Resurrection and typification of Elatine campylosperma (Elatinaceae), a long-forgotten waterwort species.

Attila Takács,Agnieszka Popiela,Lajos Somlyay,Attila Molnár V,Ádám Lovas-Kiss,Timea Nagy,Balázs A Lukács,Andy J Green

doi:10.7717/peerj.4913

Abstract

The name Elatine campylosperma Seub. is generally treated as one of the synonyms of E. macropoda Guss. However, recent morphological, phylogenetic and karyological studies indicate that this judgement should be revised. In the present paper we typify the name E. campylosperma, review its taxonomic history and provide a thorough description, with compilation of previously published data and our new measurements from in vitro cultures. Based on our herbarium survey, we outline its Atlantic-Mediterranean distribution area (Spain, France, Italy, Greece, Turkey and Algeria). Habitat preferences are summarized from our field observations, water quality measurements and the label information of the herbarium specimens examined. Intact E. campylosperma seeds were found in faecal samples of the Eurasian Coot (Fulica atra L.) in southern Spain and two of them were germinated, suggesting that E. campylosperma has a capacity for long distance dispersal via endozoochory.

Highlights

The amphibious genus Elatine L. is well-known for its taxonomic complexity, due to the extensive plasticity of their vegetative characters, accompanied by small size, inconspicuous body, ephemeral and clonal life form, poorly known biology and rarity of the included species (Mason, 1956; Coode, 1967; Tucker, 1986; Takacs et al, 2013; Molnar et al, 2015)
Elatinella, a controversial group of several, rather poorly known species, the delimitations of which have long been the subject of debate. This is especially true for the subsection Macropodae, in which only the type species (E. macropoda Guss.) is widely accepted, E. gussonei (Sommier) Brullo et al is only ‘preliminary accepted’ according to Uotila (2009b), whereas E. campylosperma Seub. is generally reduced into the synonymy of E. macropoda (Uotila, 2009b; see further literature below)
The relevant literature on Elatine was screened for protologues and further interpretations of the names involved in historical circumscriptions of E. campylosperma and related taxa

Summary

Introduction

The amphibious genus Elatine L. is well-known for its taxonomic complexity, due to the extensive plasticity of their vegetative characters, accompanied by small size, inconspicuous body, ephemeral and clonal life form, poorly known biology and rarity of the included species (Mason, 1956; Coode, 1967; Tucker, 1986; Takacs et al, 2013; Molnar et al, 2015). Recent phylogenetic studies (Sramkoet al., 2016; Razifard, Les & Tucker, 2017) confirmed the three main subdivisions of the genus, which were originally established by Seubert (1845) at the rank of sections Potamopytis (Adanson) Seub., Crypta (Nutt.) Seub., Elatinella Seub. Elatinella, a controversial group of several, rather poorly known species, the delimitations of which have long been the subject of debate. This is especially true for the subsection Macropodae, in which only the type species (E. macropoda Guss.) is widely accepted, E. gussonei (Sommier) Brullo et al is only ‘preliminary accepted’ according to Uotila (2009b), whereas E. campylosperma Seub. Corroborated by the results of Molnar et al (2015) and Kalinka et al (2015), Sramkoet al. (2016) accepted the full species status of E. campylosperma

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion