B A. pratensis L. var. (beta) alpestris Wahlenb. 1812, Fl. Lapp. 21.
T N Sweden: Alopecurum geniculatus?, Luleå fjället uti Spätjenwaggi, 08.09.1807, Wahlenberg scripsit (UPS) lectotype, selected by Moberg & Nilsson (1991, Nord. J. Bot. 11: 292).
2n= 28 (4x).
2nD Engelskjøn & Knaben (1971 N Norw); Rapp (1971, 1972 N Norw).
G NOR RUS SIB
(1) A northern, native boreal-alpine and 'sub'arctic race, usually recognized in NW Europe (Finland, Sweden, Norway) where it well is separated from subsp. pratensis geographically, ecologically, and also morphologically in a few minor characters. It was not previously recognized in Russia, where the transition between southern and northern plants is reported to be more even. It is, however, included by Tzvelev in Fedorov (1999, Flora of Russia 1) and in Tzvelev's draft. (Elven)
37.36.2 Alopecurus arundinaceus Poir. in Lam. (1808), Encycl. 8: 776.
2n= 28 (4x).
2nD Löve & Löve (1975) list four non-arctic counts; Engelskjøn (1979 N Norw).
G NOR RUS
(1) Hybrids between A. arundinaceus and A. pratensis are frequent where the parents meet. They also occur and spread (at least vegetatively) more or less independent of the parents, but probably not within the Arctic. In any case, they are recent hybrid swarms and should not be recognized as a taxon. (Elven)
37.36.3 Alopecurus roshevitzianus Ovcz. in Kom. (1934), Fl. SSSR 2: 154, 745.
S A. glaucus auct., non Less. (1835); A. alpinus Sm. subsp. glaucus Hultén (1968), Ark. Bot., ser. 2, 7, 1: 10.
T Russia: Ural: In humidis montis Taganai, alt. 1900-3000', 1835, leg. Lessing (LE) holotype.
2n= (1) >99. (2) 112. (3) c. 120.
2nD (1) ? (2) Löve et al. (1971). (3) ? [Other numbers also given by Tzvelev (1976).]
(1) Tzvelev (1964, Fl. Arct. URSS) argues for a broadly defined A. glaucus, also including A. roshevitzianus. His arguments could even support a subspecific treatment under a broadly defined A. borealis/alpinus. That was the opinion of Hultén (1968, Ark. Bot.) and should be discussed. (Elven)
WARNING! Might be reduced to a subspecies of A. borealis. 37.36.4 Alopecurus borealis Trin. (1820), Fund. Agrost. 58.
T [Bering Sea: In insula St. Pauli, leg. Langsdorff (LE).]
(1) There is much confusion here as to the name of the species. In his typewritten draft, Tzvelev accepted A. alpinus Sm. as the name of the species, but he has changed this by hand to A. borealis Trin. The reason for rejection of A. alpinus Sm. is that it is a later homonym of A. alpinus Vill., but we still should find the exact reference to the Villars name. At the same time Tzvelev proposed his own subspecies alpinus Tzvelev of that species, without the Smith name as basionym which it obviously is. (Elven)
(2) In Tzvelev's draft, subsp. borealis and subsp. alpinus are sympatric through most of their range. If this is a case of south/north variation it should be proved discontinuous before acceptance at level of two distinct taxa. The question, whether they are races or clinal expressions, remains unsolved. From my experience it is impossible to recognise two taxa. I have therefore omitted subsp. alpinus. (Elven)
(3) The type specimen of A. borealis is from the area where also [the slightly more different] subsp. stejnegeri occur. There might be problems with characterisation of the type subspecies. (Tzvelev)
(2) This entity seems to be a real Beringian taxon but its characters also appear in neighboring areas and it is difficult to draw clear geographic (and morphological) limits. (Elven)
37.36.5 Alopecurus aequalis Sobol. (1799), Fl. Petrop. 16.
T [Possible type "E Flora Petropolitana" in LE.]
2n= 14 (2x).
2nD Löve & Löve (1975) list numerous counts, some as arctic.
G ICE NOR RUS RFE ALA CAN GRL
(1) Löve & Löve (1975) separates between subsp. aequalis and subsp. amurensis (Kom.) T. Koyama (1987), Grasses of Japan & Neighb. Regions 485. The latter is also listed by them as arctic. Does it reach the Arctic as we delimit it? If so, it should either be accepted or mentioned in synonymy. They also list as arctic a subsp. aristulatus (Michx.) Tzvelev (1971), Nov. Sist. Vyssh. Rast. 8: 20. (Elven)
37.36.6 Alopecurus geniculatus L. (1753), Sp. Pl. 60.
2n= 28 (4x).
2nD Löve & Löve (1975) list numerous counts, one Icelandic.
G ICE NOR GRL*
(1) Added to Tzvelev's draft as it is proved for at least three floristic regions, in 1-2 of these maybe as native. (Elven)
(1) The reported chromosome numbers are interesting as 2n=40 is consistent with a close relationship with Glyceria (x=10) whereas 2n=42 is a typical hexaploid number (x=7) in many other genera. Are there really two numbers with different base numbers, are there aneuploids, or is one of the numbers a repeated miscount based on a presumed base number? (Elven)
37.40 Melica L. (1753), Sp. Pl. 66.
37.40.1 Melica nutans L. (1753), Sp. Pl. 66.
2n= 18 (2x).
2nD Löve & Löve (1975) list several non-arctic counts.
G NOR RUS
37.41 Piptatherum Beauv. (1812), Ess. Agrost. 17.
37.41.1 Piptatherum pungens (Torr. ex Spreng.) Roshev. *** [Combination not in IK]
B Milium pungens Torr. ex Spreng. (1821), Neue Entdeck. 2: 102.
S Oryzopsis pungens (Torr. ex Spreng.) Hitchc. (1908), Contrib. U.S. Natl. Herb. 12: 151.
2n= (1) 22. (2) 24.
2nD (1) ? (2) ?
37.42 Nardus L. (1753), Sp. Pl. 53.
37.42.1 Nardus stricta L. (1753), Sp. Pl. 53.
2n= 26 (24, 25, 28, 30) (2x).
2nD Löve & Löve (1975) list numerous non-arctic counts of 2n=26; they cite Bowden (1960b) as the only reference of 2n=30.
(1) A border case on the SE shore of Hudson Bay. The occurrence of two chromosome numbers as listed by Tzvelev (1976) is very strange. (Elven)
37.44.2 Dantonia spicata (L.) Beauv. ex Roemer & Schult. (1817), Syst. Veg. 2: 690.
B Avena spicata L. (1753), Sp. Pl. 80.
2n= 36 (6x).
2nD Löve & Löve (1975) list three non-arctic counts.