I found these Listera plants in Mt. Revelstoke National Park on June 12, 2006. I only hope they are from the same species. Is ist possible to say which species they are?
Hi, My guess from Flora of PNW, circa 1990, would be that #1 and #3 are Listera caurina because of the shape of the lip and the slender teeth at the base of the lip as well as the general shape of the bloom. But let me stress that's a guess as I'm not personally familiar with the plant. Hitchcock & Cronquist keyed mainly on the notch/cleft on the lip with mention of the shape of the lip. Couldn't make out enough of #2 to venture a firm guess. :) Harry
I generally like the idea that the plants are probably Listera caurina because of the general appearance of the lips and because of the wavy lower edges of the lips. I am not sure about the basal teeth which were really small and inconspicuous (see e. g. enlarged photo attached). And the ovaries do not look glabrous to me, but at least parts of them are very hairy, possibly glandular. You can also see that on the detail picture. According to the "Illustrated Flora of British Columbia" the ovaries of L. caurina should be glabrous, those of L. convallarioides should be slightly glandular-hairy. By the way: #2 and #3 should show the same plant.
Hi, From Flora of PNW by Hitchcock and Cronquist The above descriptions definitely state that the lip is clawed in L. convallarioides which I didn't see in your pictures. The drawings also showed the L. convallarioides had the sepals folded all the way back while in L. caurina they were much as your photos depicted. The teeth at the base of the lip were described as "sometimes slenderly toothed" for both L. caurina and L. convallarioides, and the lips of both were described as 'not often puberulent' so not necessary for the teeth to exist at all or +- puberulence of the lip is a possibility. Also the picture for L. convallarioides showed a definite notched lip while your photos don't really depict that. Didn't see any glandular hairs on the stigma/column, but I presume you're talking about the glandular hairs at the base of the lip, on the nectary, but having never seen the plant first hand that puts me at a disadvantage as to being actually able to even id the flower parts. I think that the fact that C&H keyed on the notch and the shape of the lip could lead to discrepancies in ID as plants like any other living thing vary in shape in individuals as well as in groups in certain locations. But the preponderance of the evidence here points to L. caurina and until something better comes along, I would have to stick by my identification simply from the drawings in the Flora of the PNW. Of course you could look at the angle of the lip and in some flowers the lip is almost horizontal and in others it looks to be almost 45 degrees. I guess this is one of those things that you can pick out what attributes you see in the picture that resembles what your choice looks like and the be firmly convinced that you are right. :) In fact flower identification is never that cut and dried. When I first sat down to identify plants I remember looking at a pink 6 petalled flower for many hours. The material I was working with finally became unusable, so I went out to collect another flower and some leaves. Turns out, 80 percent of the flowers on the plant had 5 petals and it was a familar phlox that I knew. These days I wouldn't make those kinds of mistakes, looking at the whole plant instead of just one attribute, but then I keep finding new ways to make mistakes. :) Harry
Hi Harry, thank you very much for the detailed data about Listera caurina and L. convallarioides. So I'll call the plants on my photographs Listera caurina, possibly with a question mark because of the hairs on the ovary. But nevertheless I also believe that much more points to Listera caurina than to L. convallarioides. Robert.
