Aquilegia saximontana

[TheOnionMan]

Searching around on the forum, there have been questions about the valid identity of Aquilegia saximontana.  I couldn't find a photo on the current SRGC Forum that I could say was A. saximontana without question, although did find one photo on the old archived SRGC forum by Graham Nicholls that show the real species.
http://www.srgc.org.uk/discus/messages/283/30636.html#POST15434  (scroll to find it, or use the next link below)
http://www.srgc.org.uk/discus/messages/283/30941.jpg

Recently I came across some good resources that should help illustrate what this Colorado endemic actually looks like, simply as a forum resource.

US Forest Service page on 5 blue columbines, starting with A. saximontana.  Click each photo for an enlarged view.
http://www.fs.fed.us/wildflowers/beauty/columbines/aquilegia_saximontana.shtml

Uploaded are several photos showing two different plants of A. saximontana growing in Panayoti Kelaidis' troughs.  The closeup view shows the hooked spurs (uncommon for American blue species, but common enough for columbine species elsewhere), the narrowish cup with diffuse color shift from blue to white or cream, and delicately flared petals at full anthesis.  Notice too, the small acute leaf dentations.  The flowers are tiny. 

Also uploaded is a fine line drawing (scanned) of this species, and A. laramiensis (endemic to Wyoming).  The photos are from Gentes Herbarum, Aquilegia - The Cultivated and Wild Columbines, by Philip A. Munz, March 1946, Vol. VII, 150 pp.

Flora of North America
http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=1&taxon_id=233500115

[Diane Clement]

Some interesting links, thanks Mark.  The seed exchanges often receive and list "Aquilegia jonesii x saximontana" but I remember Bob Nold saying that he didn't think this hybrid exists.  So are these reputed crosses just A saximontana or a different hybrid?  Has anyone grown them on?

[TheOnionMan]

Some interesting links, thanks Mark.  The seed exchanges often receive and list "Aquilegia jonesii x saximontana" but I remember Bob Nold saying that he didn't think this hybrid exists.  So are these reputed crosses just A saximontana or a different hybrid?  Has anyone grown them on?

Diane, regarding the putative Aquilegia jonesii x saximontana hybrid, I have yet to see a plant or image convincing me that the hybrid exists.  Given the well known promiscuity of the genus, I imagine that garden seed collected from either species, when other columbines species/hybrids are present, will likely result in hybrid plants not true to the species.  It is more likely that anything going around as "Aquilegia jonesii x saximontana" is a mongrel plant with all sorts of parentage possibilities.  The name has been distributed in seed exchanges for so many years that surely by now the name is meaningless, a mixed bag of columbine genetics, with any of the dozens of dwarf Aquilegias so popular among rock gardeners contributing to the mélange.

[Lesley Cox]

Some years ago I grew seed under this hybrid name. The resultant plants looked more like A. flabellata than anything else, and not the 'Nana' form either, but quite large and vigorous.

[TheOnionMan]

Some years ago I grew seed under this hybrid name. The resultant plants looked more like A. flabellata than anything else, and not the 'Nana' form either, but quite large and vigorous.

Why does this not surprise me! 

[Great Moravian]

The following links are for comparison.
Aquilegia glandulosa 'Jucunda'  
http://www.picturetrail.com/sfx/album/main/153947/199252071
Extremely short spurs. The plant as all plants usually cultivated denoted so in reality belongs to Aquilegia flabellata without any connection to Aquilegia glandulosa. The latter can be found at http://www-sbras.nsc.ru/win/elbib/atlas/flora/408.html and http://www.botanicgardensblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/aquilegia-glandulosa-smallest2.jpg and http://www.amaranthus.ru and http://pisum.bionet.nsc.ru/kosterin/plants/ranunculaceae/glandulosa.htm
Aquilegia pyrenaica subsp. discolor
http://www.picturetrail.com/sfx/album/main/153947/199815274
White spurs noticeable.
Aquilegia saximontana
http://www.picturetrail.com/sfx/album/main/153947/199482438

[Maggi Young]

I understood that Aquilegia saximontana,native to the Rocky Mountains of Colorado, was  a diminutive plant, growing little more than 10 cms ( 4 inches) high in the wild, though perhaps a little more in cultivation (as is quite commonly found to be the case with mountain flowers)
The flowers are blue with white and the spurs distinctly hooked at the tips and the sexual parts discretely hidden.

I believe that the plant is as shown in the July 2010 #7 of International Rock Gardener
- the tiny stature, foliage colour and short, curling spurs  convince me!

These links are to various  USA sites ....
The curling spurs are clearly illustrated here :
http://www.efloras.org/object_page.aspx?object_id=40998&flora_id=1
 this is the description....
http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=1&taxon_id=233500115


http://www.fs.fed.us/wildflowers/beauty/columbines/aquilegia_saximontana.shtml

http://calphotos.berkeley.edu/cgi/img_query?enlarge=0000+0000+1002+0444

[TheOnionMan]

I believe that the plant is as shown in the July 2010 #7 of International Rock Gardener http://www.srgc.org.uk/logs/logdir/2010Jul291280437029IRG7_July2010.pdf
- the tiny stature, foliage colour and short, curling spurs  convince me!

These links are to various  USA sites ....
The curling spurs are clearly i llustreated here :

Regarding the photo in IRC #7, sorry but I'm not convinced, it does not look like A. saximontana to me, but rather like a dwarf form of A. flabellata (nana, var. pumila, other names and combinations) or a hybrid of it.  Aquilegia flabellata var. pumila, like many European and Asian aquilegia, also have tightly curled spurs.  In my opinion, the plant in that photo has flowers of the wrong "character", they look plump or rotund, incurved, of heavier texture and striated, deeper blue-purple coloration, and the cream lamina strongly demarcated from the blue portion, versus a diffuse color transition.  It doesn't look right to me.

