Saxicolous Lichens of Major Oklahoma Rock FormationsKari Courkamp
McLoud High School
- Study Areas
- Methods and Materials
- Discussion and Conclusion
- Table 1
- Table 2
Lichens are unique organisms. Due to the complexity of identification and lack of knowledge about lichens, they are often avoided by both biologists and naturalists. Because of the limited literature on lichens, especially those which are crustose lichens, the need for this project was seen. There were four objectives in this project: 1) to create an inventory of the more common Saxicolous lichens in Oklahoma; 2) to compare the lichen composition from different rock types; 3) to continue contributing to the knowledge of lichens and increasing the public's view on their importance; 4) to donate collected lichens to the Oklahoma State University's herbarium. Lichens were collected from six major rock sites and three minor sites. Specimens were taken back to the laboratory and identified. Species' occurrence on different rock types was then observed and recorded. 109 specimens of lichens were collected and identified. This included 39 species representing 20 genera and 15 families. Families having the greatest number of species were Cladoniaceae 7 and Parmeliaceae 7.
Lichens are unique organisms. Due to the complexity of identification and lack of knowledge of lichens, they are often avoided by both biologists and naturalists. Lichens are composed of two organisms, an alga (either green or blue-green) and a fungus (either a basidiomycete or ascomycete). These two organisms live together in a state of symbiosis, the alga photosynthesizing and providing food for the lichen and the fungus being the structure for the lichen. Lichens are commonly separated into three groups: foliose, crustose, and fruticose. Lichens are found on several different strata including trees (corticolous species), rocks (saxicolous species), and soil (terricolous species).
Lichens are rarely studied because of the extreme difficulties encountered. These difficulties include the lack of sufficient, up-to-date literature, taxonomic keys, and the lack of reference collections. Oklahoma taxonomists have limited knowledge of state lichens, and at present there are no active professional biologists researching lichens in Oklahoma. Dr. Darvin Keck of Norman, Oklahoma, a retired professor of biology, is the only lichenologist known by the researcher in Oklahoma.
Because of the limited literature on lichens, especially those which are crustose lichens, the need for this project was seen. There were four objectives in this project: 1) to create an inventory of the more common saxicolous lichens in Oklahoma; 2) to compare the lichen composition from different rock types; 3) to continue contributing to the knowledge of lichens (the researcher studied foliose lichens growing in upland and bottomland forests in 1993 and 1994) and increasing the public's view on their importance; 4) to donate collected lichens to the Oklahoma State University's herbarium.
Lichens were collected from six major rock sites and three minor sites. The first four major rock sites are more acidic and the last two are more alkaline. 1) Red Rock Canyon, R11N, T11N, Sec. 1, in the Caddo Hills of Caddo County. This rock is classified as Rush Springs Sandstone. 2) Methodist Church Camp, R10N, T11N, Sec. 24, in Canadian County also made up of Rush Springs sandstone. 3) Happy Hollow, R12W, T2N, Sec. 18, part of the Wichita Mountains in Comanche County made up of cambrian granite rock. 3) Six acre rock, ten acre rock, and surrounding rock area in Johnston County, R5E, T3S, Sec.3, made of a pre-cambrian granite known as Tishomingo granite. 5) Travertine Creek, R3E, T1S, Sec.3, in Murray County made up of conglomerate limestone. 6) Price Falls, R2E, T1S, Sec. 32, in the Arbuckle Mountains in Murray County made up of limestone. Lichens from three rock sites in Seminole, Pottawatomie, and McCurtain counties were also sampled. Seminole, R6E, T6N, Sec. 36, and Pottawatomie, R2E, T11N, Sec. 16, County sites were made up of Garber sandstone and the site in McCurtain county, R25E, T3S, Sec. 7, in the Quachita Mountains was made up of shale rock.
METHODS AND MATERIALS
Eight different trips were taken to rock areas in Oklahoma. Rocks were inspected, and specimens were taken that could be removed. A screwdriver, a mallet, and carrying utensils were used to help in the collecting procedure. All species were labeled with the date and collection site. Specimens were taken to the laboratory and identified using three dichotomous keys, two lichen collections, and a compound microscope. Identification of many species was perplexing because of the lack of comprehensive user-friendly keys and the enormous amount of lichen terminology that needed to be mastered in order to use the complex keys. The numerous inconsistencies in different keys and resource books added to the difficulty. With the assistance of Dr. Darvin Keck and his personal dichotomous key, identification was made more accurate. Species were identified using both macroscopic and microscopic analysis. Characters analyzed for identification purposes included: thallus color, thallus classification (crustose, foliose, fruticose, squamulose), apothecia either irregular or round and cuplike, apothecia with or without exciple, exciples thalloid or proper, hymenium produced in a perithecium or apothecium, phycobiont species, and spore characteristics including color, size, septate or non-septate, and number per asci. Even with this new ability, determining species' names was difficult because of the lack of knowledge of the species in Oklahoma and the lack of knowledge of crustose lichens. Species' occurrence on different rock types was then observed and recorded.
