37.22 Poa L. (1753), Sp. Pl. 67.
S
Arctopoa (Griseb.) Probat. (1974), Nov. Sist. Vyssh. Rast. 11: 49 (incl.).
Comments:
(1)
Poa platyantha Kom. is accepted as species in Fl. Arct. URSS and given as arctic. It
must appear someplace, at least in synonymy. Until further decisions, it has been
added as a separate species after P. malacantha. (Elven)
Sect. Arctopoa (Griseb.) Tzvelev in Tolm (1964), Fl. Arct. URSS 2: 121.
B
Glyceria sect. Arctopoa Griseb. in Ledeb. (1853 [or: 1852?]), Fl. Ross. 4: 392.
37.22.1 Poa eminens C. Presl (1830), Reliq. Haenk. 1: 273.
S
Arctopoa eminens (C. Presl) Probat. (1974). Nov. Sist. Vyssh. Rast. 11: 50.
T
[Described from Vancouver Island: "Nootka-Sund", leg. Haenke. Isotype in LE.]
2n=
(1) 28 (4x). (2) 42 (6x). (3) 62.
2nD
(1) Sokolovskaya (1960a Rus); Hedberg (1967 Ala); Sokolovskaya & Probatova
(1968, 1973a Rus). (2) Sokolovskaya (1963, 1968 Rus); Sokolovskaya & Probatova
(1968, 1973a Rus); Zhukova et al. (1973 Rus). (3) ?
G
RFE ALA CAN
Comments:
Sect. Aphydris (Griseb.) Tzvelev (1974), Nov. Sist. Vyssh. Rast. 11: 25.
B
Glyceria sect. Aphydris Griseb. in Ledeb. (1853 [or: 1852?]), Fl. Ross. 4: 392.
Comments:
(1)
Is sect Aphydris sufficiently well separated from sect. Arctopoa to be upheld? (Elven)
37.22.2 Poa trautvetteri Tzvelev in Tolm. (1964), Fl. Arct. URSS 2: 122.
S
Arctopoa trautvetteri (Tzvelev) Probat. (1974), Nov. Sist. Vyssh. Rast. 11: 51.
T
Siberia: ad Lena inferiorem, prope pag. Goworowo, 25.07.1875, leg. Chekanowski
(LE) holotype.
2n=
42 (6x).
2nD
Probatova (1974); Sokolovskaya & Rudyka in Probatova (1975).
G
SIB
Comments:
37.22.3 Poa subfastigiata Trin. in Ledeb. (1829), Fl. Altaic. 1: 96.
S
Arctopoa subfastigiata (Trin.) Probat. (1974), Nov. Sist. Vyssh. Rast. 11: 52.
T
Siberia: Transbaikal, ad Udam, herb. Pallas (LE) holotype.
2n=
42 (6x).
2nD
Sokolovskaya & Probatova (1968).
G
RFE?
Comments:
(1)
Stable or casual in East Chukotka? (Elven)
WARNING! Might be excluded if not stable in Russian Far East.
Sect. Poa
S
Sect. Bolbophorum Ascherson & Graebner (1900), Syn. Mitteleur. Fl. 2, 1: 391; Sect.
Cenisia Ascherson & Graebner (1900), Syn. Mitteleur. Fl. 2, 1: 404.
37.22.4 Poa alpina L. (1753), Sp. Pl. 67.
S
Comments:
(1)
The status of the viviparous plants is enigmatic. In Fennoscandia, Iceland and
Svalbard they are now treated as a variety, at best. Iversen (1992) showed, in a local
study, that seminiferous and viviparous plants often shared isoenzyme phenotypes,
(2)
i.e., genotypes. The main reason of the preference for variety is that the vivipary (and
seminifery) very easily can be induced by temperature changes. At the same time, the
viviparous plants have their own ecology and partly distribution. This is not
necessarily a conflict. Certain habitats and general climates may be more favourable
for induction of vivipary than others. The circumpolar pattern is rather distinct; the
viviparous plants are amphi-Atlantic (as many other viviparous grasses), but there the
seminiferous plants avoid the really harsh northern Arctic.
I propose status as variety; the well-documented facts about the genetics of
vivipary in this species prohibit use of subspecies. (Elven)
After discussions we decided upon varieties. (Tzvelev & Elven)
37.22.4.1 Poa alpina L. var. alpina
S
P. alpina L. subsp. alpina.
2n=
(14-)21-74 (2x-10/11x).
