Rubus grimesii L.H. Bailey
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5252/adansonia2021v43a8 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4681701 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D5365613-DD1C-5D54-4B41-FE5FFEA60D53 |
treatment provided by |
Carolina |
scientific name |
Rubus grimesii L.H. Bailey |
status |
|
Rubus grimesii L.H. Bailey View in CoL
( Fig. 12 View FIG A-C)
In Gentes Herbarum 2: 331 ( Bailey 1932).
LECTOTYPE (here designated). — Step 1: designated by Bailey (1943: 406), 0.5 miles west of Williamsburg, James County, Virginia, L.H. Bailey 36, BH. Since Bailey’s collection 36 was made on two different days; as step 2, herein we choose the eight sheets collected on 16.V.1930, as selected by James L. Reveal, 2013 ( BH 000 080 755 , BH 000 080 757 , BH 000 080 760 [ Fig. 12 View FIG A-C]; BH 000 080 756 , BH 000 080 758 , BH 000 080 759 , BH 000 080 761 , BH 000 080 762 ).
FINDINGS
The lectotype of R. grimesii bears flowering branches that somewhat resemble those of R. floridus , but they are more curved and the angles at which their inflorescences are held are mostly less acute. In addition, the prickles on their pedicels and inflorescence rachises are finely aciculate, quite unlike the strong, hooked prickles of the R. floridus type.
Since Enslen’s specimen lacks a primocane, any clear information about plant habit, or even details about geography, we cannot determine whether it is determinate side branch from a mounding dewberry (such as R. grimesii ), or from an atypical, upright Alleghenienses (perhaps even a rare taxon in that section). Thus, we choose to maintain it as a nomen incertum.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |