Dichelostemma cont.

Kenneth Hixson khixson@nu-world.com
Sun, 01 Jun 2003 21:47:58 PDT
Dear members:  As Mary Sue mentioned, she and I have been trying 
to identify what I called "Dichlostemma pulchellum" in my post.
I've keyed this out several times, and came up with different names.
None of the keys really seem to apply to my plants, which flower in
an umbel, not a raceme.  This character may well vary with environment, 
but here I've never seen anything but an umbel.  This is most easily seen 
after the flowers fall, so feel free to wait to see what your plants are.  
	I finally went to "A Flora of the Pacific Northwest" by
Hitchcock and Cronquest.  They lump Brodia, Dichlostemma, and Tritelia
in one key and call everything "Brodia".  They give "Brodia congesta"
as having a subcapitate umbel, with all pedicels less than 10mm.
The "filament crown" is listed by Hitchcock and Cronquist as a staminode.  
I have problems with either terminology, because the "staminode" grows 
directly from the tube of the flower, not from a threadlike filament.

	Be that as it may, my plants are most like the pictures on the
Wiki of Dichlostemma congesta.  I'd say the flowers are constricted
at the throat, not "slightly constricted".  I haven't tried to measure
but estimate the throat is about half the diameter of the tube around
the ovary.  The stems of my plants are rigidly erect, not curved or
twisted.  Height in the clump varies from about a foot to 3' at the
base of the umbel.  From a distance, the variation in height is one of
the most obvious things about the plants.

	On to other things.		Ken

More information about the pbs mailing list