Flora of North America species comparison

Salix hookeriana is primarily a coastal species occurring from northern California northward to Oregon, Washington, and southern Vancouver Island, with disjunct populations on Queen Charlotte Islands, British Columbia, and northward to Yakatut Bay, Turnagain Arm, and Kodiak, Alaska. It was treated by G. W. Argus (1973) and R. D. Dorn (2000) in a broad sense because of an absence of strong distinguishing characters and intergradation in characters that could be used to divide it. It is highly variable and three very similar taxa have been named: S. amplifolia, S. hookeriana (including vars. tomentosa and laurifolia), and S. piperi. Although extremes of these taxa sometimes are recognizable, the intergradation displayed is so great that even attempts to recognize them as varieties are thwarted. The amplifolia variant in Alaska is characterized by having only white leaf hairs, hairy ovaries, no stipules, and catkins often borne on distinct flowering branchlets, but variation can occur within the same population, and typical S. hookeriana on Vancouver Island sometimes displays the same characteristics. The piperi variant, an inland population in western Oregon and Washington, is usually recognized by local botanists as different from coastal populations. It is characterized by leaves and branchlets soon becoming glabrate and stipules prominent. These characteristics, however, sometimes appear in northern California coastal populations, and some inland populations in Oregon include very hairy individuals that are indistinguishable from coastal variants of S. hookeriana. In general, very hairy populations of S. hookeriana are probably an adaptation to marine coastal environments, but some variation may be due to hybridization and introgression with S. scouleriana. Inland populations suggest the influence of S. lasiolepis. Two hexaploid chromosome numbers reported for S. hookeriana from Vancouver Island (R. L. Taylor and S. Taylor 1977) and Queen Charlotte Islands (R. L. Taylor and G. A. Mulligan 1968), British Columbia, indicate that hybridization has played a role in the evolution of this complex. It is possible that each variant of S. hookeriana has had a different, possibly even recurrent, polyploid origin. Further cytological and genetic study is indicated.

The following comparisons may help to distinguish Salix hookeriana, S. lasiolepis, and S. scouleriana.

Vegetative specimens of Salix hookeriana can be distinguished from S. lasiolepis by having floral buds ellipsoid, beaks distinctly long-tapered, densely long-hairy (villous), red-brown, blades usually pilose, villous, or woolly on abaxial surfaces, usually 18–63 mm wide, and 1.5–4.2 times as long as wide; S. lasiolepis has floral buds ovoid, beaks inconspicuous and blunt, sparsely to moderately densely short-hairy (velvety), yellowish to red-brown, blades usually tomentose on abaxial surfaces, usually 6–32 mm wide, and 3.2–9.6 times as long as wide.

Salix hookeriana is distinguished from S. scouleriana by having branchlets with spreading hairs (woolly or tomentose to glabrate), petioles usually pilose to tomentose, blades typically narrowly elliptic but variable, stigmas 0.3–0.74, short in relation to styles (0.6–2.3 mm), and pistillate nectaries 0.5–1.4 mm, shorter or longer than stipes; S. scouleriana has branchlets usually with short, erect hairs (velutinous), sometimes spreading (villous or tomentose), petioles velvety or villous adaxially, blades typically oblanceolate but variable, stigmas 0.4–1.04 mm, long in relation to styles (0.2–0.6 mm), and pistillate nectaries 0.2–0.8 mm, shorter than stipes.

Hybrids:

Salix hookeriana forms natural hybrids with S. barclayi and S. scouleriana. Variation in some S. hookeriana populations suggests hybridization with S. lasiolepis but no positive identifications have been made. R. D. Dorn (2000) doubted that hybridization in California between these species with different chromosome numbers was possible, but species with different chromosome numbers do hybridize [for example, S. athabascensis (4x) × S. pedicellaris (2x)]; synthetic hybridization studies are indicated.

