Flag for Taxon: Threepart violet (Viola tripartita)
| Flagger | Content Author | Content | Reason | Flag Created | Resolved by | Resolution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ddennism | loarie | Threepart violet (Viola tripartita) |
POWO now recognizes the segregated species |
May. 26, 2023 01:44:33 +0000 | Not Resolved |
Comments
How does this look?
@the_land_philosopher, @ballardh, @pucak, @wildlandblogger, @vvoelker, @the_buckeye_botanist, @mjpapay, @adiamond, @alabamaplants, @kzoebel, @hbraunreiter, @zirick, @evanaturalist, @danbadlands
This looks really, really good.
Looks great!
I committed the splits above.
While reviewing the results, I found some observations annotated by Ballard to be V. glaberrima to the south of where that species is mapped in the above references. (e.g. N GA: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95767449; TN: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/1792063).
And looking through more observations, it looks like really only a few should have been moved to V. tenuipes - all at the extreme south of the range, and all in AL. I think the dividing line should have been drawn at about the fall line, not near the KY-TN state line, or even the TN-GA line.
I apologize to those whose V. tripartita identifications were inappropriately changed to V. tenuipes instead of V. glaberrima (or bumped up to subsection). You can look at a map showing dots to indicate current observations of the two wedge-leaf violets here:
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxon_changes/126281
I think probably all the N GA, N AL, and TN observations currently ID'd as V. tenuipes are actually V. glaberrima - at least most seem to fit better there morphologically from what's shown in the photos.
Looks good, thanks Daniel!
POWO now recognizes both Viola glaberrima (Ging. ex Chapm.) House and Viola tenuipes Pollard.
These two species are segregates from Viola tripartita in the broad sense. Viola glaberrima is in Ballard et al. (2023) and Weakley's Flora (2023, following Ballard's treatment). Viola tenuipes is mentioned in the first reference above, but is not within the geographic scope of that paper. It is recognized and keyed in Weakley's Flora, and it also appears on Harvey Ballard's website key.
To bring us in-line with POWO, I've drafted the following taxon changes:
A. V. tripartita var. tripartita --> V. tripartita (sensu stricto)
B. V. tripartita var. glaberrima --> V. glaberrima + V. tenuipes
C. V. tripartita (s.l.) --> V. tripartita (s.s.) + V. glaberrima + V. tenuipes
To try to reduce the number of IDs that will get bumped up to subsection in changes B and C, I've drafted the following atlases:
V. glaberrima : https://www.inaturalist.org/atlases/85603
V. tenuipes : https://www.inaturalist.org/atlases/85601
V. tripartita (s.s.): https://www.inaturalist.org/atlases/85612
This will still bump up many identifications to subsection "Nudicaules", particularly in the Carolinas and North Georgia. I could get around this in the Carolinas by making the atlases of V. glaberrima and V. tenuipes more fine-grained, for example, following the range map at the bottom of this page, but I'm not sure whether that map is meant to be a draft.
There aren't that many observations of these taxa. I've added variety-level IDs whenever possible to most of them, which will prevent many of the observations, particularly of the rare V. tripartita sensu stricto, from being bumped back to subsection. Even in regions of overlap (Carolinas), we can probably ID them to species individually with some coordination.