Some further links for comparison:

Aquilegia flabellata (nana, pumila, yezoense, Mini-Star, pumila 'Mini-Star')
http://1003gardens.blogspot.com/2009/04/aquilegia-flabellata-nana-yezoense-easy.html

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_TAp_ZAaoiUM/SeUSYFymSMI/AAAAAAAACH4/JKJo8pK7XqE/s1600-h/Aquilegia+flabellata+nana-Yezoense.jpg

http://www.stauder.net/bildearkiv/Aquilegia%20flabellata%20nana%202%20%206,3.jpg

http://www.pflanzen-vielfalt.de/popup_image.php?pID=910842

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Aquilegia_flabellata_var_pumila1.jpg

NARGS page on trough, A. flabellata 'Nana' part way down:
http://www.nargs.org/nargswiki/tiki-index.php?page=troughs

as A. akitensis, a synonym of flabellata
http://www.zahradnictvolimbach.sk/skalnicky/aquilegia_akitensis.jpg

var. pumila
http://www.wildgingerfarm.com/images/Aquilegiaflabellata.jpg

var. pumila (in N. Japanese Alps)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/akira_o/918992319/in/set-72157600833042281/
http://www2.yamanashi-ken.ac.jp/~yohnishi/personal/mountains/photos/plants/salpsn/odamaki.kita.jpg

[Maggi Young]

Interesting links.... none of which look like the plant in IRG 7  

 

[TheOnionMan]

Interesting links.... none of which look like the plant in IRG 7  

That's the problem, nothing quite looks like the plant in IRG 7, particularly saximontana.

[Maggi Young]

This illustration from efloras.org, Flora of North America shows a flower form that is like the IRG 7 pic....


 With photographes there is always the problem of comparing plants at differing stages of growth, in or out of character, with varying colour casts in the camera etc.

I will say that the description of foliage,flower etc I have seen matches the description of wild plants and given a provenance of Colorado seed rather than European or Japanese, I am more inclined to find it to be saximontana than any other. 

[tonyg]

Interesting links.... none of which look like the plant in IRG 7  

  (Attachment Link)

I'm with Mark - it looks like A flabellata (nana) as I have grown it ... and as Google sees it!
Pretty though ... as are the pics of Panayotis plants, seed please!

[Maggi Young]

I see the flower profile of saximontana as being much rounder, as shown in the illustration from efloras, also, I  rather think the plant shown originated from Colorado seed 

I'll agree to disagree.

[TheOnionMan]

The Flora of North America line drawing of A. saximontana shows an important detail; acute sepals.  However, like all line drawings, they capture one moment in time, on a single individual plant.  One must observe full anthesis on the flowers to see what the flower disposition is, and on A. saximontana the sepals are widely spreading, giving a light airy look to the flowers.

Yes Maggi, we can agree to disagree. Regarding "given a provenance of Colorado seed rather than European or Japanese", it is important to note that the photo in IRG 7 depicts a garden grown plant, and any of number of factors could be at play; seed mix-up, seed contaminated with other species when cleaned or as provided by the seller, plant labeling mixup, digital photo labeling "after the fact" misidentification, etc.

Meanwhile to help Aquilegia fans understand key characteristics of true Aquilegia saximontana, I prepared a composite image showing 4 flowers of A. saximontana, 3 taken from the US Forest Service page showing 3 different plants, and the 4th from Panayoti Kelaidis' plant of known provenance. Key things to note: the sepals are acute (rather than widely rounded as in A.f. pumila or nana), and at full anthesis, the sepals spread widely.  The lamina ends (or "cup") is narrowish, not rotund as in A. f. pumila/nana.  The spurs on A. saximontana splay outwards then bend inwards at the tip... the hook at the end is mild (a very distinctive and characteristic look), whereas in A. f. pumila/nana the spurs angle inwards (converging) and strongly coiled at the tips to almost 360 degrees.  To help illustrate the spur differences, I put together two detail drawings from the aforementioned Gentes Herbarum publication, showing the differences in spurs; slight bend in saximontana, strong coil bend in flabellata, the strong coil bend visible in the IRC 7 image.  And not specifically described, but true in every image I've seen to date, on A. saximontana the blue color blends in diffuse manner to the cream or white cup, whereas in A. f. pumila/nana the color change is a sharp demarcation as in the IRC 7 image.

So, I remain firmly convinced that the plant shown in IRC 7 shows a flabellata form or hybrid, and looks nothing like A. saximontana.  I'm dedicating some time on this, as this species (saximontana) is nearly legendary in terms of misidentifications for decades.  I well remember seeing true Aquilegia saximontana in Colorado in the 1980s for the first time and thinking, "wow, that's what it really looks like", then realizing that nothing under this name in the seedexes (at that time) was even close to being true.  As I find more photos showing plants that look like true A. saximontana I shall post them here as reference.

By the way Tony, you have a good eye, as does google ;-)

[Great Moravian]

This illustration from efloras.org, Flora of North America shows a flower form that is like the IRG 7 pic...

You are right. The image is obviously misleading. It is a general problem of botanical illustration which exaggerates certain distinctive characters but forgets others not important for a given purpose.
In Aquilegia saximontana the spurs are usually divergent at flower bases whereas in the cultivars of Aquilegia flabellata the spurs are usually parallel or convergent at flower bases. It is the consequence of petal shape. The petal limb is deeply bulgy in Aquilegia flabellata, but not in Aquilegia saximontana and Aquilegia glandulosa which of course is a large-flowered species.