Euphrasia tricuspidata agg.

Beispielsweise Lokalfloren, Taxonomie, Sippen- und Gebietsdiskussionen, Fachexkursionen
Benutzeravatar
amadej
Beiträge: 4
Registriert: Samstag 13. Februar 2021, 11:59

Euphrasia tricuspidata agg.

Beitragvon amadej » Samstag 13. Februar 2021, 20:28

Hi there,
In Trenta valley, East Julian Alps, SIovenia I encounter many Euphrasia specimens pictured on the right side of the photo below. As you can see, the plants look amazingly similar to Euphrasia tricuspidata L. = Euphrasia tricuspidata ssp. tricuspidata Hartl = Euphrasia tricuspidata s. str. published by 'Botanic in Bild' (left side of the picture). Also, leaf (Deckbläter) proportions fall closer to E. tricuspidata than to E. cuspidata Host = E. tricuspidata ssp. cuspidata Hartl according to the key in E. Vitek, in Fischer, Exkursionsflora Österreich, ….. (2006), p752. According to literature (HEGI, Mayer, Vitek, Jogan, etc.) E. tricuspidata L. (sub)species is endemic to northeast Italy and doesn't grow in Slovenia. So, I am confused. Can someone help me to clarify the situation?
[img]
E-tricuspidata-primerjava-Botanik-in Bild-Trrenta_mala.jpg
Lizenz: CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
E-tricuspidata-primerjava-Botanik-in Bild-Trrenta_mala.jpg (660.18 KiB) 3632 mal betrachtet

Sincerely
Amadej

Benutzeravatar
Hermann Falkner
Beiträge: 1791
Registriert: Sonntag 23. Oktober 2016, 20:16
Wohnort: Wien

Re: Euphrasia tricuspidata agg.

Beitragvon Hermann Falkner » Sonntag 14. Februar 2021, 12:11

Hello Amadej,
and welcome to the forum!

First and foremost - I am not at all firm with determining Euphrasia sp., on the contrary; but in this case I think it is possible to estimate the proportion of bracts length to width on the photo of "Botanik im Bild": about 6-8 (9) times as long as broad, I would say, and also very similar to the bracts in your photo.

According to Fischer, Exkursionsflora (3rd ed. 2008) both specimen - i. e. yours and that one of Botanik im Bild - would rather fall into Euphrasia tricuspidata subsp. cuspidata = (in Fischer 3rd ed.) Euphorbia cuspidata, which Fischer declares as being distributed mainly south-eastern Alpine (Southern Carinthia, Slovenia and Northern Italy; also in Northern Tyrol and Souteastern Bavaria).

So here possibly the misunderstanding lies rather in taxonomy - with Botanik im Bild using the broader term of Euphrasia tricuspidata (agg.) while the image shown is Eu. tricuspidata subsp. cuspidata = Eu. cuspidata.

Cheers
Hermann

kurt nadler
Beiträge: 3809
Registriert: Samstag 10. November 2018, 13:26
Wohnort: prellenkirchen,breitenbrunn,wien
Kontaktdaten:

Re: Euphrasia tricuspidata agg.

Beitragvon kurt nadler » Sonntag 14. Februar 2021, 20:08

hi, welcome to the forum.
my english is very bad, sorry.
i see no indication against tricuspidata agg.
how would slovenian botanists call this species, if not tricuspidata agg.?
there´s no distance between NE italian, S austrain and slovenian mts.
best regards
kurt

Benutzeravatar
amadej
Beiträge: 4
Registriert: Samstag 13. Februar 2021, 11:59

Re: Euphrasia tricuspidata agg.

Beitragvon amadej » Montag 15. Februar 2021, 12:32

Hi Hermann and Kurt,

Thanks for your kind response.
There is no doubt that both pictures show Euphrasia tricuspidata agg. This is not an issue. The problem resides within this aggregate at a lower taxonomic level.

