The New Zealand Plant Conservation Network

I'm curious as to the fate of Celmisia glabrescens.
I notice that the New Zealand Plant Names Database still lists this as a true species, but NZPCN does not list it.
My very rough literature search did not find anything on the taxonomy of this species.
Any help would be very much appreciated. Thanks.

Hi Jane,

Good question - Celmisia glabrescens was described by Petrie (1915, TNZI 47: 50) from Stewart Island, and Allan (1961, FLNZVol.I. 630) states it is only known from the type locality "Meadows at Freshwater River" Paterson's Inlet. Wilson (1987, NZJB, Supplement: 81-131) does not mention it, and Druce obviously thought it was synonymous with something else (I cannot now find out what). Images of it suggest a relationship to C. durietzii. As you will appreciate Celmisia needs a proper, modern revision. At this stage I don't know what to do about this species - I will see what I can find out. However, just because NZPND lists something does not necessarily mean anything, e.g., Coprosma solandri is also listed by them (not sure what you mean by a 'true species' as they don't use that nomenclature and rightly so), and that is not a 'true species' in a New Zealand context at all! More later.

I have now spoken with Shannel Courtney - Celmisia glabrescens was rejected by Druce (1993) - in his unpublished checklist, held by Landcare Research (9th revision) where he treats it as a 'doubtful species'. Clearly that is just an opinion, not a revision, and until a revision of the genus (or this species) is done we should prepare a fact sheet for it. The problem you have identified is typical of the current situation whereby the lack of biosystematic funding, capacity and capability has meant that unpublished opinions, in the absence of proper research, have tended to become established facts. Certainly Wilson (1982, 1987) does not mention C. glabrescens in his Stewart Island Field Guide and Flora List - so one assumes he too thought it 'dubious'. Can I suggest that if you have found it in your work for DOC to make sure to get good images of it, and if the population is of sufficient size some decent collections for CHR so that some future revision can use them?

Thanks Peter,
That's really helpful, and you're right, I shouldn't have used the term "true species."
Celmisia does need a revision, and it would be quite a fun group to study more. Having worked on them a little bit ecologically for my masters I seem to have become rather attached to the group. I have so many more to see though!
I haven't come across anything I would call C. glabrescens yet, but if I do I'll certainly be making extensive collections (either photographs or physical samples) of it to aid in any future revision.
Cheers,
Jane

Bona Sera Jane - I have now posted a Fact Sheet for Celmisia glabrescens -its a work in progress but the sheet at least captures the salient points of our dialogue. Thanks for drawing it to my attention. Ciao Peter

Hi Peter,
That's fantastic, I'll keep a look out for any candidate C. glabrescens next week as we start our alpine work.
Happy New Year!
Jane

Good luck with that. Remember that this species was recorded from near sea level....