Regarding Pulvigera/Orthotrichum lyellii in the Pacific Northwest

One of the most common epiphytic mosses in the PNW is something that was traditionally called Orthotrichum lyellii. It immediately announces itself on account of its longish, erectish, unbranched-ish shoots, short sporophytes with hairy caps. When a group of bryologists in Spain took a closer look at herbarium samples of purported O. lyellii, they found collections from western North America were distinct.

The type specimen of Orthotrichum lyellii seems to have been collected on a tree in the "New Forest, Hants" (present day southern England) by a young Charles Lyell long before the publication of his three volume Principles of Geology. The material was treated as a new species by WIlliam Jackson Hooker (First Director of Kew Gardens, father of Joseph Dalton Hooker) and Thomas Taylor in their Muscologia Brittanica. It is notable for having seperate male and female plants ("Dioicous") and little asexual propagules on the leaves.

The problem that Lara et al. addressed was that the material from the west coast of North America, while having seperate male and female plants, lacked those asexual propagules on the leaves. They expanded on the concept of the genus Pulvigera to include all dioicous species previously treated as Orthotrichum. After some molecular work and morphological characterization, it turned out that Orthotrichum lyellii does not occur in the Pacific Northwest, with the closest records being in California. That material, with its asexual propagules is now referred to as Pulvigera lyellii.

What does occur in Oregon, Washington and British Columbia turned out to be two morphologically distinct species: Pulvigera pringlei and Pulvigera papillosa. Below I copy and paste the couplet from Lara et al.'s revised key to the genus. That in turn is followed by links to examples of iNat observations of these species. While some of the characters are microscopic, the size and form of the sporophyte is something that can be seen in the field and caught on film.

Vaginula densely hairy; capsules emergent to short exserted, seta 1.75–3.40 mm long; operculum plane
or slightly plane-convex, with a broad reddish-orange basal rim; external side of teeth with papillae and
longitudinal lines in the upper part; endostome with a faint connective membrane, no or faintly coloured;
spores finely papillose .......................................................................................................................P. pringlei
Vaginula sparsely hairy; capsules almost immersed to widely emergent, seta 1.0–1.5 mm long; operculum
strongly convex, almost dome-shaped, rarely plane-convex, with a little conspicuous yellowish to pale
orange basal rim; external side of teeth coarsely papillose in the upper part; endostome with a showy
orange connective membrane; spores coarsely papillose ............................................................. P. papillosa

Example of Pulvigera pringlei. -note long seta
Example of Pulvigera papillosa -note short seta and nearly immersed capsule, convex operculum
Example of male plant of Pulvigera, which cannot be IDed to species unless growing in close proximity to a female plant bearing sporophytes. Note bulb-like growths where antheridia (sperm-beaaring organs) are engulfed in leaves
Example of actual Pulvigera lyellii -- note the abundant asexual propagules growing on the leaf surface

Posted on December 31, 2022 02:01 AM by rambryum rambryum

Comments

@chlorophilia @bstarzomski @stewartwechsler @cwardrop @terrymcintosh @dbltucker @johndreynolds @fmcghee @bradenjudson I tried to write a longer explaination that can be used as a link when IDing someone else's photos. My standard copy and paste will be:

Pulvigera lyellii does not seem to occur in the Pacific Northwest. Things treated as P. lyellii appear to be either P. pringlei or P. papillosa based on characters of their sporophytes. You can read a summary here or read the paper justifying this change in approach here.

Posted by rambryum over 1 year ago

Thank you! Since hearing we didn't have Pulvigera lyellii here, I have only been able to offer ID's of Orthotrichaceae for these. I hope I will now learn to distinguish the two and be able to offer species ID's for them, but until then I can at least offer Pulvigera ID's, something I wasn't sure I could do from the time I learned we didn't have P. lyellii.

Posted by stewartwechsler over 1 year ago

Thanks for doing this Randal! Can we take the calyptra hairyness as a proxy for the vaginula considering the calpytra is just the remnant vaginula? The examples you provided are great. I have to go back into my observations because I swear I've collected Pulvigera with gemmae here in BC.

-Dan

Posted by dbltucker over 1 year ago

Wonderful- thanks @rambryum! I'll dig into these more.

Posted by bstarzomski over 1 year ago

Thanks very much, @rambryum, I'll take these notes for a spin from now on with these mosses.

Posted by johndreynolds over 1 year ago

Thanks for the updates on this @rambryum

Posted by aksimpson over 1 year ago

@dbltucker I looked back through all of my observations of Pulvigera and not one of them has obvious gemmae like @mossgeek 's observation. It would be neat if we could find some of it to match your memory. As for the vaginula, I think in pringlei the hairs are just really long and abundant though it is unclear if the authors mean specifically the ones coming up from the base. In their figures, the difference in hair length, abundance and robustness seems evident in the calyptra, too.

Posted by rambryum over 1 year ago

Wow Thanks @rambryum! This is really fantastic

Posted by fmcghee over 1 year ago

Steve J. is pretty sure he has IDed P. lyallii for BC. I will try to keep you posted on this but it may take a while...

Posted by terrymcintosh over 1 year ago

Great idea to share this paper around, and nice write up :)
I haven't noticed any ecological differences between the two species yet, have you?
I've found a few fruiting Pulvigera specimens with long multicellular brown gemmae as well, but as they were so sparse compared to the evident/densely arranged European examples, I dismissed them as aberrant or contamination from a neighbouring Orthotrichum or a dirty slide. These two 'collections' were just a couple shoots each, and I already burned though them searching for more gemmae, so not much to revisit- although I think I have photos of the gemmae somewhere. I'll been keeping an eye out though just in case!
Cheers.

Posted by cwardrop over 1 year ago

Add a Comment

Sign In or Sign Up to add comments