that the taxon
is
most Specimens documenting
likely occurs within the county. dis-
junct or marginal occurrences (or otherwise rare, endangered or
threatened taxa) usually have received greater scrutiny, loecause
and
of a heightened interest in rare plants nationwide, are less
be
likely to misidentified.
The data were entered into a simple computer database using
one of several letters in the county field as a code to indicate the
herbarium which voucher specimen The
the deposited.
in letter
is
code herbarium where voucher specimen was
indicates the a
first
No
seen. letter codes were added for subsequent voucher speci-
mens
other herbaria, because our primary objective has been
at
to plot the distribution of the taxon, not to inventory the holdings
—
New
Angelo
cUid Boufford Atlas of England Flora
5
1996J
of any particular herbarium. While such information might be
of
some we
value
for purposes, felt that our time at other herbaria
was New
devoted
best to searching for data not found in the En-
gland Botanical Club herbarium, or each subsequently searched
in
herbarium, gaps
to in in distribution.
fill
The
data in the database were converted to dot distribution
A
maps method
using a devised by Angelo more
(1994). detailed
and mapping
technical description of methodology
the
will
appear an appendix volume.
as in the final Interested parties
may
obtain of appendix upon
a draft the request
to the
first
author.
TAXONOMY AND FORMAT
The taxonomy and nomenchiturc adopted work
for essen-
this
!/
With
major
for the divisions within the pteridophytes (Lycopodiophyta,
Equisetophyta, Polypodiophyta), which follows Flora
cind the
of
North America (Flora of North America Committee
Editorial
1993) sequence, the families are ordered alphabetically. The gen-
era are alphabetical within families, as are species within genera.
Named
unnamed
and
hybrid taxa are placed alphabetically the
at
Unnamed
end of the genus. hybrids combine the names of the
progenitors alphabetically by
epithet.
deemed New
Species be
to introduced, that not native
is, in
England the time of European contact with North America,
at are
indicated by the use of all upper case type for the scientific name.
No
single source of information was used determining
in intro-
duced For most
species. taxa there is little dispute as to nativity.
Where
we
differences of opinion exist in the literature, have used
own
our judgment based on evidence
the available.
A
common
name supphed when name
appears be
is to a in
it
Names New
general use. used England have been given
in pref-
er
erence.
chromosome
numbers
Cited are taken from indices prepared by
Cave
(1958a, 1958b, 1959a, 1959b, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963,
1964, 1965), Goldblatt (1981, 1984, 1985, Goldblatt and
1988),
Johnson Moore
(1990, 1991, 1994), (1973, 1974, Ornduff
1977),
(1967, 1968, 1969), and reports by Takamiya and Kurita
(1983),
Taylor Tryon Tryon and Tryon and Wag-
(1970), (1978), (1982),
ner (1971). Very few of the counts are based on material from
Rhodora
6 98
[Vol.
New
made from
England, but instead rellect counts throughout
the range of the taxon.
The habitat data are distillations from a variety of sources aug-
own An was made
mented by our observations. attempt to
field
taxon
indicate habitat information as applies to a particular in
it
New
England rather than the entire range of the taxon.
to
Synonymy names used
provided primarily with respect to in
is
New
standard manuals covering England published from 1950
the
onward, including Fernald (1950), Gleason (1952), Gleason and
Seymour
Cronquist (1963, 1991), and (1969a, 1982).
A
many
selection of references, including not cited above,
is
provided. This consists of the standard manuals published
list
from 1950 regional and county floras and checklists pro-
to date,
we
duced alter 1950, and what believe to be the key articles and
New
gymnosperms
books on pteridophytes and pertinent
the to
We we may
England. would appreciate being notified of papers
have overlooked.
LYCOPODIOPHYTA
ISOETACEAE
—
=
Isoctes acadiensis Kott Acadian Quill wort (Figure 2n 44;
2).
=
44 and macro-
the report of (Kott Britton 1980) for
2/7
/.
spora Durieu forma hicroglyphica (A. A. Eaton) N. E. Pfeiffer
was Shallow wa-
laler attributed (Kott 1981) to acadiensis.
/.
moving
ponds and slow
of streams.
ter
—
=
echinospora Durieu Braun's Quillwort (Figure 2n
Isoctes
2).
22, 33. Shallow water and shores of slightly acidic lakes,
ponds, and streams. eclunospora var. hraiinii (Durieu) En-
[/.
Engelmann;
gelmann; echinospora muricata (Durieu)
var.
/.
muricata Durieu]
/.
—
engelmannii A. Braun Engelmann's Quillwort (Figure
Isoetes
= ^
2n Shallow water of ponds, streams,
n 22. lakes,
2). 11;
muddy
or ditches.
in
—
^
Isoetes lacustris Linnaeus Lake Quillwort (Figure 2). 2n 110.
