Since it's the same thing, it should do!

Resin

cool with me but what's up with this Arboretum de Villardebelle link I was directed to from this link?

PLANTS Profile for Pinus washoensis (Washoe pine USDA PLANTS

Dax

Here is a link that might be useful: Arboretum de Villardebelle

A brief explanation of Pinus washoensis can be found on Christopher Earle's site, the Gymnosperm Database, under the account for the nominate race of ponderosa.

Here is a link that might be useful: Pinus ponderosa subsp. ponderosa

Dax,

If you find a source for it (seedlings or small specimens), could you let me know? I don't feel like growing it from seed.

Thanks,
Darren

Darren,

Forestfarm!

osprey

Very cool, Osprey

Thanks very much I will check it out. I was almost on the verge of going to man eating kitty kingdom and get some seeds. :-)

Darren

I don't know the source of Forestfarm's material--it may come from the Mt. Rose, NV population. However, you may have missed the point that Washoe Pine is identical to the race of Ponderosa that grows in the interior regions of Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia. Seedlings of Ponderosa Pine from this area should be the same as Washoe Pine. That's unless you wish to obtain specimens from the southern end of the range of the subspecies.

Thanks Pasadena, I had no idea that washoensis is identical to ponderosa nor living in British Columbia. I always thought this plant was indigenous to North Eastern California, and Southern Nevada with a few scattered about southern Oregon.

I would definitely be interested in the a more southern subspecies whether that be Mt. Rose or Mt. Warner in California. So if the northern populations of Wahoe are identical to to Ponderosa, why has it been designated a seperate species? and how would you tell the difference between the two in northern areas and southern populations for that matter?

Darren

"So if Wahoe is identical to the northern populations of Ponderosa, why has it been designated a seperate species?"

[note amendment to your query for clarification!]

Because it was found by Californian botanists who were only familiar with the southwestern ('Pacific') populations of Ponderosa (i.e., Pinus benthamiana Hartweg), from which it is quite distinct. If they had travelled further northeast they would have seen that all they had found was a new southern extension of the range of the northern populations of Ponderosa.

Some differences:
Needle length
Northern ('north plateau', inc. 'washoe') 10-22cm
Southwestern ('pacific') 15-30cm
Needle thickness
Northern ('north plateau') stout, 1.7-2.2mm
Southwestern ('pacific') slender, 1.3-1.7mm
Cones
Northern ('north plateau') 5-11cm; matt, purple when immature
Southwestern ('pacific') 7-16cm; glossy, green when immature

Resin

Hi Resin,

Thanks for the clarification. Me thinks it wood be a more gooder idea to re-rite the nomenclature of this plant to avoid some confusion. It's starting to sound more like a subspecies. N'est pas?

So would Pinus ponderosa var. Washoe(ensis) be something to consider for the future or at least technically be more accurate?

As my botantist friend says, "We need something to keep us busy."

Darren

Hi Darren,

Yes, and no - there are clearly two subspecies involved, 'north plateau' (a.k.a. 'washoe'), and 'pacific'. However, the first Ponderosa discovered and named (by David Douglas in 1836) was the north plateau one, so this takes the name Pinus ponderosa subsp. ponderosa, with washoensis as a synonym.

What actually needs renaming is the pacific one from California and OR/WA west of the Cascades; it has been seperately named as Pinus benthamiana (by Hartweg in 1847), but has not yet been described as a subspecies of P. ponderosa, which is what needs to be done.

Resin

One last question then before I stop hasseling you Resin.

How many subspecies of Ponderosa are there or I should say should there be?

P.p. subsp. ponderosa northern variety
P.p. var. arizonica southern variety
P.p. var. scopulorum eastern variety

And P.benthamiana should be changed to for example P.p. susp. benthamiana western variety.

Darren

I have some seedlings of pinus ponderosa the seed came
from sheffields and the source California.Is pinus ponderosa ssp scopulorum
the same as pinus washoensis?

Hi Darren,

Pinus arizonica (southeast AZ, southwest NM, northwestern Mexico) is now usually treated as a distinct species.

