Difference between revisions of "Rosa rubiginosa var. nemoralis"
in P. J. Redouté, Roses 2: 23. 1821.
FNA>Volume Importer |
imported>Volume Importer |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Treatment/ID | {{Treatment/ID | ||
|accepted_name=Rosa rubiginosa var. nemoralis | |accepted_name=Rosa rubiginosa var. nemoralis | ||
| − | |accepted_authority=(Léman) Thory | + | |accepted_authority=(Léman) Thory |
|publications={{Treatment/Publication | |publications={{Treatment/Publication | ||
|title=in P. J. Redouté, Roses | |title=in P. J. Redouté, Roses | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
|name=Rosa nemoralis | |name=Rosa nemoralis | ||
|authority=Léman | |authority=Léman | ||
| + | |rank=species | ||
|publication_title=Bull. Sci. Soc. Philom. Paris | |publication_title=Bull. Sci. Soc. Philom. Paris | ||
|publication_place=1818: 94. 1818 | |publication_place=1818: 94. 1818 | ||
| Line 20: | Line 21: | ||
|name=R. micrantha | |name=R. micrantha | ||
|authority=Borrer | |authority=Borrer | ||
| + | |rank=species | ||
}} | }} | ||
|hierarchy=Rosaceae;Rosaceae subfam. Rosoideae;Rosaceae tribe Roseae;Rosa;Rosa subg. Rosa;Rosa sect. Caninae;Rosa rubiginosa;Rosa rubiginosa var. nemoralis | |hierarchy=Rosaceae;Rosaceae subfam. Rosoideae;Rosaceae tribe Roseae;Rosa;Rosa subg. Rosa;Rosa sect. Caninae;Rosa rubiginosa;Rosa rubiginosa var. nemoralis | ||
| Line 35: | Line 37: | ||
|elevation=0–700 m | |elevation=0–700 m | ||
|distribution=N.S.;Ont.;P.E.I.;Que.;Conn.;D.C.;Ill.;Ind.;Ky.;Maine;Md.;Mass.;Mo.;N.J.;N.Y.;N.C.;Ohio;Oreg.;Pa.;R.I.;S.C.;Tenn.;Tex.;Va.;Wash.;W.Va.;Wis.;Europe;introduced also in Pacific Islands (New Zealand);Australia. | |distribution=N.S.;Ont.;P.E.I.;Que.;Conn.;D.C.;Ill.;Ind.;Ky.;Maine;Md.;Mass.;Mo.;N.J.;N.Y.;N.C.;Ohio;Oreg.;Pa.;R.I.;S.C.;Tenn.;Tex.;Va.;Wash.;W.Va.;Wis.;Europe;introduced also in Pacific Islands (New Zealand);Australia. | ||
| − | |discussion=<p>Variety nemoralis is often found near < | + | |introduced=true |
| + | |discussion=<p>Variety nemoralis is often found near <i></i>var.<i> rubiginosa</i> with apparently little or no ecological distinctions between them. They differ in morphological characters by degrees of expression rather than complete distinctions. The rank of variety follows, for example, the recommendation of H. J. Scoggan (1978–1979).</p> | ||
|tables= | |tables= | ||
|references= | |references= | ||
| Line 44: | Line 47: | ||
-->{{#Taxon: | -->{{#Taxon: | ||
name=Rosa rubiginosa var. nemoralis | name=Rosa rubiginosa var. nemoralis | ||
| − | + | |authority=(Léman) Thory | |
| − | |authority=(Léman) Thory | ||
|rank=variety | |rank=variety | ||
|parent rank=species | |parent rank=species | ||
| Line 60: | Line 62: | ||
|publication year=1821 | |publication year=1821 | ||
|special status=Introduced | |special status=Introduced | ||
| − | |source xml=https:// | + | |source xml=https://bitbucket.org/aafc-mbb/fna-data-curation/src/2e0870ddd59836b60bcf96646a41e87ea5a5943a/coarse_grained_fna_xml/V9/V9_135.xml |
|subfamily=Rosaceae subfam. Rosoideae | |subfamily=Rosaceae subfam. Rosoideae | ||
|tribe=Rosaceae tribe Roseae | |tribe=Rosaceae tribe Roseae | ||
Latest revision as of 23:54, 5 November 2020
Prickles infrastipular and internodal, lengths ± uniform, aciculi and setae absent on flowering branches. Leaves: terminal blades mostly oval, 12–20 × 8–14 mm, apex usually obtuse, abaxial surfaces seldom densely glandular. Flowers 2–3.5 cm diam.; sepals deciduous before or as hips mature, styles usually glabrous, stylar orifice 1/5–1/6 diam. of rims 2.5–4 mm diam. Hips 10–12 × 7–9 mm. 2n = 35, 42.
Phenology: Flowering May–Aug.
Habitat: Thickets, clearings, roadsides
Elevation: 0–700 m
Distribution
Introduced; N.S., Ont., P.E.I., Que., Conn., D.C., Ill., Ind., Ky., Maine, Md., Mass., Mo., N.J., N.Y., N.C., Ohio, Oreg., Pa., R.I., S.C., Tenn., Tex., Va., Wash., W.Va., Wis., Europe, introduced also in Pacific Islands (New Zealand), Australia.
Discussion
Variety nemoralis is often found near var. rubiginosa with apparently little or no ecological distinctions between them. They differ in morphological characters by degrees of expression rather than complete distinctions. The rank of variety follows, for example, the recommendation of H. J. Scoggan (1978–1979).
Selected References
None.