Download Copy a link to this page Cite this record

Cupressus L.

Scientific name record
Names_Plants record source
Is NZ relevant
This is the current name
This record has collections
This record has descriptions
This is foreign

Click to collapse Details Info

Cupressus L., Sp. Pl. 1002-1003 (1753)
Cupressus L.

Click to collapse Biostatus Info

Exotic
Wild
New Zealand
Political Region

Click to collapse Nomenclature Info

L.
L.
1753
1002-1003
ICN
Cupressus L.
genus
Cupressus

Click to collapse Classification Info

Cupressus

Click to collapse Vernacular names Info

Click to collapse Associations Info

Click to collapse Descriptions Info

Cupressus L.

Monoecious trees, occasionally shrubs. Branchlets usually not flattened (arranged in several planes); ultimate shoots terete or 4-angled. Juvenile lvs needle-like, subulate, similar lvs often on main axes (terminal shoots). Adult lvs scale-like, opposite, decussate, often with a prominent, whitish resinous gland in middle of dorsal side. Cones solitary, terminal on short shoots towards branchlet ends. ♂ strobili (cones) oblong or ovoid, yellow; stamens numerous. Mature ♀ cones usually ± globose, usually > 10 mm diam., ripening in second year, generally persistent. Scales 6-14, not whorled, peltate with mucronate boss or umbo in middle, separating to release seeds; ovules and seeds 6-c. 20 on each scale. Seeds narrowly winged; cotyledons 3-4.

Click to collapse Collections Info

Cupressus L.
[Not available]

Click to collapse Notes Info

editorial
Adams et al. (2009) showed that Cupressusformed two clades: the Old World clade of Cupressuswas sister to Juniperus, whereas the New World clade of Cupressus (Hesperocyparis) included Xanthocyparis vietnamensis and Callitropsis nootkatensis. However, Mao et al. (2010) showed that Cupressus in its broad sense including Xanthocyparis and Callitropsis is monophyletic with weak support. Zhu et al. (2018) provided further evidence for the split of Cupressus into Cupressus, Callitropsis, Hesperocyparis and Xanthocyparis. Christenhusz et al. (2011) claim to be adopting a conservative position based on a poorly resolved tree. Zhu et al. (2018) moves us past that.

Click to collapse Metadata Info

cee344c5-80e8-4a9c-a7cb-ac89530def31
scientific name
Names_Plants
1 January 2000
13 February 2014
Click to go back to the top of the page
Top