Difference between revisions of "Potentilla sect. Biflorae"
in N. L. Britton et al., N. Amer. Fl. 22(7): 11. 1959.
FNA>Volume Importer |
FNA>Volume Importer |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
|name=Potentilla ser. | |name=Potentilla ser. | ||
|authority=Biflorae (Rydberg) Soják | |authority=Biflorae (Rydberg) Soják | ||
| − | }}{{Treatment/ID/Synonym | + | }} {{Treatment/ID/Synonym |
|name=Potentilla subg. Micropogon | |name=Potentilla subg. Micropogon | ||
|authority=Bunge | |authority=Bunge | ||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
|distribution=nw North America;Asia. | |distribution=nw North America;Asia. | ||
|discussion=<p>Species 1.</p><!-- | |discussion=<p>Species 1.</p><!-- | ||
| − | --><p>Although sect. Biflorae deviates from the main body of Potentilla and superficially resembles the mainly Asian genus Dasiphora in shoot and leaf architecture and in some floral features, molecular analyses place the species unequivocally in the Potentilla clade, not in the Fragaria clade with Dasiphora (C. Dobeš and J. Paule 2010; M. H. Töpel et al. 2011).</p> | + | --><p>Although sect. Biflorae deviates from the main body of <i>Potentilla</i> and superficially resembles the mainly Asian genus <i>Dasiphora</i> in shoot and leaf architecture and in some floral features, molecular analyses place the species unequivocally in the <i>Potentilla</i> clade, not in the <i>Fragaria</i> clade with <i>Dasiphora</i> (C. Dobeš and J. Paule 2010; M. H. Töpel et al. 2011).</p> |
|tables= | |tables= | ||
|references= | |references= | ||
| Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
|publication year=1959 | |publication year=1959 | ||
|special status= | |special status= | ||
| − | |source xml=https://jpend@bitbucket.org/aafc-mbb/fna-data-curation.git/src/ | + | |source xml=https://jpend@bitbucket.org/aafc-mbb/fna-data-curation.git/src/8f726806613d60c220dc4493de13607dd3150896/coarse_grained_fna_xml/V9/V9_186.xml |
|subfamily=Rosaceae subfam. Rosoideae | |subfamily=Rosaceae subfam. Rosoideae | ||
|tribe=Rosaceae tribe Potentilleae | |tribe=Rosaceae tribe Potentilleae | ||
Revision as of 19:15, 18 September 2019
Perennials, tufted, not stoloniferous; taproots not fleshy-thickened; vestiture of long and crisped hairs, glands absent or sparse, not red. Stems ± erect, not flagelliform, not rooting at nodes, lateral to persistent basal rosettes, (0.1–)0.5–1(–1.5) dm, lengths 1.5–3 times basal leaves. Leaves: basal sometimes 2-ranked; cauline leaves 0(–1); primary leaves ternate, appearing ± palmate, 2–7 cm; petiole: long hairs absent or spreading to ascending, weak, glands usually absent; leaflets 3, at tip of leaf axis, separate, cuneate-ovate in outline, margins strongly revolute, central leaflets divided nearly to base into 3 equal lobes, lateral divided nearly to base into 2 lobes, lobes entire, rarely again 2-fid, surfaces ± dissimilar, abaxial whitish with thick waxy bloom, cottony hairs absent, adaxial light green, often purple-tinged, not glaucous, long hairs weak or absent. Inflorescences solitary flowers or 2–3(–4)-flowered, ± cymose, open. Pedicels straight in fruit, 0.5–1.5(–2) cm, proximal not much longer than distal. Flowers 5-merous; hypanthium 2–2.5 mm diam.; petals pale yellow to yellow, ± obcordate, 6–10 mm, longer than sepals, apex retuse; stamens ca. 20; styles subapical, filiform-tapered, not papillate-swollen proximally, 2.5–4 mm. Achenes smooth.
Distribution
nw North America, Asia.
Discussion
Species 1.
Although sect. Biflorae deviates from the main body of Potentilla and superficially resembles the mainly Asian genus Dasiphora in shoot and leaf architecture and in some floral features, molecular analyses place the species unequivocally in the Potentilla clade, not in the Fragaria clade with Dasiphora (C. Dobeš and J. Paule 2010; M. H. Töpel et al. 2011).
Selected References
None.