DC.
Identity
Unique IDELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.144206
Element CodePDRAN07010
Record TypeSPECIES
ClassificationSpecies
Classification StatusStandard
Name CategoryVascular Plant
KingdomPlantae
PhylumAnthophyta
ClassDicotyledoneae
OrderRanunculales
FamilyRanunculaceae
GenusActaea
SynonymsCimicifuga americanaMichx.
Other Common Namesmountain bugbane (EN)
Concept ReferenceKartesz, J.T. 1994. A synonymized checklist of the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. 2nd edition. 2 vols. Timber Press, Portland, OR.
Taxonomic CommentsDescribed as Cimicifuga americana by Michaux in 1803; moved to Actaea by de Candolle in 1817 where Actaea americana was previously occupied (by Pursh in 1813) so a new epithet was necessary: Actaea podocarpa DC. Phylogenetic analyses of Compton et al. (1998) support the inclusion of Cimicifuga within a monophyletic Actaea. Can be distinguished from Cimicifuga (Actaea) racemosa by the presence of a deep, broad groove on the upper side of lowest petiole (leaf stem) of this species.
Conservation Status
Review Date2000-01-03
Change Date2000-01-27
Edition Date2000-01-03
Edition AuthorsJohn R. Boetsch (1/00); rev. Eric Nielsen (1/00)
Range Extent20,000-2,500,000 square km (about 8000-1,000,000 square miles)
Number of Occurrences81 to >300
Rank ReasonsThis species is a broad endemic to the southern and central Appalachians, known from a few hundred populations. Although no information was found regarding its targeted collection from wild populations, it seems to be facing incidental collection and subsequent decline due to its resemblance to the widely collected C. racemosa (Blakley pers. comm., Kauffman pers. comm., Suggs pers. comm.). It also appears to be facing specific habitat development pressure in mountainous areas (Dellinger pers. comm.).
Range Extent CommentsThis species is primarily endemic to the southern and central Appalachian region, from northern Georgia to western Pennsylvania (Weakley 1996), and a disjunction to southern Illinois (USDA-NRCS 1999). There are also a few disjunct occurrences in some of the diabase outcrops in the piedmont of South Carolina (Pittman pers. comm.). It is known from one county in the Allegheny Plateau of Maryland (Frye pers. comm.).
Occurrences CommentsRangewide, there are estimated to be fewer than 500 extant populations. Maryland: 10; North Carolina: 100 (Kauffman pers. comm.); South Carolina: 12; Tennessee: 50-100+ (Brumback and Mehrhoff 1996, APSU 1999).
Better recognition of this species is turning up additional occurrences formerly confused with C. racemosa, especially near the edge of the range of this species (Kunsman pers. comm., Pittman pers. comm.). But estimation of population numbers is made more difficult by the possibility of co-occurrence with the more common and widespread C. racemosa (Kauffman pers. comm.).
Threat Impact CommentsThere is hearsay that, especially in western North Carolina, plants are wild-collected for the plant trade. Collection of this species is likely given the potential for confusion with C. racemosa (Blakley pers. comm., Suggs pers. comm.). No evidence was found of targeted collection of this species, though Kauffman (pers. comm.) indicated that an unknown proportion of the permitted harvest of C. racemosa in the Black Mountains on North Carolina is probably incidentally-collected C. americana.
The following information is for "black cohosh", Cimicifuga racemosa; however it is very likely given the location of collections that some of this material is in fact C. americana: USDA Forest Service collection permits, per Kauffman (pers. comm.): 1997 - 2200 lbs. (dry); 1998 - 12,000 lbs. (dry); 1999 - 2150 lbs. (dry); a recent case was made where a poacher was caught with approximately 500 lbs. (dry) on the Blue Ridge Parkway in North Carolina (Corbin pers. comm.).
Habitat conversion and development are significant direct threats (Dellinger pers. comm., Kauffman pers. comm., Kunsman pers. comm., Pittman pers. comm.). Equally significant threats include habitat fragmentation, and to a lesser degree displacement by exotic species.
Given its more specific siting requirements, this species may prove more difficult to cultivate than C. racemosa (Suggs pers. comm.).