‘Hemiepiphyte’: a confusing term and its history (Viewpoint)
Home » ‘Hemiepiphyte’: a confusing term and its history (Viewpoint)

‘Hemiepiphyte’: a confusing term and its history (Viewpoint)

Zotz suggests a more coherent scheme to categorize structurally dependent flora that discards the misleading term secondary hemiepiphyte.

‘Hemiepiphyte’: a confusing term and its history (Viewpoint)
‘Hemiepiphyte’: a confusing term and its history (Viewpoint)

There are many types of structurally dependent plants and, ignoring parasitic mistletoes, it is usual to distinguish four functional groups: (1) true epiphytes; (2) primary hemiepiphytes; (3) secondary hemiepiphytes; and (4) climbing plants (lianas and vines). Based on a review of the relevant literature over the last 120 years, Zotz identifies serious problems with the current use of terminology. Arguing that current ambiguities hamper integration and generalization, he suggests a more coherent scheme to categorize structurally dependent flora that discards the misleading term secondary hemiepiphyte.

botanyone

The Annals of Botany Office is based at the University of Oxford.

Read this in your language

The Week in Botany

On Monday mornings we send out a newsletter of the links that have been catching the attention of our readers on Twitter and beyond. You can sign up to receive it below.

@BotanyOne on Mastodon

Loading Mastodon feed...

Audio


Archive