2nD
(1) Conert (1998, 2n=14-64). (2) Tzvelev (1964, 2n=21-44). (3) Tzvelev (1976,
2n=28-42). (4) Löve & Löve (1975) list very numerous counts in the range 2n= 2174, many as arctic. (5) Engelskjøn (1979) lists 42 counts in the range 2n=31-52 from
S and C Norway.
G
ICE NOR RUS SIB RFE ALA CAN GRL
Comments:
37.22.4.2 Poa alpina L. var. vivipara L. (1753), Sp. Pl. 67.
S
P. alpina L. subsp. vivipara (L.) Arcang. (1882), Comp. Fl. Ital. 785.
2n=
32-52.
2nD
Engelskjøn (1979) lists 18 counts in this range from S and N Norway, Bear Island
and Spitsbergen.
G
ICE NOR RUS CAN GRL
Comments:
(1)
Poa jemtlandica is listed among the synonyms in Tzvelev's draft, but see below.
(Elven)
(2)
Poa x herjedalica H. Smith is often accepted as a taxon in Nordic literature and
reaches the Arctic both in N Norway and in Svalbard. It is interpreted as a
polymorphic hybrid between P. alpina and P. pratensis subsp. alpigena s. l. The
plants (populations) seem to be mainly recent and very polyphyletic hybrids that
reproduce by bulbils. I propose that we don't accept it as a taxon but perhaps mention
it in a comment, like this. (Elven)
37.22.5 Poa x jemtlandica (Almq.) K. Richt. (1890), Pl. Eur. 1: 84.
B
Poa alpina L. subsp. jemtlandica Almq. (1883), Bot. Not. 1883: 115.
S
P. alpina L. x flexuosa Sm.
2n=
36-38.
2nD
Nygren (1950 Scand); Hedberg (1958 Scotl); see Brysting et al. (1999).
G
ICE?
Comments:
(1)
Added to Tzvelev's draft. A bulbil-reproducing hybrid that occurs and spreads quite
independent of its parents (Nannfeldt 1937, Brysting et al. 1997, 1999, Brysting
1999). Its hybrid origin is now very well documented by several techniques
(morphological intermediacy, isoenzyme additive pattern, GISH addition and
translocation of genomes, see Brysting et al. 1997, 1999). Its origin is probably
polytopic but it is homogeneous morphologically, often occurs apart from its parents,
and it is not recent hybrid swarms as genetical restructuring and stabilisation have
taken place after the hybridisation(s). Its range is in S, C and southern N Scandinavia,
Scotland and Iceland, and may reach the Arctic in Iceland. In opposition to very
many other taxa proposed in many drafts, this is a documented hybridogenous taxon.
(Elven)
The Poa arctica R. Br. aggregate (P. almasovii, P. arctica, P. beringiana, P. lanata, P.
macrocalyx, P. malacantha, P. platyantha)
Comments:
(1)
Most listed species - P. almasovii, P. beringiana, P. macrocalyx, P. malacantha and
P. platyantha - are only tentatively placed in this aggregate as I know nothing about
them. (Elven)
(2)
Nearly all entities found on the Russian side are treated as species (P. malacantha, P.
platyantha, P. lanata, P. almasovii, P. beringiana, P. macrocalyx, partly also P.
tolmatchewii) whereas the two entities found only on the American side are treated as
subspecies (subspp. williamsii, longiculmis). This is probably mainly a result of the
'traditional' difference in handling of categories in Russia and North America and
must be adjusted in a joint checklist! (Elven)
37.22.6 Poa arctica R. Br. (1823), Chloris Melvill. 30.
S
T
Canada: Melville Island [1819-1820], leg. J. Edwards (BM) holotype.
Comments:
(1)
Some results from Haugen (2000) may have relevance to the taxonomic decisions
here. The entities investigated and compared, mainly to test two of Tzvelev's hybrid
hypotheses, are: P. abbreviata, P. alpigena viviparous type, P. alpigena subsp.
colpodea, P. arctica subsp. arctica, P. arctica subsp. cespitans, P. glauca and P.
hartzii. The investigation concerned morphology (about 50 characters), reproductivity
and isoenzymes as genetical markers.
