Identification of Syngonanthus flavidulus, not Lachnocaulon beyrichianum EDIT05172022

Identification of Lachnocaulon beyrichianum - Summer 2016

Lachnocaulon beyrichianum Form

This plant looked like a tuft of grass and weed. It was green and I didn’t care that it was growing and left it. Later it grew a flower head that could not be mistaken for anything other than a pipewort, Eriocaulaceae. I thought all pipeworts were all in one genus, but to my surprise they are not. Eriocaulaceae comprises 3 different genus in the United States: Eriocaulon, Lachnocaulon, and Syngonanthus.

Lachnocaulon beyrichianum Form

The genus Eriocaulon is described as having a scape (a separate stem just for the flower and without leaves) that is glabrous (smooth, without hairs) by Radford 1968 and Chafin 2010. My specimen has hairs all over the scape. Concluding: it is not Eriocaulon.

The genus Syngonanthus is described as having a sheath (like the sheath of a sword, for a leaf) on the scape (a separate stem just for the flower and without leaves) that is longer than the regular leaves (leaves not assisting the flower stalk). My specimen had sheaths that were just as long as the regular leaves. Concluding: it is not Syngonanthus.

Lachnocaulon beyrichianum scape and flower

Lachnocaulon have branches fibrous roots whereas Syngonanthus has thick, spongy unbranched roots. I didn’t uproot the plant, yet, but this could be helpful for others. The only species in this area is Syngonanthus flavidulus (Radford 1968). Flavidus means yellowish (Stearn 1997). This species is noted to have yellow flowers at times, my specimen was only white or greyish. Root have yet to be determined. Flower explains the specimen is not Syngonanthus.

Only Lachnocaulon remains. Radford (1968) mentions 3 species for the area around the Carolinas: L. beyrichianum, L. minus, and L. anceps. Godfrey (1979) mentions 5 in the Southeastern United States with the inclusion of two additional: L. engleri and L. digynum.

Godfrey (1979) describes L. digynum as having glabrous or almost glabrous (smooth, without hairs) 5.0-10.0 cm scape (flower stalk without leaves). My specimen has a hairy, 24 cm scape. Another had a 19 cm scape. The flower head of L. digynum described as 2.0-3.5 mm broad whereas my specimen had ~7 mm broad flower head. BONAP, a database of plant locations, reports this species as not found in Georgia. I am confident the plant is not L. digynum.

Scape and flowers of Lachnocaulon beyrichianum

L. engleri is described as having leaves 2.0-3.0 cm long, with a mature scape (flower stalk without leaves) 6.0-15.0 cm long, with a mature flower head of 3.0-8.0 mm long, “3.0-4.0 mm wide, dark brown with mention appearing smooth in contrast to the heads of other Lachnocaulon.” My specimen has leaves longer than 3 cm with a flower head that is more globose (sphere) and hairy than the glabrous (smooth, not hairy) football like shape description of L. engleri (Godfrey 1979). Also the flower head was 7 mm wide. BONAP, a database of plant locations, reports this species as not found in Georgia. It is not L. engleri.

Twisted scapes of Lachnocaulon beyrichianum examined through a loupe.

L. minus is described as having 2.0-3.0 cm long leaves, 6.0-15.0 cm long scape, with cylindrical, 4.0-6.0 long, 3.0-4.0 mm broad flower head. My specimen had longer leaves, a 24 & 19 cm scape (flower stalk without leaves), and had a flower head at least 7 mm wide, appearing wider than long (Godfrey 1979). It is not L. minus.

Twisted scape of Lachnocaulon beyrichianum examined through a compound microscope.

L. beyrichianum has leaves up to 4 cm long, scape (flower stalk without leaves) up to 23 cm long. My specimen had leaves at least 4 cm long so this doesn’t help much, but with a scape of 24 & 19 cm long with L. anceps having a scape ranged of 15-40 cm long (Godfrey 1979) up to 45 cm long (Radford 1968). Godfrey (1979) mentions the seeds are “highly lustrous” in L. beyrichianum and pale to dark brown in L. anceps. I did collect the seeds from the flower head from my specimen, which were very small. Under a 10x magnification the seeds were smooth ellipsoid light brown gel looking, if I can phrase it that way. They were not shiny as lustrous is defined. Radford (1968) mentions the seeds of L. beyrichianum as smooth and those of L. anceps as striate (having lines), so this confused my identification. I would need equipment with more magnification to see any lines on the seeds. Godfrey (1979) describes the flower head as up to 5.0 mm broad in L. beyrichianum and up to 7.0 mm broad in L. anceps. My specimen was ~7 mm broad matching L. anceps. Chafin’s (2010) account of L. beyrichianum provides information to distinguish it from L. anceps, again with the flower head difference. Looking at drawings provided by Godfrey (1979), the seeds appear to be a similar form of L. anceps. I conclude identification of my specimen as Lachnocaulon anceps, or so I thought…

Zona et al. (Zona and other co-authors) provides good scanning electron microscope (SEM) images for, as it is titled, “Seeds of Eriocaulaceae for the United States and Canada” (2012). This can help if people can look at seeds under a microscope.

