 |
A species from New Zealand described as semi-hardy in mild places. I suppose that means not hardy. I have it in the greenhouse, if it doesn't survive there then it is beyond my facilities. Sometimes listed as Adiantum hispidulum var. pubescens or absorbed within A. hispidulum, however the nomenclatural situation remains complicated. Two taxa have been described with this name. A. pubescens Poir. published in 1810 is an illegitimate homonym (reuse of a name that is already taken) and the plant described is now called Hemionitis macrophylla. The New Zealand taxon, A. pubescens Schkuhr (1809) was absorbed within A. hispidulum as A. hispidulum var. pubescens (Schkuhr) Large & Braggins. It is now seen as dubiously distinct from A. hispidulum. NZ Flora says: "Within New Zealand, Allan (1961) recognised six indigenous species – A. aethiopicum, A. cunninghamii, A. diaphanum, A. formosum, A. fulvum and A. hispidulum. Parris & Croxall (1974) subsequently reinstated A. viridescens, Parris (1980) suggested that A. pubescens should be recognised in addition to A. hispidulum, and Brownsey (in Webb et al. 1988) added two naturalised species to the New Zealand flora. However, Large & Braggins (1993) found that A. hispidulum and A. pubescens could only be distinguished on the basis of their hair characters, and even then with a high degree of variability. They treated A. pubescens as a variety of A. hispidulum. Brownsey et al. (2019) investigated the presence or absence of hairs on the abaxial lamina surfaces of all indigenous New Zealand Adiantum species, and concluded that most are dimorphic in this regard, and that such variation should be treated as variation within the bounds of individual species distinguished on the basis of other morphological characters, a conclusion also reached for Australian and Malesian plants by Bostock (1992)." |
|
| 4th October 2018 | ||
