Notes

R.B.& A.J. Faden 74/412 (Morogoro District: Uluguru Mts, Bondwa summit, 2120 m, in Podocarpus – Allanblackia–Polyscias–Balthasaria–Syzygium forest) has erect rhizomes but the frond architecture is similar to that of A. schimperi. Attempts to divide the mainland subspecies further have been unsuccessful. It was at first thought that the southern African population might form a taxon equivalent to A. laxum but the variation overlaps too much with that of material further north to make it practical to do so. Clair Thompson mentions (on a label) it can be epiphytic but there is no confirmation of this.Schelpe described A. scandicinum var. rhodesianum (Bol. Soc. Brot., Sér. 2, 41: 211 (1967); F.Z. Pterid.: 204, t. 57, fig. a (1970). Type: Zimbabwe, Pungwe Gorge, Schelpe 5722 (BOL, holo., BM!, iso.)) but it seems doubtfully different and he makes no mention of it in the F.S.A. Pterid. account. Burrows (op. cit.) and Jacobsen (op. cit.) keep it distinct.Without really adequate rhizome data A. schimperi and A. scandicinum can be difficult to distinguish particularly in southern Africa and some field mention creeping rhizomes yet say fronds are tufted.

Notes

R.B.& A.J. Faden 74/412 (Morogoro District: Uluguru Mts, Bondwa summit, 2120 m, in Podocarpus – Allanblackia–Polyscias–Balthasaria–Syzygium forest) has erect rhizomes but the frond architecture is similar to that of A. schimperi. Attempts to divide the mainland subspecies further have been unsuccessful. It was at first thought that the southern African population might form a taxon equivalent to A. laxum but the variation overlaps too much with that of material further north to make it practical to do so. Clair Thompson mentions (on a label) it can be epiphytic but there is no confirmation of this.Schelpe described A. scandicinum var. rhodesianum (Bol. Soc. Brot., Sér. 2, 41: 211 (1967); F.Z. Pterid.: 204, t. 57, fig. a (1970). Type: Zimbabwe, Pungwe Gorge, Schelpe 5722 (BOL, holo., BM!, iso.)) but it seems doubtfully different and he makes no mention of it in the F.S.A. Pterid. account. Burrows (op. cit.) and Jacobsen (op. cit.) keep it distinct.Without really adequate rhizome data A. schimperi and A. scandicinum can be difficult to distinguish particularly in southern Africa and some field mention creeping rhizomes yet say fronds are tufted.

Notes

R.B.& A.J. Faden 74/412 (Morogoro District: Uluguru Mts, Bondwa summit, 2120 m, in Podocarpus – Allanblackia–Polyscias–Balthasaria–Syzygium forest) has erect rhizomes but the frond architecture is similar to that of A. schimperi. Attempts to divide the mainland subspecies further have been unsuccessful. It was at first thought that the southern African population might form a taxon equivalent to A. laxum but the variation overlaps too much with that of material further north to make it practical to do so. Clair Thompson mentions (on a label) it can be epiphytic but there is no confirmation of this.Schelpe described A. scandicinum var. rhodesianum (Bol. Soc. Brot., Sér. 2, 41: 211 (1967); F.Z. Pterid.: 204, t. 57, fig. a (1970). Type: Zimbabwe, Pungwe Gorge, Schelpe 5722 (BOL, holo., BM!, iso.)) but it seems doubtfully different and he makes no mention of it in the F.S.A. Pterid. account. Burrows (op. cit.) and Jacobsen (op. cit.) keep it distinct.Without really adequate rhizome data A. schimperi and A. scandicinum can be difficult to distinguish particularly in southern Africa and some field mention creeping rhizomes yet say fronds are tufted.