# Been Collecting Natives - Now Need IDs



## asukawashere (Mar 11, 2009)

Went on a collecting and exploring mission in my backyard this morning (lol, I make it sound like some far-off exotic land). Came back with some funky stuff found growing marginally/aquatically in my stream. Now I want to know what it is :mrgreen:

First off, one that should be easy - I suspect this of being willow moss or a similar species of _Fontinalis_. It's got that distinct three-row leaf pattern with the larger (~3mm ish) long leaves, so possibly F. antipyretica? Can anyone confirm please?









bonus penny for size reference, lol


















Next, we have a stem plant - probably something Ludwigia-like or similar... but no idea on the species since I only found emergent stems w/o flowers








Whatever it is, it's pretty








a little variation in color - greener one was from a more shaded spot









Another stemmy thing:








this one was growing marginally, so for all I know it might not be capable of aquatic growth...









And then this, which formed a pretty carpet along some of the stream edges. Fortunately it comes with flower shots, so ID might be a little easier.








close-up on flowers








again, not sure if this is aquatic or just marginal...









Have at it, all ~ Would love to know what these things are but can also just go play with them in my outdoor plant tub with or without an ID, and see if I can make them grow aquatically in the case of the marginals... fun stuff.


----------



## kingken (Apr 18, 2010)

I went to a local river this weekend and found that same moss! I cleaned it and tried it out in my 10gal as a ground cover, and man is that stuff ugly lol, its all twiggy like and black =(


----------



## miremonster (Mar 26, 2006)

> First off, one that should be easy - I suspect this of being willow moss or a similar species of Fontinalis. It's got that distinct three-row leaf pattern with the larger (~3mm ish) long leaves, so possibly F. antipyretica? Can anyone confirm please?


I confirm that it belongs to genus Fontinalis. But there are several other Fontinalis taxa, e.g. F. kindbergii or F. duriaei. Perhaps bryologists knowing the local moss flora could ID it.


----------



## asukawashere (Mar 11, 2009)

kingken said:


> I went to a local river this weekend and found that same moss! I cleaned it and tried it out in my 10gal as a ground cover, and man is that stuff ugly lol, its all twiggy like and black =(


What's the temp of the tank water you put it in? Fontinalis spp. are coldwater mosses, they don't take kindly to being put in a warmwater tank.



miremonster said:


> I confirm that it belongs to genus Fontinalis. But there are several other Fontinalis taxa, e.g. F. kindbergii or F. duriaei. Perhaps bryologists knowing the local moss flora could ID it.


Thanks for the confirmation - I suspected as much, but I'm no moss expert, lol, so I wanted to make sure. As for the local mosses, F. kindbergii isn't local as far as I know - pretty sure it comes from the western part of the continent. F. novae-angliae is a good candidate in terms of locality, as are F. antipyretica, F. sphagnifolia, or other New England regional mosses - my specimen was collected in Fairfield County, Connecticut. Beyond that, I know only what I can find on Google, lol.

If it helps narrow things down, the stem leaves are notably larger than the branch leaves. That's true of like half the Fontinalis spp. though, so I'm not sure it says much...


----------



## asukawashere (Mar 11, 2009)

Any takers on the other stems? Pretty please? I would love to know what they are, lol


----------



## Bert H (Mar 2, 2004)

First stem looks like L. repens, one of the others looks a little like L. palustris. Where are you at?


----------



## asukawashere (Mar 11, 2009)

Lol, sorry, should have provided the location in the first post, but too late to go back and edit.

I'm in Fairfield County, Connecticut... these plants all came from Easton, CT, specifically.

Thanks for the input. _L. palustris_ is native according to the USDA listings, and I'll definitely believe that for the 2nd stem plant's ID, but they also indicate that_ L. repens _ doesn't come this far north... the maps indicate it only gets as far up the coast as Virginia. o.0' I also hear that _L. sphaerocarpa_ and_ L. polycarpa_ are native around here, but those both seem to have much narrower leaves...

Of course, the USDA is not the world's highest authority on such things, so if anyone knows of_ L. repens_ occurring elsewhere in CT, please share


----------



## flashbang009 (Aug 6, 2009)

I second the ludwigia repens on the first one. I've collected those EXACT same plants, the moss and the two stems in a local stream in Raleigh NC


----------



## Cavan Allen (Jul 22, 2004)

I believe that's _Ludwigia palustris_. You can easily tell for sure if you manage to find any flowers. There will be no petals (so look carefully!).

_L. repens_ occurs - or did occur - as a disjunct population in New Jersey, but otherwise no closer than North Carolina. When I have time, I'll link an excellent monograph on related Ludwigias.


----------



## asukawashere (Mar 11, 2009)

flashbang - thanks; it's interesting to know NC has very similar plants... still, you're within the native range of_ L. repens_. I'm a bit north of that... but still, it's not unreasonable to think the population has found its way northward a bit. Time will tell which _Ludwigia_ it is... now if only I could find a darn flower! XD

Cavan - I'd love to read that monograph, thanks. If I can find any flowers, I'll snap a photo and share... however, I think it's too early in the year for it to be flowering. We've had some unseasonably cool weather as of late and outdoor plant growth is sluggish... except for the pansies out in the garden, lol, but they like it on the cool side. Some weird stuff going on as of late with storms has probably set them back a bit as well... in any case, the _Ludwigia_ patch I got this stem from has a lot of tiny little plantlets but not much mature growth...most specimens out there are 6" or less.

In any case, I've now googled about a gajillion (I counted :mrgreen photos of _L. palustris_, and the thing that strikes me is that in all the photos I can find, the widest point of the leaves on the _palustris_ are closer toward the middle of the leaf than the plant I have. My leaves reach their max. width far closer to the stem and have an overall more tapered, pointier appearance than the _L. palustris_ images - which all have a rounded, elliptic shape more in keeping with the second stem plant in my photos. Is there a possibility this is an _L. palustris_ hybrid, possibly crossed with another local _Ludwigia_ species? (I've heard scattered reports of _L. x lacustris_ in the state, for instance, but this seems too broad to be that.) Or are there any accounts of _L. palustris_ showing more noticeably acuminate foliage?

I took a look at the pond/river downhill from the stream this came from, they seemed to have a wider variety of _Ludwigia spp._ around there (and some lovely _Vallisneria_ and _Eleocharis_). Also a lot of geese, which brings me back to my theory that migratory birds are responsible for the spread of everything unusual around here. Including possibly deadly illness, believe it or not.  Those darn birds...


----------



## Cavan Allen (Jul 22, 2004)

Yes, _Ludwigia_ x _lacustris_ does grow in your state; I've even seen it there. But I don't think that's what it is.

_L. palustris_ can grow leaves that are almost like those of brevipes! I've seen it that way in PA, and HeyPK has seen it like that in Mississippi (both in very shallow water in full sun). But when you get it home and grow it out, it always looks like the palustris we all know. I don't know for sure why that happens (shallow water and full sun apparently doesn't always make it do that). The first time we ever saw the lacustris, we almost didn't collect it because I thought that's what it was. But after growing a while, the leaves stayed narrow - and orange- and showed the greenish yellow close to the stem that brevipes nearly always shows.

The red plant turned out to be_ L. palustris_. Really. That's what the stuff I found looked like too. 
http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/...-three-aquarium-plants-mississippi-ditch.html

The monograph is here, but I thought for sure it's available online for free. I may be able to find it that way next week. 
http://www.jstor.org/pss/40035477


----------

