Flora of North America species comparison

Varieties 2 (2 in the flora).

Cirsium inamoenum is a variable complex across the northern Great Basin and adjacent mountains. A. Cronquist (1994) treated this complex as a single species under the name C. subniveum without infraspecific taxa and including taxa that formerly had been assigned to C. utahense (e.g., J. T. Howell 1960b). Some populations consist of small-headed, white-flowered plants with strong involucres and short, appressed phyllaries. Others have larger heads, white or lavender to pink-purple corollas, and phyllaries with longer, ascending to spreading tips. My treatment of this complex as C. inamoenum is similarly inclusive as was Cronquist’s treatment of C. subniveum, except that I believe C. humboldtense, which Cronquist included, is probably a derivative of hybridization between C. subniveum and C. eatonii var. peckii. I have observed such hybrids on the slopes of Steens Mountain in Harney County, Oregon, and the type of C. humboldtense closely resembles some of the introgressants. I have examined several other specimens that are likely the products of hybridization of C. inamoenum with other varieties of C. eatonii.

I have chosen to recognize racial differentiation within Cirsium inamoenum at the rank of variety. The main difference between Cirsium inamoenum var. inamoenum and var. davisii is corolla color. Unfortunately this feature is sometimes difficult to determine on herbarium specimens, and many collectors fail to include corolla color on specimen labels. Some geographic overlap occurs between var. davisii, which has a distribution centered in northeastern Utah, southeastern Idaho, and adjacent southwestern Wyoming, and the more widespread var. inamoenum.

Plants of northeastern Oregon, southeastern Washington, and adjacent western Idaho often have large heads and densely tomentose foliage. These were named Cirsium wallowense by Peck. Similar plants occur sporadically in other portions of the range of Cirsium inamoenum var. inamoenum and I chose not to recognize these northwestern populations as a third variety. Additional study might clarify the relationships of these plants.

Some specimens of Cirsium inamoenum in central Nevada and Utah approach C. neomexicanum. It seems likely that these species have interacted in the past.

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

Of conservation concern.

Cirsium mohavense ranges from scattered sites in eastern California east in the Basin and Range Province of southern Nevada to southwestern Utah and nortwestern Arizona, mostly in Mojave Desert region. When Welsh proposed Cirsium virginense for a geographically limited group of plants from southwestern Utah and northwestern Arizona (and subsequently discovered in extreme southeastern Nevada), he indicated that its relationship to other western thistles was unknown. Subsequently, he indicated (S. L. Welsh 1983; Welsh et al. 1993) that the affinities of the taxon apparently lie with C. mohavense, but he did not attempt to distinguish C. virginense from C. mohavense (in the strict sense) because the latter was not known to occur in Utah. A. Cronquist (1994) attempted the distinction. The only character he used in his key was life span of the plants: biennial (C. mohavense) versus perennial, spreading by creeping roots (C. virginense). In the descriptions of the two taxa he elaborated on this character, indicating that C. mohavense is single-stemmed and C. virginense often multistemmed. In the remaining features the plants are very similar or overlap extensively.

Distinction of two taxa on the basis of duration is impractical and probably inaccurate. Specimens commonly lack roots, and in those specimens in which bases are present, I have seldom been able to make any distinction between biennial taproots and perennial taproots. In particular I have seen no evidence of creeping roots. I am not aware of any study of either taxon that documents the life history of the plants. Some specimens of C. mohavense (in the strict sense) appear to have perennial bases like those attributed to C. virginense by Cronquist. For instance, a specimen of C. mohavense from Death Valley (Thorne & Ratcliff 2287, BRY) is indistinguishable from specimens of C. virginense (e.g., Atwood 13374, BRY) from Nevada and Utah. Both have a branched root crown with multiple rosettes and nearly identical leaves and heads.

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