The investigated Poa alpigena and P. arctica are insufficiently separated in
most morphological characters (except the lemma hairiness) and also less distinct in
isoenzymes than expected. Poa arctica subsp. cespitans is slightly more distinct from
P. arctica subsp. arctica in morphology than the latter is from P. alpigena. Poa
arctica subsp. cespitans is also distinct enzymatically although most closely related to
P. arctica subsp. arctica. Poa alpigena subsp. colpodea is fairly distinct, both
morphologically and enzymatically. In morphology, it is a little more distinct from
'normal' P. alpigena than the latter is from P. arctica subsp. arctica. In enzymes,
however, P. alpigena subsp. colpodea is closer to P. alpigena s. str. than to P.
arctica. Some further results are referred to below.
The investigated Svalbard plants of P. arctica subsp. arctica correspond very
well both with the type material (Melville Island) and with abundant material
collected in Melville Island in 1999. It obviously belong to the 'type' subspecies.
Svalbard P. arctica subsp. cespitans is indistinguishable from Simmons' type
collections from Ellesmere Island and also from Greenland plants named as P. arctica
subsp. cespitans. Poa alpigena subsp. colpodea is described from Svalbard, and the
investigated plants are very close to the type and to plants named as such in arctic
America. We therefore think the results have relevance for these taxa also outside
Svalbard.
What they imply is, e.g., that the separation between the Poa arctica and the
P. pratensis aggregates, the latter exemplified by Svalbard P. alpigena var. vivipara
and subsp. colpodea, is problematic. If we separate these two at species level (as we
probably should), then we might have to recognize as species also P. arctica subsp.
cespitans (not the same as P. tolmatchewii, see below) and perhaps also P. alpigena
subsp. colpodea. (Elven)
(2)
As to subsp. stricta. Tzvelev (1964, 1976, in draft) accepts as an arctic subspecies P.
arctica subsp. stricta (Lindeb.) Nannf. (1940), Symb. Bot. Upsal. 4, 4: 67. This
subspecies is based on P. stricta Lindeb. (1855, Bot. Not. 1855: 10), non Roth (1821),
nec D. Don (1821). Synonyms: P. lindebergii Tzvelev (1974), Nov. Sist. Vyssh. Rast.
11: 27; P. tolmatchewii Roshev. var. stricta (Lindeb.) Tzvelev in Tolm. (1964), Fl.
Arct. URSS 2: 132.
Tzvelev equalizes (in his draft and in 1964 and 1976) the local S Norwegian
P. stricta Lindeb. with some viviparous segregate in the P. arctica aggregate, by him
reported as arctic from Severnaya Zemlya and Kharaulakh. In S Norway, what has
been named P. stricta is a distinct and fairly frequent plant within a very compact
area of about 30 x 40 km. Its most distinctive characters, the tussocky growth with
both intra- and extravaginal shoots, the vivipary and the narrow panicle, are not
shared by the other S Norwegian representatives of the P. arctica complex. The
narrow panicle is, however, purely modificative. It is characteristic of its wet late
snowbed sites, but when it grows on low-lying riverbanks and roadsides it becomes
spreading (and large).
Some years ago (in 1990) we made some initial enzyme study, testing a
possible hybrid origin from the seminiferous P. arctica var./subsp. elongata (the most
frequent local race of P. arctica) and P. glauca or flexuosa, without much luck. The
question of what P. stricta Lindeb. is therefore remains unsolved. What it is not, is a
widespread arctic race. The name 'stricta' has also sometimes been applied to arctic
plants in Scandinavian herbaria, mainly in the late 19th century, but these differ in
most details except for being viviparous. Either P. stricta Lindeb. (=P. lindebergii
Tzvelev) is a local and probably hybridogenous S Norwegian taxon (as I believe), or
it is a recurrent vivipary mutation scattered throughout the Arctic. In the latter case, it
is not a taxon.
Another special feature of the 'stricta' entity is that it has a lower
chromosome number than all other North Atlantic taxa of the P. arctica aggregate
(there are five named subspecies in Norway alone). It consistently seem to have
2n=38-39 (Nannfeldt 1940, S Norway; Nygren 1950a, 1950b, S Norway; Vestre in
Engelskjøn 1979, S Norway). It might be fairly local a viviparous offspring from a
hybridisation between P. arctica and a low-ploid species, most probably P. flexuosa.
