The green links below add additional plants to the comparison table. Blue links lead to other Web sites.
enable glossary links

California red fir, magnificant silver fir, red fir, Shasta red fir, silvertip fir

alpine fir, Rocky Mountain fir, sapin concolore, subalpine fir

Habit Trees to 57m; trunk to 2.5m diam.; crown narrowly conic. Trees to 20m; trunk to 0.8m diam.; crown spirelike.
Bark

grayish, thin, with age thickening and becoming deeply furrowed with ridges being often 4 times wider than furrows, plates reddish.

gray, thin, smooth, furrowed in age.

Branches

ascending in upper crown, descending in lower crown;

twigs opposite to whorled, light yellow to ± tan, reddish pubescent for 1–2 years.

stiff, straight;

twigs opposite to whorled, greenish gray to light brown, bark splitting as early as 2 years to reveal red-brown layer, somewhat pubescent;

fresh leaf scars with red periderm.

Buds

hidden by leaves or exposed, usually dark brown, ovoid, small, not resinous or with resin drop near tip, apex rounded;

basal scales short, broad, equilaterally triangular, densely pubescent, not resinous, margins entire to crenate, apex sharp-pointed.

hidden by leaves or exposed, tan to dark brown, nearly globose, small, resinous, apex rounded;

basal scales short, broad, equilaterally triangular, glabrous or with a few trichomes at base, not resinous, margins crenate to dentate, apex sharp-pointed.

Leaves

2–3.7cm × 2mm, mostly 1-ranked, flexible, the proximal portion often appressed to twig for 2–3mm (best seen on abaxial surface of twig), distal portion divergent;

cross section flat, with or without weak groove adaxially toward leaf base, or cross section 3–4-sided on fertile branches;

odor camphorlike;

abaxial surface with 2 glaucous bands, each band with 4–5 stomatal rows;

adaxial surface blue-green to silvery blue, with single glaucous band that may divide into 2 toward leaf base, band with (8–)10(–13) stomatal rows at midleaf;

apex rounded or, on fertile branches, somewhat pointed;

resin canals small, near margins and abaxial epidermal layer.

1.8–3.1cm × 1.5–2mm, spiraled, turned upward, flexible;

cross section flat, prominently grooved adaxially;

odor sharp (ß-phellandrene);

abaxial surface with 4–5 stomatal rows on each side of midrib;

adaxial surface bluish green, very glaucous, with 4–6 stomatal rows at midleaf, rows usually continuous to leaf base;

apex prominently or weakly notched to rounded;

resin canals large, ± median, away from margins and midway between abaxial and adaxial epidermal layers.

Pollen cones

at pollination ± purple or reddish brown.

at pollination ± purple to purplish green.

Seed(s)

cones oblong-cylindric, 15–20 × 7–10cm, purple at first but becoming yellowish brown or greenish brown, sessile, apex round;

scales ca. 3 × 4cm, pubescent;

bracts included to exserted and reflexed (Shasta red fir) over scales.

cones cylindric, 6–12 × 2–4cm, dark purple, sessile, apex rounded;

scales ca. 1.5 × 1.7cm, densely pubescent;

bracts included (specimens with exserted, reflexed bracts are insect infested).

2n

=24.

=24.

Abies magnifica

Abies lasiocarpa

Habitat Mixed coniferous forests Coastal, subalpine coniferous forests
Elevation 1400–2700m (4600–8900ft) 1100–2300 m (3600–7500 ft)
Distribution
from FNA
CA; NV; OR
[WildflowerSearch map]
[BONAP county map]
from FNA
AK; CA; OR; WA; BC; YT
[WildflowerSearch map]
[BONAP county map]
Discussion

Abies magnifica often exists in extensive high elevation stands in the Sierra Nevada; its close relative A. procera occurs in small mountaintop populations relatively isolated from one another. As expected for isolated populations, A. procera produces large interpopulation variation in morphology (J.Maze and W.H. Parker 1983) and chemistry (E.Zavarin et al. 1978). Where the two species meet in southern Oregon and northern California, many populations are intermediate; these have been called A. magnifica var. shastensis Lemmon. The status of such intermediates is unsettled. They may be accepted as hybrids between A. magnifica and A. procera (Liu T. S. 1971) or, alternatively, the paleontological record suggests that the two species may have originated from the intermediates (E.Zavarin et al. 1978). Individuals from this region should be assigned to A. magnifica, A. procera, or A. magnifica × procera (E.L. Parker 1963), depending on the morphologic criteria selected to differentiate the species, though clearly these individuals are genetically quite different from those near the type localities of the two species.

An extensive study of this variation, as proposed by E.Zavarin et al. (1978), is warranted. Such a study should consider data from the type localities as a basis of comparison. Moreover, to evaluate this situation critically, one should first determine if any genetic exchange occurs between Abies lasiocarpa and A. procera that may complicate an evaluation.

(Discussion copyrighted by Flora of North America; reprinted with permission.)

The only unique populations in this species come from coastal Alaska (A. S. Harris 1965; C. J. Heusser 1954). They are found at lower elevations (0–900 m) and appear to be isolated with no reported introgression between them and the coastal mountain populations. The population on the Prince of Wales Island has distinct terpene patterns and needs morphological and developmental studies to see if these patterns contrast with neighboring populations.

Through central British Columbia and northern Washington, Abies lasiocarpa introgresses with A. bifolia. These trees may have morphologic features resembling either species and may have intermediate terpene patterns; they are best classified as interior subalpine fir (A. bifolia × lasiocarpa). At the southern end of its range, A. lasiocarpa possibly hybridizes with A. procera (R.S. Hunt and E.von Rudloff 1979). Abies lasiocarpa shares with A. procera a red periderm, crystals in the ray parenchyma (R.W. Kennedy et al. 1968), and reflexed tips of the bracts, features not shared with A. bifolia.

Abies lasiocarpa usually exists in small stands at high elevations and is not often observed. Its differences in comparison to A. bifolia have prompted studies (W.H. Parker et al. 1979) to see if it is A. bifolia introgressed with the sympatric A. amabilis. Abies lasiocarpa and A. amabilis, however, are separated by many morphologic features, and no hybrids have been found (W.H. Parker et al. 1979).

(Discussion copyrighted by Flora of North America; reprinted with permission.)

Source FNA vol. 2. FNA vol. 2.
Parent taxa Pinaceae > Abies Pinaceae > Abies
Sibling taxa
A. amabilis, A. balsamea, A. bifolia, A. bracteata, A. concolor, A. fraseri, A. grandis, A. lasiocarpa, A. lowiana, A. procera
A. amabilis, A. balsamea, A. bifolia, A. bracteata, A. concolor, A. fraseri, A. grandis, A. lowiana, A. magnifica, A. procera
Synonyms Pinus lasiocarpa
Name authority A. Murray bis: Proc. Roy. Hort. Soc. London 3: 318. (1863) (Hooker) Nuttall: N. Amer. Sylv. 3: 138. (1849)
Web links