[ Sedum pallidum ] et Sedum hispanicum

Moi aussi j'ai un Sedum identifier comme hispanicum, mais le miens est plus glauque et à déjà fleuri ! C'est vraiment compliqué ces Sedum !

Heu prévois à boire et à manger, Il y a quelques photos (1700 photos, 600 Sedums)

Your plant is Sedum pallidum. It is sometimes listed under the synonyms Sedum bithynicum or S. pallidum var. bithynicum.


Cereusly Steve

Stéphane a écrit:Je suis surpris par ton sedum lydium Monique, je le trouve bien allongé par rapport aux photos du site, et au mien. Après, il y a peu etre des variations, ou alors l'ombre, ou beaucoup d'eau?
C'est fou ce qu'une simple photo peu entrainer comme vague...

yes definitely S. pallidum var bithynicum - until they flower they can be almost impossible to differentiate - especially in N Anatolia where they grow together. -Ray Stephenson

Almost. There remains some confusion over the correct name of the plant.

Chamberlain & Muirhead (1972) had misnterpreted the annual species to be typical Sedum pallidum and named the perennial as S. pallidum var. bithynicum.

'T Hart (1995, 2002, 2003) corrected the synonymy as Sedum pallidum to be the perennial species only, with S. pallidum var. bithynicum as a synonym, and the annual species as Sedum eriocarpum (with 8 subspecies).

The annual plant listed and illustrated as Sedum pallidum (fig. 5.12) in Ray's "Sedum - Cultivated Stonecrops" is actually Sedum eriocarpum while his perennial plant as S. pallidum var. bithynicum (plate 14) is a form of S.pallidum itself. The plant shown as Sedum hispanicum var. minus (plate 12) also appears to be a form of S. pallidum rather than the plant originally described under that name by Praeger (1921). 'T Hart (2003) comments on identity problems with certain plants attributed to S. hispanicum possibly being better referred to other species, especially S.eriocarpum.


Chamberlain, D.F. & Muirhead, C.W. (1972) CRASSULACEAE in Davis, P. (ed.), Flora of Turkey and the East Aegean Islands 4: 209-249.


Hart, H't (1995) Variation in Sedum litoreum and the S. rubens complex (Crassulaceae): new names and combinations. Ot Sist. Bot. Dergisi 2 (2): 1-9

Hart, H't (2002) Crassulaceae in Strid, A. & Kit Tan, FLORA HELLENICA 2: 304-336.


Hart, H’t. & Bleij, B. (2003) Sedum in Eggli, U. (ed.) Illustrated Handbook of Succulent Plants: Crassulaceae.(pp. 235-332, pl. XXXII-XLI.)

Praeger, R.L. (1921) AN ACCOUNT OF THE GENUS SEDUM AS FOUND IN CULTIVATION. Journal of the Royal Horticultural Society 46: 1-314, 183 figs.


Cereusly Steve

I hadn't realised the state of confusion. In my month spent studying specimens in the Euxine Alps I noted that the coastal plants were small and perennial (those we've usually referred to as bithynicum) but inland plants and those found in central Anatolia became huge and annual and they definitely were not S. eriocarpum (will be on the front of the October Sedum Society Newsletter). Obviously much more work is needed on these. I see Eggli does say that some S. pallidum plants are monocarpic and they can be distinguished from the strictly annual S. eriocarpum but I see little point in this as S. eriocarpum does not come from C Anatolia. I have a speciment from N Anatolia I have had 4 years and I cannot say whether it is S. dasyphyllum or S. hispanicum. Out of flower it looks more like S. pallidum. I have someone looking at the DNA to sort this.
Ray

(il ni a pas de smileys avec des oreilles d'âne )

"The annual plant listed and illustrated as Sedum pallidum (fig. 5.12) in Ray's "Sedum - Cultivated Stonecrops" is actually Sedum eriocarpum while his perennial plant as S. pallidum var. bithynicum (plate 14) is a form of S.pallidum itself. The plant shown as Sedum hispanicum var. minus (plate 12) also appears to be a form of S. pallidum rather than the plant originally described under that name by Praeger (1921). 'T Hart (2003) comments on identity problems with certain plants attributed to S. hispanicum possibly being better referred to other species, especially S.eriocarpum.".
In the above quote Steve has made 2 astute observations and a serious error. No one who has seen S. eriocarpum in the wild (I've only observed it in 11 distant sites) would take fig. 5.12 to be this species - it looks nothing like this - plants are always very simple. Annual does not mean = S. eriocarpum. Once over the watershed from the Black Sea southwards all (almost all?) S. pallidum plants are annual - S. eriocarpum does not grow here - if it did it wouldn't look at all like S. pallidum. Plate 12 is most definitely S. pallidum - this would have been corrected 10 years ago had I had the chance! I don't think anyone would muddle S. hispanicum and S. eriocarpum in flower but S. rubens and S. eriocarpum often intermingle and I guess the hybridise in some Greek sites.
Ray

geogeo83 a écrit: va falloir que je reprenne des cours d'englich. Heu, dur, dur!!!! (il ni a pas de smileys avec des oreilles d'âne )

Monique a écrit: c'est un joli Sedum , ce n'est déjà pas mal !!!

Tu as un bien joli tapis de fleurs!

j-m.pilliere a écrit:Ce qui est bien avec ce sedum, les rosettes forment aussi un très joli tapis dès le début du printemps

Monique a écrit:voilà voilà nous l'apellerons Sedum 'joli tapis' !!