(Elven)
Tzvelev's recombination (1964) as a variety of P. tolmatchewii indicates that
he at that time (and perhaps now?) considered 'stricta'/lindebergii as a viviparous
parallel of P. arctica subsp. cespitans. We have found some indications of vivipary in
arctic P. arctica subsp. cespitans, and most probably the arctic reports refer to such or
related plants. They differ in most characters from the S Norwegian 'stricta'. They
might better be named, until we know more, as a viviparous variety of P. arctica
subsp. cespitans, if they are worth a name at all. (Elven)
37.22.6.1 Poa arctica R. Br. subsp. arctica
S
P. arctica R. Br. var. arctica.
2n=
42-74.
2nD
Tzvelev (1976, 2n=42-74).
G
NOR RUS SIB RFE ALA CAN GRL
Comments:
37.22.6.2 Poa arctica R. Br. subsp. cespitans Simmons ex Nannf. (1940), Symb. Bot. Upsal.
4, 4: 71
S
P. arctica R. Br. var. cespitans (Simmons ex Nannf.) Hyl. (1945), Uppsala Univ.
årsskr. 7: 78; ?P. filipes Lange (1890), Consp. Fl. Groenl. 175.
T
Canada: Ellesmere Island, Harbour Fjord, leg. H.G. Simmons 4000 (UPS) lectotype
selected by Nannfeldt (1940).
2n=
56 (8x).
2nD
Löve & Löve (1975) list 12 counts, nearly all as arctic.
G
NOR RUS CAN GRL
Comments:
(1)
Tzvelev (1976, p. 455) synonymised P. arctica subsp. cespitans with P. tolmatchewii
Roshev. and stated it to be "undoubtedly hybridogeous (or even a modern hybrid; P.
arctica x glauca)". This raises two questions: (a) whether the two are synonymous;
and (b) whether the hybrid hypothesis can be supported for one or the other (or both).
Poa tolmatchewii Roshev. (1932), Izv. Bot. Sada AN SSSR 30: 299, was
typified from Siberia: eastern Taimyr, lower reaches of Yamu-Taimyr, lower part of
the slope near Yamu-Tarida bank, 13.09.1928, leg. A. Tolmachev 834 (LE).
Tzvelev's hybrid hypothesis probably mainly concerns P. tolmatchewii. By induction
this hypothesis has also been transferred to P. arctica subsp. cespitans.
There is no evidence that P. arctica subsp. cespitans and P. tolmatchewii are
the same, or even very similar. The diagnostic characters given for P. tolmatchewii do
not fit subsp. cespitans (see Haugen 2000). Tzvelev's hybrid hypothesis may therefore
well be true for P. tolmatchewii but not for P. arctica subsp. cespitans. I have also
excluded most of the Russian areas and Alaska from the distribution as these reports
are based on a too extended concept of P. arctica subsp. cespitans.
Poa arctica subsp. cespitans differs from P. arctica subsp. arctica in
numerous morphological characters, but the differences do not point in the direction
of P. glauca. The isoenzymes show no addition pattern indicative of influence from
P. glauca or any other species, at least not in the North Atlantic area (Haugen 2000). I
therefore think we should forget the hybrid hypothesis proposed in Tzvelev's draft.
Poa arctica subsp. cespitans is genetically simpler, with fewer markers, and
at a lower ploidy level than P. arctica subsp. arctica (Haugen 2000). It seems to be
constantly octoploid whereas most supported counts of P. arctica subsp. arctica are
higher. The Svalbard plants are pollen-sterile and agamospermous, and Canadian
material we have investigated is similar. If it is involved in hybridisation, it is rather
as an agamospermous offspring from a parental taxon in the P. arctica aggregate than
as an offspring.
This taxon might be also recognized as a species (perhaps as P. filipes) on
level with some of the Beringian species. It is at least as distinct as many of these. It
seems to be amphi-Atlantic and does not reach Siberia and Taimyr; it reaches east to
Novaya Zemlya in Eurasia, west to central arctic Canada in North America. In the
northwestern American material, there is a lack of well-defined 'cespitans' whereas it
nearly dominates in eastern Canada and in much of Greenland. (Elven)
37.22.6.3 Poa arctica R. Br. subsp. williamsii (Nash) Hultén (1943), Lunds Univ. Årsskr., n.
f., avd. 2, 38, 1: 202.
B
P. williamsii Nash (1901), Bull. New York Bot. Gard. 2, 6: 151.
S
2n=
2nD
G
ALA
Comments:
37.22.6.4 Poa arctica R. Br. subsp. longiculmis Hultén (1943), Lunds Univ. Årsskr., n. f.,
avd. 2, 38, 1: 202.