Shores and shallow water of slightly acidic ponds, lakes, and
streams. macrospora Durieu; liieroglyphica A. A. Eaton]
/.
[/.
—
New
Angelo and Boufford England
Atlas of Flora 7
1996J
~
M. Deep
Isoetes prototypus D. Britton (Figure 2n 22. wa-
3).
of
ter cold, acidic lakes.
—
Engelmann
Isoetes riparia ex A. Braun Riverbank Quillwort
=
Muddy
(Figure 2n 44. or sandy shores (including
3). tidal
and
shores estuaries), usually of rivers. riparia var. cana-
[/.
Engelmann; Engelmann
densis saccharata amesii
var.
/.
A. A. Eaton]
—
Isoetes tuckermanii A. Braun ex Engelmann Tuckerman's
Quill-
=
Pond
wort (Figure 2n 44. and lake margins, shores
3). (fre-
submersed
quently tidal), usually in quiet water.
Isoetes Fiybrids
X X
Dodge [^
Isoetes eatonii (Figure echinospora Durieu
3).
/.
X
engelmannii A. Braun; gravesii A. A. Eaton; eatonii
/. /. /,
Dodge
gravesii (A. A. Eaton) Clute]
var.
X
was
Isoetes harveyi A. A. Eaton. This hybrid recognized only
recently by Britton (1991). Herbarium specimens annotated as
hybrid are from southern Penobscot Co., Maine
this (us);
Somerset Co., Maine (maine); and Mt. Desert Island, Maine
(mo). Since the holdings of nebc have not been examined
criti-
mapped. [=
cally for this hybrid, not laciistris Lin-
is
it /.
X
naeus tuckermanii A. Braun]
/.
LYCOPODIACEAE
—
Diphasiastrum complanatum (Linnaeus) Holub Northern Run-
= =
ning Pine (Figure n 22-24, 23; 2n 40, 44, 46, 48.
4).
Dry, open coniferous or mixed [Lycopodium com-
forests.
planatum
Linnaeus]
—
Diphasiastrum digitatum (Dillenius ex A. Braun) Holub South-
^ =
ern Running Pine (Figure n 23; 2n 46. Usually dry
4).
woods, open [Lycopodium
thickets, or fields, in acid soils.
complanatum
Linnaeus
flahelliforme Fernald]
var.
—
Diphasiastrum Holub Clubmoss
sitchense (Ruprecht) Sitka
—
=
(Figure n 23; 2n 46. Alpine meadows, open rocky
4).
Rhodora
8 [Vol. 98
woods [Lycopodium Ru-
barrens, conifer (rarely). sitchense
precht]
—
Holub Ground Cedar
Diphasiastrum tristachyum (Pursh) (Fig-
—
=
ure n 23; 2n 46. Acid soils in open conifer or oak
4).
woods, [Lycopodium tristachyum Pursh]
thickets.
Diphasiastrum Hybrids
X
Holub Diphasiastrum com-
Diphasiastrum (Linnaeus)
alpiniim
planatum Holub
(Linnaeus) (Figure
5).
X
complanatum Holub Diphasiastrum
Diphasiastrum (Linnaeus)
di^itatum (Dillcnius ex A. Braun) Holub (Figure
5).
X
Diphasiastrum digitatum (Dillenius ex A. Braun) Holub Dipha-
X
siastrum (Willdenow) Holub (Figure
salfinifolium
5).
X
Holub [^
Diphasiastrum hahereri (House) (Figure D.
5). dif^i-
X
Holub
tatum (Dillenius ex A. Braun) D. tristachyum (Pursh)
X
Lycopodium House]
Holub; hahereri
X
Diphasiastrum (Rouy) Holub (Figure [^ D.
alpi-
issleri
6).
X
num
Holub
(Linnaeus) D. tristachyum (Pursh) Flolub; Ly-
X
copodium (Rouy) Lawalrcc]
issleri
—
X
Diphasiastrum sahiuifolium (Willdenow) Holub Savin-
=
Woods
Clubmoss
leaved (Figure 2n 46. (often subal-
6).
[^
pine spruce), thickets, clearings. D. sitchense (Ruprecht)
X
Holub D. tristachyum (Pursh) Holub; Lycopodium sahiui-
Willdenow]
folium
X
Diphasiastrum (Rouy) Holub (Figure [= D.
zeillcri
6).
X
complanatum Holub
(Linnaeus) D. tristachyum (Pursh)
Holub]
&
Huperzia appalachiana Mickel
Beitel (Figure Cliffs, talus
6).
damp, [Specimens
slopes, acidic rocks in alpine zones.
New
mapped from England
are the herbaria of the Botanical
Club and Harvard
University.]