The question is: can one associate these both plants on my picture (which seem to me evidently the same taxon) to Euphrasia tricuspidata L. = Euphrasia tricuspidata ssp. tricuspidata Hartl or to Euphrasia cuspidata Host = Euphrasia tricuspidata ssp cuspidata Hartl? I've asked some Slovenian pro botanists the same question and they were reluctant. They were not convinced that such plants can be associated with Euphrasia tricuspidata L.. Actually, they were of the very similar opinion than you Hermann.

Nevertheless, I am constantly encountered with the plants here in Trenta valley, which cannot be determined as E. cuspidata using Vitek's key published in Fischer, Exkursionsflora (2006); they fit neither with respect to leave length/width ratio nor to the length of teeth/leaf width ratio. The leaves with two teeth on each side are completely absent. Nothing resembles, even from far, a typical E. cuspidata Host leaf (as published for example by Dryades project, picture below).

[img]
Dryades_E-cuspidata_typical-leave.JPG
[/img]

All this doesn't correspond to the main (underscored in the text!) diagnostic traits given in the key. Note that this relates not only to a single or a very few plants (which wouldn't mean much considering high variability of the Euphrasia species), but there are dozens.

Presently I am 'cuddling' the idea that many plants from Trenta can eventually be considered as former Euphrasia carniolica Kerner, 1882, which was later synonymized (Wettstein, accepted also by Yeo, Vitek) with Euphrasia cuspidata Host. Some herbarium sheets (for example WU037556 from Flora Exsiccata Austro-Hungarica, No. 637, available online) show specimens very similar to what I am observing in Trenta. If this assumption is viable at all has yet to be proven, of cause. Also, I am far from being competent to judge whether this synonymization was sufficiently justified. However, the fact that these plants cannot be determined using current keys remains. Any additional thoughts very welcome.

Warmest regards
Amadej

PS: You can write in German language if you prefer. I understand and read it without problems, only talking and writing it is 'a kind of problem' for me.
Dateianhänge
Dryades_E-cuspidata_typical-leave.JPG
Lizenz: CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
Dryades_E-cuspidata_typical-leave.JPG (49.05 KiB) 3572 mal betrachtet

Peter Pilsl
Beiträge: 581
Registriert: Donnerstag 15. Dezember 2016, 09:19
Wohnort: Salzburg

Re: Euphrasia tricuspidata agg.

Beitragvon Peter Pilsl » Montag 15. Februar 2021, 15:54

Peter Pilsl
SABOTAG

Benutzeravatar
amadej
Beiträge: 4
Registriert: Samstag 13. Februar 2021, 11:59

Re: Euphrasia tricuspidata agg.

Beitragvon amadej » Montag 15. Februar 2021, 21:20

Hi Peter,
Thank you for your interest in my problem and the links provided.

According to the key in Vitek in Fischer et al., Exkursionsflora…. (2006) E. salisburgensis (inclusive E. stiriaca) agg. and E. tricuspidata agg. are separated by a single straightforward and relativelly easy to observe trait:
E. salisburgensis agg.: Gut augebildete DeckB mit meist mindestens 3 Zähnen pro seite.
E. tricuspidata agg.: Gut augebildete DeckB mit meist veniger als 3 Zähnen pro seite.

In deed all plants on the herbarium sheets you send me have at least some leaves with 3 teeth per leaf side (except one: sheet no. 18203 down-left specimen). None of the plants in Trenta have leaves with 3 teeth per leaf side. Also the flowers of the E. salisburgensis (var. stiriaca) are distinctly smaller (4-7,5 mm) than of the plants in Trenta (8-10 mm). The leaf width seems larger with E. salisburgensis var. stiriaca than with the plants in Trenta (not only the one on my picture above but also all others). So, I am pretty sure the plants in Trenta do not belong to E. salisburgensis agg.

Note also that Euphrasia salisburgensis var. stiriaca (Wettst.) Halácsy was (similarly as Euphrasia carniolica Kerner) synonymized with Euphrasia cuspidata Host in spite of the fact that it has narrower leaves than E. salisburgensis s.str.