S
P. brintnellii Raup. (1947), Sargentia 6: 112.
2n=
2nD
G
ALA
Comments:
37.22.7 Poa lanata Scribn. & Merr. (1910), Contr. U.S. Natl. Herb. 13: 72.
S
P. arctica R. Br. subsp. lanata (Scribn. & Merr.) Soreng (1992), Phytologia 71: 395.
T
[Described from the Aleutian Islands.]
2n=
(1) 42. (2) 80.
2nD
(1) ? (2) ?
G
RFE ALA CAN
Comments: See also P. malacantha.
(1)
This entity is clearly different from the two major arctic entities ('arctica', 'cespitans')
and we have to decide whether we shall recognise all the eight Beringian entities, if
all shall be included in this aggregate, and whether each of them are to be recognised
as species or subspecies. (Elven)
(2)
The two chromosome numbers indicated in Tzvelev's draft are very far apart. (Elven)
WARNING! Might be reduced to subspecies.
37.22.8 Poa malacantha Kom. (1924), Bot. Mater. Gerb. Glavn. Bot. Sada RSFSR 5, 10:
148.
S
P. komarovi Roshev. (1927), Izv. Glavn. Bot. Sada SSSR 26: 286.
T
Russian Far East: Kamtchatka, subalpine meadows on Kashka River below the brook,
15.06.1909, leg. Komarov 2832 (LE) holotype.
2n=
(1) 42 (5x). (2) 56 (8x). (3) c. 60-80.
2nD
(1) Sokolovskaya (1963); Zhukova (1968). (2) Löve & Löve (1975) list six Russian
counts, all as arctic. (3) Löve & Löve (1975) list 11 Russian counts, most as arctic.
G
RFE ALA
Comments:
(1)
From the descriptions, the entities P. malacantha, P. platyantha and P. lanata seem
to be very close and could perhaps be evaluated for merging. (Elven)
WARNING! Might be included in P. lanata or reduced to subspecies.
37.22.9 Poa platyantha Kom. (1924), Bot. Mater. Gerb. Glavn. Bot. Sada RSFSR 5, 10: 148.
S
2n=
(1) 42 (6x). (2) 64. (3) 70-72. (4) 84 (12x).
2nD
(1) Sokolovskaya & Probatova (1968). (2) Sokolovskaya & Probatova (1973a). (3)
Sokolovskaya (1963); Sokolovskaya & Probatova (1968, 1973a). (4) Sokolovskaya &
Probatova (1973a).
G
RFE
Comments: See also P. malacantha.
(1)
Added tentatively to Tzvelev's draft as it is included by Fl. Arct. URSS and reported
from Chukotka Peninsula (East Chukotka) and not mentioned in any synonymy in
Tzvelev's draft. (Elven)
WARNING! Might be included in P. lanata or reduced to subspecies.
37.22.10 Poa almasovii Golub. (1936), Sist. Zam. Gerb. Tomsk. Univ. 4: 1.
S
T
Russian Far East: Okhotsk coast, Nogaevo farm house, precipices of the coastal
coniform hills, 1934, leg. Golub (TK), holotype.
2n=
56 (8x).
2nD
Probatova (1974).
G
RFE
Comments:
(1)
Tzvelev's description (1976: 454) indicates that this might be some local
hybridogenous populations, possibly not worthy of specific rank. (Elven)
WARNING! Will be excluded if not well justified, see comment.
37.22.11 Poa beringiana Probat. (1971), Nov. Sist. Vyssh. Rast. 8: 34.
S
T
Russian Far East: Komandor Islands, Medny Island, near village Preobrazhenskoe,
slope near the mountain peak, 26.08.1965, leg. Probatova 532 (LE), holotype.
2n=
42 (6x).
2nD
?
G
RFE
Comments:
(1)
More information is needed before full acceptance of this taxon. (Elven)
37.22.12 Poa macrocalyx Trautv. & Mey. in Middend. (1856), Reise 1, 2: 103.
S
P. hispidula Vasey (1893), Contr. U.S. Natl. Herb. 1: 273.
T
Russian Far East: The Great Shantar Island, 08.1844, leg. Middendorff (LE),
holotype.
2n=
c.70 (10x).
2nD
?
G
ALA
Comments:
37.22.13 Poa porsildii Gjærevoll (1957), K. Norske Vidensk. Selsk. Forh. 29, 16: 72.
S
P. vaseyochloa auct., non Scribn. (1899).
T
[Described from Alaska-Yukon.]
