I notice that Flora of North America seems to pretty much define Arnica parryi as being rayless or, more specifically, “Ray florets usually 0 (sometimes peripheral florets pistillate; corollas yellow, laminae rudimentary)”. This covers the characteristics of plants of this species in my area but I also notice that Jepson includes the following statement: “Unabridged Note: If recognized taxonomically, radiate plants assignable to Arnica parryi subsp. sonnei (Greene) Maguire. G. Schoolcraft 1994, 1997.” Where do these radiate plants of ssp. sonnei fall in the Flora of North America treatment?
Looks like they just treat it as a synonym / don’t recognize it as a separate taxon:
http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=1&taxon_id=250066125
(as does POWO http://powo.science.kew.org/taxon/urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:303234-2#synonyms)
Looking around further, here’s more on same: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/18308209
Thanks, @bouteloua. I just find it odd that the description doesn’t seem to accommodate flowers that are clearly petiolate (see various examples in iNat observations, assuming they are all correctly ID’d (not that I am doubting the IDs)).
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.