Warmest regards
Amadej

PS: Is it possible to get high resolution scans/photos of the sheets you send me? Would appreciate much.

kurt nadler
Beiträge: 3809
Registriert: Samstag 10. November 2018, 13:26
Wohnort: prellenkirchen,breitenbrunn,wien
Kontaktdaten:

Re: Euphrasia tricuspidata agg.

Beitragvon kurt nadler » Dienstag 16. Februar 2021, 19:29

ohne tiefergehende kenntnis des problems kann ich nur beitragen, dass auch in österreich euphrasia-funde auftauchen, die sich viteks sippen nicht eindeutig zuordnen lassen, auch oberflächlich cuspidata-ähnliche außerhalb des bekannten cuspidata-areals.
weiters scheint der bastardierungs- und / oder introgressionsgrad in euphrasiapopulationen vergleichsweise hoch zu sein, wie in meinem untersuchungsgebiet auf der stubalm in SO-österreich - wenigstens morphologisch - nachgewiesen werden konnte (mit 4-5 distinkten sippen und zahlreichen übergangsformen).
vereinfacht gesagt würde ich behaupten, dass salisburgensis s.l. eine kleinblütige sippe, cuspidata oder tricuspidata s.l. eine großblütige sein sollte.

Benutzeravatar
amadej
Beiträge: 4
Registriert: Samstag 13. Februar 2021, 11:59

Re: Euphrasia tricuspidata agg.

Beitragvon amadej » Dienstag 16. Februar 2021, 22:09

Hi Kurt,

Thanks for your contribution. I agree. Within the genus section Angustifolia (Wettst.) Jörg. (narrow leaved species) and in my region, I definitely see only E. cuspidata L. plants (which nicely fit to Vitek's description) and the plants (not one or two, but many!) like this one on my picture above, which do fit neither to Vitek nor to Tuttin, Flora Europea. The plants in Trenta seem to be morphologically somewhere in between E. cuspidata Host and E. tricuspidata L. As you see from the left side of my picture above, some people (at 'Botanik in Bild', Naturhistorisches Museum Wien, for example) name such plants E. tricuspidata L. Others are suspicious about such naming.

Hybridizing doesn't seem to me probable in my region because I've never seen a single 'true' E. tricuspidata L. that is a plant with strictly lineal leaves with very large length/width ratio and with exclusively one single tiny tooth per leaf side situated very close to the leaf apex. So, one parent is missing in Trenta. The closest locations of E. tricuspidata seem to be about 50 km west prom Trenta near Tolmezzo in Italy. It is not much, but still …..

Anyway, I am afraid only extensive morphometric and statistical (PCA?) approach may give a better insight into this problem. DNA would also be helpful most probably.

Thank you again for your willingness to deal with this problem and your time.

Sincerely
Amadej

Ernst Vitek
Beiträge: 42
Registriert: Donnerstag 26. November 2020, 11:42
Wohnort: Hagenbrunn
Kontaktdaten:

Re: Euphrasia tricuspidata agg.

Beitragvon Ernst Vitek » Sonntag 14. März 2021, 19:01

Sorry that I didn't see your question earlier. Your picture is clear Euphrasia cuspidata. The photo of "tricuspidata" by W. Franz in Botanik-im-Bild is a wrong determination.
Euphrasia tricuspidata has lanceolate leaves with 0-1 tiny tooth on each side.
https://www.zobodat.at/pdf/ANNA_108B_0273-0276.pdf

In Slovenia is E. cuspidata with medium-sized flowers, in most cases richly branched and whole plant green. Very typical e.g. near the origin of Soča/Isonzo; and E. salisburgensis with smaller flowers, and in most cases whole plant purple tinged, and the very similar E. illyrica near the Italian border (should probably better be included in e. salisb.).

Best wishes
Ernst


Zurück zu „Konkrete botanische Themen“

Wer ist online?

Mitglieder in diesem Forum: 0 Mitglieder und 14 Gäste