2n=
2nD
G
CAN?
Comments:
(1)
A border case. The northernmost reported occurrence on the E side of Richardson
Mts is in the North Alaska-Yukon region, if it is within the Arctic as defined. (Elven)
The Poa pratensis aggregate (P. angustifolia, P. humilis, P. pratensis, P. raduliformis, P.
sublanata)
Comments:
(1)
Most taxa of the P. pratensis aggregate are more or less apomictic (Müntzing 1932,
1940 and many later studies), with both agamospermy and bulbil propagation. The
limits between the listed entities are often unclear. It might be better to consider many
of them as entities of lower rank than species. This is traditionally and currently done
in NW Europe: P. pratensis subsp. pratensis, subsp. alpigena, subsp. angustifolia,
and subsp. subcaerulea (P. humilis). See comments below. (Elven)
37.22.14 Poa pratensis L. (1753), Sp. Pl. 67.
S
Comments:
(1)
The current approach to the P. pratensis complex in NW Europe is a partly artificial
grouping into four entities, now mostly recognized as subspecies. The key characters
are: lower glume one-veined - subsp. angustifolia and subsp. pratensis, three-veined subsp. alpigena and subsp. subcaerulea. Then subsp. angustifolia is separated from
subsp. pratensis by leaves of vegetative shoots very narrow and folded versus broader
and flat, and panicle comparatively narrow with short lower branches and small
spikelets versus pyramidal with longer lower branches and larger spikelets. Subsp.
subcaerulea is separated from subsp. alpigena mainly by being much shorter, with
short broad leaves, a broad pyramidal panicle with comparatively few but large
spikelets, and typically with very distinct bluish bloom on spikelets and sometimes on
other parts (lost in the herbaria). Applying these and a few other criteria, subsp.
angustifolia becomes fairly homogeneous and consistent, subsp. subcaerulea and
subsp. pratensis also more or less recognisable, whereas subsp. alpigena becomes
very wide and heterogeneous, see below.
Tzvelev proposes to keep P. angustifolia and P. humilis as separate species.
He proposes five subspecies of P. pratensis. Three of these I agree with, the fourth I
have no knowledge of, and the fifth I disagree with. (Elven)
37.22.14.1 Poa pratensis L. subsp. pratensis
S
2n=
18-c.124.
2nD
Conert (1998, 2n=18-c.124); Tzvelev (draft, 2n=52-70).
G
ICE*? NOR*? RUS SIB RFE ALA*? CAN*? GRL*?
Comments:
(1)
As defined above, subsp. pratensis becomes a fairly southern plant. It is not assumed
to be native in the Middle and North Boreal parts of Fennoscandia (see e.g. Hylander
1966, Hämet-Ahti et al. 1986, Elven in Lid & Lid 1994) but as it is among the most
frequently used forage grasses it is introduced regularly. Strains of subsp. alpigena
are also extensively cultivated for forage in northern areas and are much more
persistent there than subsp. pratensis. All plants seen from Greenland, Svalbard and
arctic mainland Norway - also the introduced ones - are excluded from subsp.
pratensis in this meaning. The discrepancy in the distributional part, where subsp.
pratensis is stated as introduced and perhaps casual in all Nordic, Greenlandic and
American regions but as native in nearly all Russian regions, is obviously not a
biological fact but a result of different understanding of this taxon. We must reach a
common understanding of it before the checklist is finished. (Elven)
37.22.14.2 Poa pratensis L. subsp. alpigena (Fr. ex Blytt) Hiit. (1933), Suom. Kasvio 205.
B
P. pratensis taxon alpigena Fr. ex Blytt (1861), Norges Fl. 130.
S
P. alpigena (Fr. ex Blytt) Lindm. (1918), Sv. Fanerogamfl. 91.
T
See comment (1).
2n=
28-95.
2nD
Tzvelev (1976, 2n=35-95); Flovik (1940 Sb, 2n=35); Flovik (1938 Sb, 2n=42+4ff and
44, viviparous plants); Solokolskaya & Strelkova (1941 N Rus, 2n=56); Engelskjøn
(1979, six counts in the range 2n=61-84 from C Norway and Svalbard for
seminiferous plants); Sokolovskaya & Strelkova (1960 N Rus, 2n=70-72);
Sokolovskaya & Strelkova (1941 N Rus, 2n=84).
