I already have a checklist of North American plants which meet basic tree, shrub, subshrub, forb, graminoid, epiphyte, vine, broadleaf/needleleaf, rosette, succulent, evergreen/deciduous categories. However, I am interested in further classifying species as sclerophyllous, or small-leaved. I could otherwise spend considerable time reviewing plant manuals to get this data.
Should shortness outrank succulence? Combinations like "succulent subshrub" would be lost if I were to follow Appendix B (species like Opuntia humifusa, would generally be lumped in with dwarf shrub since it is mostly < 30 cm, except in FL).
It may be desirable to have annuals as a separate category of forbs and graminoids, given that they characterize vegetation in some unique ephemeral enviroments.
Article EcoVeg: A new approach to vegetation description and classification
In the accompanying papers, some biotypes are segregated, for if any of the information useful.
JL
I know this isn't an answer, but I believe that those categories make things harder to work, specially when it comes to succulency, since this feature isn't a growth habit per se but an adaptation for drylands. Just as happens with many Cactaceae that are succulent and arboreous or arborescent, there are many other plants, such as those in genus Ceiba, that are succulent trees. In my humble opinion, I'd rather work with the basic tree, shrub, subshrub, vine and herb categories.
Dear Mr Schmidt,
Greetings for you and your work. Regarding the question you asked, as far as I am concerned, I share Mr Sánchez Ocharan opinion. Of course, I do not know what is the exact purpose for detailed segregation of the form of the habit(us) you need, but in Southeast Europe mainly we use the aforementioned categories plus hemiparasite-epiphyte (like Arceuthobium oxycedri, Viscum album, Loranthus europaeus).
Best regards!
I use a predefined list of species' growth habits for various purposes. However, most of the time, I too only use the major categories based on plant height and longevity (tree, shrub, herb, vine). They can be used to subdivide a vegetation plot summary for informational purposes only (not used to classify the vegetation). I also like to make species diversity gradient maps based on growth habit, whereby different growth habits have different centers of diversity.
But I like the option of subcategories (it is safer to maintain more categories in a database, since you retain the abitlity to lump at any time for a given report). I welcome new categories such as "small-leaved" plants since some desert plant descriptions are ambiguous on whether the plant can be considered evergreen or deciduous (especially marcescent subshrubs in the Asteraceae), and some like ocotillo are leafless the majority of the time. As I have used the term subshrub in the past, I have included both suffrutescent and dwarf shrubs in this category, but I am not sure if both meet the same modal concept intended for dwarf shrub.
Incidentally, I have a parasitic modifier on each life form (lumping hemi-parasites and achlorophyllous holo-parasites), overriding the deciduous/evergreen modifier. Mistletoe in this case would be "parasitic epiphyte", Agalinis and Conopholis are “parasitic forbs”, and buffalo-nut is a “parasitic shrub”. Their dependence on other plants is a more significant feature than their leaf longevity or greenness.
With regard to succulence, I think that have been a little biased towards focusing on primary photosynthetic organs like green leafless stems (cacti), or fat leaves (Crassulaceae), thereby excluding “pachycauls” like Ceiba or Bombax from succulence, just because they have “normal” leaves.
Right. Furthermore, subshrub refers to form of habit, but often as half-shrub meaning perennial with lignified base stem and even to plant life forms... Keep the good work!
I added a draft checklist with growth habits.
www.researchgate.net/publication/327845055_Growth_Habits_of_North_American_Vascular_Plants
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Ecology