There is however one other ponderosa subspecies, southern Rockies (central & northern AZ, central & northern NM, southern CO, southern UT, eastern NV). It has been named (by Engelmann in 1848) as Pinus brachyptera, but not yet as a subspecies within P. ponderosa.

Resin

"the seed came from sheffields and the source California"
Likely be benthamiana, then.

"Is pinus ponderosa ssp scopulorum the same as pinus washoensis?"
No

Resin

Resin,

I feel like I opened a can worms here. I think I'm suffering from nomenclatureitis or at least botany induced migraines. You have inspired me to take Lisandro, my botanist buddy out this week for lunch. Just before he sips away on a spoonful of soup, I'm gonna slap him upside the head and ask him to get his crap straightened out. After 7 years of University and several years in the field.... I will propose to him that for the next 20 years I would like to be called Douglas, after that I will ponder the name Jeffery. Who knows maybe I will switch it up to Bentham half way through.

But thank you very much for your help and knowledge. I found 12 accepted English names for this species in one search a few minutes ago.

For anybody who has insomnia or who yearns to ponder more about ponderosa pine, there is some more info at the link below.

I guess I will buy a few Washoe Pine(if that is what it is called today) and see what happens...

Thanks to all.

Darren

Here is a link that might be useful: Ponderosa Pine

The standards of "proof" that have led to the delineation of these numerous subspecies that are tripping so lightly from several tongues around here are not at all standardized. This ponderosa complex is huge, and research on it has been spotty and uncoordinated. Think of the elephant being studied by a blind man.
Hard and fast data like needle lengths at the subspecies level are bogus. Needle lengths are almost never standardized and they vary from one field guide to another at even the local level. Needle lengths vary by year, height in a tree, shaded or sunny situation, etc. Cone color even within a "good" taxon also is variable, sometimes correlating with elevation, often not.
Comparing cone lengths in "Pacific" vs. "north plateau ponderosa (incl. Washoe) ignores the fact that Washoe cones have prickles that bend inwards, like Jeffrey pine; not outwards like ponderosa. That is data selection, and creates bias.
It is presumptuous for anyone who did not personally know either Mason or Stockwell to claim they were only familiar with one population system and not another. Mason was a long-time conifer student and very well travelled. Stockwell was a member of the early forest geneticists with wide conifer experience. They were not amateurs bouncing around in the woods.
Washoe pine is now being studied by molecular means, and maybe this work will answer some questions at a higher level than so far. But to carve up the ponderosa massif on the basis of a little bit of data and a proclivity to draw lines on the map doesn't get you there.

"Comparing cone lengths in "Pacific" vs. "north plateau ponderosa (incl. Washoe) ignores the fact that Washoe cones have prickles that bend inwards, like Jeffrey pine; not outwards like ponderosa"

Just checked my cones of 'north plateau' (eastern WA & OR), 'washoensis' (Mt Rose, NV), and 'pacific' (CA, western OR & WA); the prickle angle is the same on the 'north plateau' and 'washoensis' (variably straight to inward on both) but differs somewhat from 'pacific' (variably straight to outward). Straight can occur on all three, but I didn't find outward on either 'north plateau' or 'washoensis', nor inward on 'pacific'.

"This material does not exceed the limits of variability, in any character visible, of Pinus ponderosa Dougl. ex Laws. var. ponderosa, North Plateau race, as found in British Columbia. T.C.BRAYSHAW 5.Feb.1986" Â annotation on the holotype specimen of Pinus washoensis

"Washoe pine is now being studied by molecular means"

Details published so far support merging with North Plateau Ponderosa: "Phylogenetic analysis of the DNA of a putative portion of the nuclear NADH-specific nitrate reductase gene revealed the existence of a Pinus jeffreyi lineage that gave rise to P. washoensis and the North Plateau race of P. ponderosa var. ponderosa. These data are consistent with Lauria's (1991) hypotheses that the North Plateau race is genetically distinct from the other races of the species, and that this race should be considered conspecific with P. washoensis."  Patten, A. M. & Brunsfeld, S. J. (2002). Evidence of a novel lineage within the Ponderosae. Madroño 49(3): 189-192.

Resin