G
ICE NOR RUS SIB RFE ALA CAN GRL
Comments:
(1)
Blytt (1861: 130) had a fairly narrow concept when he described this taxon, here
translated from the original Norwegian which might be difficult to read for most of
you: "[taxon] alpigena. With narrow folded leaves; panicle narrow, 2-5 panicle
branches in each node, smooth, sinuous; spikelets very small and purplish colored
and usually 3-flowered." He also, at the same time, recognized a taxon rigens (as part
of his taxon subcaerulea) and a taxon macrorrhiza which includes what now is
considered as a major subalpine to low alpine type within alpigena.
Blytt refers to two publications in his protologue, Fries' Summa p. 76 (as P.
pratensis alpestris) and Blytt's paper in Nyt Mag. Naturv. 1 (1838), but primarily he
refers to Fries' exsiccate Herbarium Normale Fasc. 9, no. 93. A specimen from this
must formally be chosen as type, if not already done. It is sometimes said that this
taxon is described from "Svalbard, Spitzbergen, Liefdebay". This is erroneous as
Blytt has no reference to Svalbard at all in the protologue but several and specific
ones to the mainland Scandinavian plants. However, subsp. colpodea is described
from Liefdefjord in Svalbard.
Quite another question is how we should delimit subsp. alpigena today. In his
draft, Tzvelev recognizes three entities within the NW European concept of alpigena:
alpigena s. str., rigens and colpodea. As to the last-mentioned, see comment under P.
arctica and below. I am aware of the presence of numerous fairly distinct 'biotypes'
within subsp. alpigena, but I am totally unable to group them into two main entites
and name these as alpigena and rigens. I believe that we must be pragmatic and
accept a very wide concept of this subspecies, including numerous more or less
totally apomictic 'strains'. (Elven)
(3)
The following names are accepted for Greenland material by Böcher et al. (1978) and
must appear somewhere: var. iantha Laest., var. domestica Laest., var. rigens Laest.,
and var. gelida (Roem. & Schult.) Böcher. Synonymy? (Elven)
37.22.14.3 Poa pratensis L. subsp. colpodea (Th. Fr.) Tzvelev (1972), Nov. Sist. Vyssh.
Rast. 9: 47.
B
P. stricta Lindeb. subsp. colpodea Th. Fr. (1869), Öfvers. Svenska Vet.-Akad. Förh.
26: 138.
S
P. alpigena (Fr. ex Blytt) Lindm. var. colpodea (Th. Fr.) Scholander (1934), Skr.
Svalb. Ishavet 62: 89; P. pratensis L. subsp. alpigena (Fr. ex Blytt) Lindm. var.
colpodea (Th. Fr.) Soreng (1991), Phytologia 71: 403-404. Other synonyms are given
in Tzvelev's draft but they do not seem to be currently applied names.
T
[Described from Svalbard: Spitsbergen: Liefdebay.]
2n=
(1) 42 (6x). (2) 51+5ff. (3) 56 (8x).
2nD
(1) Zhukova & Petrovsky (1976). (2) Flovik (1938 Sb). (3) Zhukova & Petrovsky
(1976).
G
NOR RUS SIB? RFE? ALA? CAN GRL
Comments: See also comments under P. arctica.
(1)
Haugen (2000) has compared subsp. colpodea in Svalbard with viviparous subsp.
alpigena and P. arctica s. lat. She finds fairly consistent differences towards both,
and the same is my experience from Svalbard and arctic Canada. I am therefore ready
to accept this as a taxon at a fairly high level, even if it probably is a totally apomictic
plant. It is distinct morphologically and enzymatically from its relatives and appears
to be homogeneous through much of its range. The material I have seen is from
northernmost Canada, Greenland, Svalbard and Franz Joseph Land. Please check
carefully the material behind reports from more southern areas (mainland Russia and
Siberia, Chukotka, Alaska) as there are many other viviparous plants in the 'alpigena'
affinity. I have therefore questioned the occurrences in SIB, RFE and ALA.
The var. vivipara of subsp. alpigena is much more frequent, at least in the
North Atlantic area, than is subsp. colpodea. These plants also have morphologically
close seminiferous counterparts whereas I know of no such counterpart for subsp.
colpodea. (Elven)
37.22.14.4 Poa pratensis L. subsp. zhukoviae Jurtz. & Tzvelev (1980), Bot. Zhurn. 65: 1466.
S
2n=
2nD
G
RFE
Comments:
(1)
We need more information about this before acceptance. (Elven)
37.22.14.5 Poa pratensis L. subsp. rigens (Hartm.) Tzvelev (1972), Nov. Sist. Vyssh. Rast.
9: 47.