I examined these features August to September 2016.

January 2017

Well I got some microscope thanks to my buddy Top Cat. Now I can look at the seeds up close.

Coin holder seed card of Lachnocaulon beyrichianum seeds

Using the dissecting microscope:

Lachnocaulon beyrichianum seeds at 20x magnification using a dissecting microscope.

Lachnocaulon beyrichianum seeds at 40x magnification using a dissecting microscope.

Using the compound microscope:

Lachnocaulon beyrichianum seeds at 40x magnification using a compound microscope.

I then compared the microscope images to those of Zona 2012 and their description of seeds for the species of this family of plants. Some of the seeds have “appendages” that can be seed on the seed coat. My seed looks very much like that of L. beyrichianum or L. engleri. My suspected L. anceps is reported to have “T-shaped” appendages as well many of the other species. Yet my seeds do not have these appendages. L. beyrichianum is noted “ornamentation absent” or rather said no appendages from the seed coat. L. digynum, appendages. L. engleri is also noted to be without appendages on the seed coat. L. minus has appendages. Syngonanthus flavidulus is also noted to have no appendages. In their discussion, they mention Lachnocaulon have two different kinds of seeds. Those with appendages and those without. I haven’t mentioned this but the seeds look like they have lines on them, as should be seen by the images. Zona 2012 displayed these lines are “quadrangular” or make up little rectangles along the seed surface. L. beyrichianum and L. engleri have rectangles with a ratio greater than 1:6 length by width. L. digynum and L. minus have a ratio less than 1:6 length by width, rather they have wider rectangles.

Lachnocaulon beyrichianum seeds at 100x magnification using a compound microscope. Note the ridges or lines.

My observation had me choose L. anceps or L. beyrichianum. Zona 2012 has me chose L. beyrichianum or L. engleri. BONAP indicates only L. anceps, L. beyrichianum, and L. minus are found in Georgia. From all this I am convinced I have Lachnocaulon beyrichianum.

Lachnocaulon beyrichianum seeds at 400x magnification using a compound microscope. Note the ridges or lines are rectangles with a ratio greater than 1:6 length by width. This is a key characteristic for my identification. Yes hard to see in photo.

Chafin 2010 reports this is a species of special concern. This species gets a rarity ranking of G3/S1. The letters stand for location. G is for global and S is for state. The numbers represent population estimates in that 1 is very rare and at risk of extinction and 5 is common, widespread and abundant. Translated for this plant, Lachnocaulon beyrichianum is considered very rare in Georgia, but is seemingly ok globally (it is more commonly found in Florida than in Georgia). Chafin 2010 mentions the conversion of habitat to pine plantations and pastures are a problem for this species as well as ditching and draining of wetlands, and fire suppression. This site was in a ditch beside a pine plantation with fire suppressed. She explains 6 populations are known and only 1 on protected land. The Georgia Department of Natural Resources also indicates this species is rare for the state and of concern (http://georgiawildlife.com/SpeciesInfo/Plants).

Thank you for reading. Comment if you would like. Have a nice day!

Citation

Kartesz, J.T., The Biota of North America Program (BONAP). 2015. North American Plant Atlas. (http://bonap.net/napa). Chapel Hill, N.C. [maps generated from Kartesz, J.T. 2015. Floristic Synthesis of North America, Version 1.0. Biota of North America Program (BONAP). (in press)]. Specifically http://bonap.net/NAPA/TaxonMaps/Genus/County/Lachnocaulon.

Zona, Scott, Philip Davis, L.A.A.H. Gunathilake, Jeffery Prince, and James W. Horn. 2012. Seeds of Eriocaulaceae of the United States and Canada. Castanea 77(1):37-45.

Chafin, Linda G. 2010. Common Name: Southern Bog-Button. Assecced on 11 January 2017 from http://georgiawildlife.com/sites/default/files/uploads/wildlife/nongame/pdf/accounts/plants/lachnocaulon_beyrichianum.pdf.

Godfrey, Robert and Jean Wooten. 1979. Aquatic and Wetland Plants of Southeastern United States: Monocotyledons. University of Georgia Press. [I failed to record edition].

Radford, Albert E., Harry E. Ahles, and C. Ritchie Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas. University of North Carolina Press; 1st ed.