Calendula suffruticosa Vahl (1791: 94)
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/phytotaxa.605.1.1 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8181554 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/E82AFC0A-1567-CA46-66ED-FD50821EF8F8 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Calendula suffruticosa Vahl (1791: 94) |
status |
|
11. Calendula suffruticosa Vahl (1791: 94) View in CoL View at ENA ; Bonnet & Barratte (1896: 231); Jahandiez & Maire (1934: 788); Quézel & Santa (1963: 969); Pottier-Alapetite (1981: 1024); Le Floc’h & Boulos (2008: 80); Fennane & Ibn Tattou (2005: 29); Dobignard & Chatelain (2011: 189). Type:— TUNISIA. Legi Portum Farinam in montosis, s.c. [Forskål fide Ohle (1975b: 529)] s.n. (lectotype C! [C10000327], designated by Ohle (1975b: 529)).
Description:––Perennial herbs, ± woody at the base, rarely annual. Stems (8) 40–72 (220) cm long, prostrate, decumbent, diffuse, ascending to erect, ± branched, ± glandular pubescent or ± white-arachnoid-tomentose. Basal leaves (1.8) 4.5–8.8 (24) × (0.3) 1–2.2 (7) cm, (0.2) 0.4–0.7 (2.9) mm thick; rarely linear or narrowly-oblanceolate, most often oblanceolate, spatulate or sub-spatulate, rarely obovate; apex acute or obtuse; margins entire to repand-dentate, sinuate-dentate or undulate-dentate, base attenuated in a ± longer petiole; with glandular and non-glandular hairs in variable proportions, sometimes predominantly white-arachnoid pubescent; the middle and upper leaves progressively smaller and shortly petiolate to sessile toward the apex, oblanceolate to lanceolate, usually auriculate. Capitula solitary, (1.5) 2.9–4 (7.1) cm in diameter. Involucre (5.3) 7.5–10 (13.3) × (0.8) 1.1–1.6 (2) mm, with 1–2 rows of bracts, sub-equal, linear-lanceolate, acute, narrowly hyaline, with scarious margins, apex usually reddish, glandular pubescent. Ray florets (13) 18–22 (36), in 1 row; (11.8) 14.5–21 (35) × (1.4) 2.1–3.8 (4.7) mm, usually more than twice the length of the involucre, yellow. Disc florets (21) 40–70 (100); 3.4–4.4 (6.1) × (1.4) 1.6–2.2 (2.6) mm, yellow. Anthers (1.6) 2.1–2.6 mm long. Styles 2.6–3.7 mm long. Outer achenes rostrate (1.2) 11–19 (32) × (0.8) 1.3–1.8 (4.3) mm, generally straight or slightly curved, exceptionaly curved up to 90⁰, without dorsal spines, or with them few and small, rarely up to 2 mm, rarely muricated, usually with one tooth at the base and another at the apex; middle achenes bialate (8) 10.7–15 (29) × (3.0) 5.8–7.8 (15.2) mm, with a rostrum (1.5) 4–6.7 (15.2) mm long; trialate (5) 7–9 (16.2) × (1.3) 5–7.5 (11.2) mm, rarely with a rostrum 2-3.6 (3.7) mm; cymbiform (4) 6.5–8.3 (14.5) × (2.5) 4.5–6.3 (9.5) mm, sub˗cymbiform (4) 8–11.8 (16) × (3) 6.3–8.7 (31.8) mm, or sub-exalate (5.5) 5.5–6.1 (9.7) × (2) 2.5–3.2 (7.2) mm; inner achenes vermiculate-alate (3.3) 4.7–5.8 (8.3) × (1.2) 2.7–3.8 (6.2) mm, ± circular, with 2 narrow lateral wings, and/or vermiculate-exalate (1.9) 3.7–4.8 (8.5) × (0.7) 1.3–1.8 (3.7) mm, circular, hemicyclic, falcate or hook-shaped.
Habitat and distribution:—Sandy beaches and dunes, rocky shores, cliffs, hills and coastal mountains, mostly on limestone, but also on other substrates, at elevations of 0–1100 m. From Madeira, through west and south coast and littoral mountains of the Iberian Peninsula, Sicily, South of Italy, Greece, to Turkey and northern coast and mountains of Morocco and Algeria to Tunisia. Figure 14 View FIGURE 14 .
Notes:—Since its description by Vahl in Forskål (1791: 94), Calendula suffruticosa has often been confused with other taxa. Several authors recorded the species from other Mediterranean countries such as Portugal ( Brotero 1804), Spain ( Boissier 1849: 83) and Morocco ( Ball 1873: 367). Ball (1878: 517) pointed out that the material from Morocco was distinct from C. suffruticosa and he described it as C. maroccana . Even though there are certain morphological similarities between these two taxa, the cymbiform achenes of C. maroccana are distinct from those of the typical C. suffruticosa , and after the chromosome numbers of these plants were known, no more doubts remained about the distinction between these two groups.
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.