B
P. rigens Hartm. (1820), Handb. Skand. Fl. 448.
S
P. pratensis L. subsp. alpigena (Fr. ex Blytt) Lindm. var. rigens (Hartm./Laest.) ***.
T
[Described from N Sweden, probably Kvikkjokk, leg. Læstadius.]
2n=
2nD
G
NOR? RUS? RFE? GRL?
Comments:
(1)
I am very reluctant to accept this subspecies and would prefer to include it under the
synonymy of subsp. alpigena. See comment under that subspecies. (Elven)
WARNING! Will certainly be merged with subsp. alpigena and reduced to synonymy if
not much better justified.
37.22.15 Poa humilis Ehrh. ex Hoffm. (1800), Deutschl. Fl., ed. 2, 1: 45.
S
P. subcaerulea Sm. in Sowerby (1802), Engl. Bot. 14: t. 1004; P. pratensis L. subsp.
subcaerulea (Sm.) Hiit. ***; P. irrigata Lindm. (1905), Bot. Not. 1905: 88; P.
pratensis L. subsp. irrigata (Lindm.) Lindb. fil. (1916), Sched. Pl. Finl. Exsicc. 2: 20.
T
2n=
2nD
["Poa humilis, Upsaliae, Ehrhart", isotypes in LE.]
38-147.
Löve & Löve (1956 Icel, 2n=38-117); Löve & Löve (1975) list several counts in the
range 2n=48-147, partly as arctic; Tzvelev (1976, 2n=82-147).
G
ICE NOR RUS RFE? CAN GRL
Comments:
(1)
In northern and alpine Fennoscandia we have problems in clearly separating
'alpigena' and 'humilis'. I do not believe that we can draw as clear a boundary as we
should if we propose species. I therefore propose treatment as subspecies of P.
pratensis, and then subsp. irrigata probably has priority if it is possible to identify
Lindman's P. irrigata with this entity. (Elven)
(2)
I have seen material conforming well with this entity from Iceland, N Norway
(frequent), N Kola Peninsula, Baffin-Labrador (Iqaluit 1999) and SW and SE
Greenland (HbO). The report from Chukotka must be carefully checked against
specimens as the entity seems to be amphi-Atlantic. (Elven)
WARNING! Might be reduced to a subspecies of P. pratensis.
37.22.16 Poa raduliformis Probat. (1971), Nov. Sist. Vyssh. Rast. 8: 25.
S
T
Russian Far East: Amur area, Tyrma basin, Talaya River, hilly slopes, 04.06.1909,
leg. Dokturovskii 165 (LE), holotype.
2n=
70 (10x).
2nD
Sokolovskaya & Probatova in Tzvelev (1976).
G
RFE
Comments:
(1)
More information is needed about this entity before evaluation and acceptance.
(Elven)
37.22.17 Poa angustifolia L. (1753), Sp. Pl. 67.
S
P. pratensis L. subsp. angustifolia (L.) Gaudin (1811), Agrost. Helv. 1: 214.
2n=
46-c. 84.
2nD
Conert (1998, 2n=c. 49-c. 84); Tzvelev (in draft, 2n=46-72).
G
RFE*? GRL*?
Comments:
(1)
This is the most distinct entity in the P. pratensis aggregate in the N European area,
and the variation seems to be discontinuous. I could therefore accept this as a species
but it is thermophilous and probably not present as stable anywhere in the Arctic.
(Elven)
WARNING! Will be excluded if not confirmed as stable in the Arctic.
37.22.18 Poa sublanata Reverd. (1934), Sist. Zam. Mat. Gerb. Tomsk. Univ. 2-3: 1.
S
T
Siberia: Enisei, 6945', Leontievskii Island, sands, 31.07.1914, leg. Reverdatto (TK),
holotype.
2n=
(1) 56 (8x). (2) c.70 (10x).
2nD
(1) Sokolovskaya & Probatova (1968). (2) Sokolovskaya (1968); Sokolovskaya &
Probatova (1968).
G
SIB RFE ALA
Comments:
(1)
See Fl. Arct. URSSS. Perhaps subspecies? (Elven)
WARNING! Might be reduced to subspecies of P. pratensis.