Salix hookeriana × S. scouleriana: Plants from southern British Columbia with leaves similar to S. hookeriana but with prominent stipules, catkins both erect and recurving, and relatively long stigmas were thought by J. K. Henry (1915) to be this hybrid.

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

Genera 50+, species ca. 1000 (4 genera, 123 species in the flora).

Taxonomic placement of the Salicaceae and the genera included in it have varied greatly. Some botanists (H. G. A. Engler and K. Prantl 1887–1915) treated it as a primitive member of the Dicotyledoneae and grouped it with other families having simple, apetalous, unisexual flowers arranged in catkins, the “Amentiferae.” At about the same time, others (C. E. Bessey 1915) took a different view, regarding the simple flowers as the result of reduction, and placed the taxa in Caryophyllales. As early as 1905, H. Hallier could see that there were similarities between Salicaceae and Flacourtiaceae; at the time, he was vigorously challenged by E. Gilg (1915). A. D. J. Meeuse (1975) summarized evidence for a close relationship between these families, including wood anatomy, phytochemistry, host-parasite relationships (including rust fungi), and morphology. He concluded that the Salicaceae could be combined with the Flacourtiaceae, “perhaps as a tribe.” A. Cronquist (1988) and R. F. Thorne (1992b) placed the Salicaceae, in a narrow sense, in Violales near Flacourtiaceae.

Molecular studies support a close relationship between Salicaceae and Flacourtiaceae in Malpighiales and show that Flacourtiaceae, in a broad sense, is paraphyletic. Based on a study of plastid rbcL DNA sequences, Salix and Populus were nested within a subset of 52 genera of Flacourtiaceae (M. W. Chase et al. 2002). Chase et al. proposed moving some genera from broadly circumscribed Flacourtiaceae to Salicaceae. Other studies, based on different gene sequences, came to the same conclusion (O. I. Nandi et al. 1998; V. Savolainen et al. 2000; K. W. Hilu et al. 2003; Angiosperm Phylogeny Group 2003). The discovery of the extinct fossil genus Pseudosalix (L. D. Boucher et al. 2003), from the Eocene Green River Formation of Utah, provided further support for placing some members of Flacourtiaceae in Salicaceae. The well-preserved Pseudosalix fossils, in which reproductive structures are directly associated with the leaves, occur intermixed with Populus fossils. The leaves are slender and have salicoid teeth, inflorescences are cymose, flowers are unisexual, pedicellate, tetrasepalous, and 3- or 4-carpellate, and seeds are comose, i.e., having characteristics intermediate between Salicaceae and Flacourtiaceae.

The presence, in both families, of salicoid teeth is often cited in support of their close relationship (W. S. Judd 1997b; O. Nandi et al. 1998; M. W. Chase et al. 2002; H. P. Wilkinson 2007). Salicoid teeth were first recognized and defined as having the tip of the medial vein (seta) of the tooth retained as a dark, but not opaque, non-deciduous spherical callosity fused to the tooth apex and were reported to occur in Salicaceae and Idesia of the Flacourtiaceae (L. J. Hickey and J. A. Wolfe 1975). Nandi et al. reported that a broad survey of angiosperm leaves showed that salicoid teeth occur outside of Flacourtiaceae and Salicaceae only in Tetracentraceae.

Isozyme and cytological evidence show that Populus and Salix are ancient polyploids (D. E. Soltis and P. S. Soltis 1990; Wang R. and Wang J. 1991). All Salix and Populus species contain salicin (R. T. Palo 1984).

The genera often included in Salicaceae, in the narrow sense, are Chosenia, Populus, Salix (A. K. Skvortsov 1999), and, sometimes, Toisusu. Molecular studies (E. Leskinen and C. Alström-Rapaport 1999; T. Azuma et al. 2000) show that Chosenia is nested within Salix. H. Ohashi (2001) treated Toisusu as Salix subg. Pleuradinea Kimura and Chosenia as Salix subg. Chosenia (Nakai) H. Ohashi.

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