New
Angelo and Boufford^Atlas of England Flora 9
1996]
—
Clubmoss
Huperzia (Michaux) Trevisan Shining (Fig-
lucidida
= —
woods
and
ure n 67; 2n 134. Cool, moist in rich acid
7).
[Lycopodium lucidulum Michaux]
soils.
Marti
= Damp
Mountain 2n 268.
13611;
woods, mountainous
rocks, barrens, cold in regions. [H. sc-
densa Lycopodium selago Linnaeus; Ly-
lago Trevisan;
var.
copodium Linnaeus appressum Desvaux]
selago
var.
Huperzia Hybrids
&
X
Huperzia appalachiana Mickel Huperzia lucidnla
Beitel
(Michaux) Trevisan (Figure
7).
&
X
Huperzia appalachiana Mickel Huperzia selago (Lin-
Beitel
&
naeus) Bernhardi ex Schrank Martius (Figure
7).
&
X
Gandhi
Huperzia (Abbe) Kartesz (Figure
buttersii 8).
X
[= H. lucidula (Michaux) Trevisan selago (Linnaeus)
//.
&
Bernhardi ex Schrank Martius]
—
Club-
Lycopodiella alopecuroides (Linnaeus) Cranfill Foxtail
=
moss (Figure 2n 156. Bogs, marshes, ditches, sandy or
8).
{Lycopodium alope-
peaty shores, wet barrens, in acid soils.
Linnaeus]
curoides
—
Bog
(Chapman) Appressed
Lycopodiella appressa Cranfill
=
Damp,
Clubmoss (Figure L56. acid or peaty soils in
2/7
8).
&
[Lycopodium appressum (Chapman) Lloyd Un-
open.
the
immdatum
derwood; Lycopodium Linnaeus bigelovii
var.
Tuckerman; Lycopodium immdatum Linnaeus rohustum
var.
Eaton]
R.
J.
—
Bog Clubmoss
immdata (Figure
Lycopodiella (Linnaeus) Holuh)
= ^
Damp,
n 78; 2n 156. acid, sandy or peaty soils in
8).
immdatum
[Lycopodium Linnaeus]
open.
the
&
W. Wagner
Lycopodiella margueritae G. Bruce, H. Beitel
J.
=
2n
(Figure 312.
9).
Rhodora
10
98
[Vol.
—
Lycopodiuni annotinum Linnaeus Clubmoss
(Figure
Stiff
9).
- -
n 34, 68TT; 2// ca. 50, 66, 68. Woods, cool shaded thick-
ets, exposed rocky or peaty habitats higher elevations.
at [L.
ahyestre
:7
C. Harlnian; annotinum van pungens
L. (Bachelot de Py-
la
Desvaux]
laie)
—
Lycopodiuni clavatuni Linnaeus Staghorn Clubmoss
(Figure
9).
=
=
n 22, 34, 34II, 34111, 34TV, 68 (69, 70); 2/7 34, 44, 68,
Open, woods
102, 136. usually and
dry, thickets, clearings,
exposed rocky
shuations, acid clavatum sub-
in soils. [L. var.
rcmotuni Victorin
—
Lycopodiuni dcndroideuni Michaux Clubmoss
Tree
(Figure
9).
=
2n 68. Dry, open woods and clearings, obscuruni Lin-
\L.
naeus dcndroideuni (Michaux)
var. D. C. Eaton]
—
&
Lycopodiuni hickeyi W. H. Wagner, Beitel R. C. Moran Mick-
=
Clubmoss
ey's (Figure Mainly deciduous woods
10). 2// 68.
and
thickets, usually acid obscuruni Linnaeus
in soils. [L. var.
isophyllum Hickey]
Lycopodiuni lagopus
(Laestadius ex C. Hartnian) G. Zinserling
=
ex Kuzeneva-Prochorova
(Figure In Grassy
68.
10). fields
and openings second-growth woods. clavatum Linnaeus
in
[L.
&
var. megastacJiyon Fernald clavatum Linnaeus
Bissell; L.
&
Hooker
nionostachyon
var. Greville] Distribution data are
New
primarily from the herbaria of the England Botanical
Club and Harvard
University.
—
Lycopodiuni obscuruni Linnaeus Clubmoss
Tree
(Figure
10).
= =
34, 34II; 68. Rich woods, clearings, edges of boggy
2fi
//
forests, usually acid
in soils.
Lycopodiuni Hybrids
X
Lycopodiuni Michaux
dcndroideuni Lycopodiuni ohscurum
Linnaeus
(Figure
10).
Pseudolycopodiella caroliniana (Linnaeus) HoIub^Carolina
- =
Clubmoss
(Figure n
11). 35, 68, 70, 15; 2/? 70, 78, 140.
1