109 specimens of lichens were collected and identified . This included 39 species representing 20 genera and 15 families. Families having the greatest number of species are Cladoniaceae 7 and Parmeliaceae 7. A tabular view of families is shown in Table I. For a complete list of species and their authorities refer to the annotated list in the appendix.
Cambrian granite and pre-cambrian granite had 4 species in common with 22 different species between the two. Garber sandstone and Rush Springs' sandstone had no species in common with 13 different species between the two. Granite (cambrian and pre-cambrian) and sandstone (Garber and Rush Springs) had 4 species in common with 29 different species. Granite (cambrian and pre-cambrian) and limestone (conglomerate and limestone) had 4 species in common with 23 different species. Limestone (conglomerate and limestone) and sandstone (Garber and Rush Springs) had 2 species in common with 22 different species. The more acidic rock verses the more alkaline had six species in common and 32 different species. Species' occurrence on each rock type is shown in Table II.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
This project shows the need for further lichen research. Thirteen species found in this project were ones found and noted by Dr. Darvin Keck as ones not previously reported as components of Oklahoma lichen flora. They were Buellia stigmaea, Caloplaca aurantiaca, Caloplaca flavovirescens, Candelaria concolor, Cladonia apodocarpa, Cladonia subtenuis, Diploschites scruposus, Lecidea tessellina, Physcia halei, Physcia subtilis, Verrucaria calciseda, Crocynia membraneacea, and Lepraria chlorina.
For further lichen research, one would need to contact an expert of lichenology. More recent books about lichens need to be found if possible. Attending a summer session at a biologicial station such as the one in Michigan on lichenology would benefit one wishing to continue in the field of lichenology. In Oklahoma, lichenology could be called a "lost art".
I would like to give my utmost appreciation to many for the assistance they gave me in conducting my research. I would like to thank my science instructor Mr. Bruce Smith, Dr. Darvin Keck for the use of his dissertation and his love of lichens, and my family for appreciating my love of lichens. I would also like to thank Alison and Erin Mainers, Cory White, and Russell Smith for accompanying me on my collecting expeditions.
- Abramoff, P., Krishna, Al., Dumaran, Millington, W. F. Biology. 1986. 809, 824-826, 981, 1009-1010, 1017.
- Asahine, Yasuhiko. Chemistry of Lichen Substances. 1954. 3.
- Brower, J. E., Zar, J. H. Field and Laboratory Methods for General Ecology. 1977. 144.
- Culberson, C. F. Chemical and Botanical Guide To Lichen Products. 1970.
- Dobson, F. Lichens. 1979, 1981.
- Farb, P. The Forest, Life Nature Library. 1961. 46, 58, 61, 118.
- Fink, Bruce. The Lichen Flora of the United States. 1935.
- Gutnik, M. J. Ecology, Projects for Young Students. 1984. 102, 115.
- Hale, M. E. A Guide to the Lichens of Eastern North America. 1961. 160, 161.
- Hale, M. E. How to Know the Lichens. 1969, 1979.
- Keck, Darvin. 1959-60. Lichens of North Central Oklahoma. A doctoral dissertation, Oklahoma State University, Oklahoma.
- Little, E. L., Jr. Forest Trees of Oklahoma. 1985.
- Goomis, W. E., Steeves, T. A., Wilson, C. L. Botany, Fifth Edition. 1971. 384, 449, 549-552, 550.
- Milne, L. and M. The Nature of Plants. 1971. 19-20, 63-64, 70, 135, 144.
- Nearing, G. G. The Lichen Book. 1947.
- Rushforth, S. R. The Plant Kingdom, Evolution and Form. 1976. 190-195.
- Saigo, R. H. and B. W. Botany, Principles and Applications. 1983. 273, 293-295, 325-326, 348-349, 426.
- Smith, Annie Lorain. Lichens. 1921. 19-22.
- Sugden, A. Longman Illustrated Dictionary of Botany, the elements of plant science illustrated and defined. 1984. 147.
- Tuckerman, Edward. North American Lichens. 1921.
- United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. Soil Survey of Caddo County, Oklahoma. 1973.
- United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. Soil Survey of Canadian County, Oklahoma. 1976.
- United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. Soil Survey of Comanche County, Oklahoma. 1967.
- United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. Soil Survey of Johnston County, Oklahoma. 1979.
- United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. Soil Survey of McCurtain County, Oklahoma. 1974.
- United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. Soil Survey of Murray County, Oklahoma. 1984.
- United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. Soil Survey of Pottawatomie County, Oklahoma. 1977.
- United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. Soil Survey of Seminole County, Oklahoma. 1979.
- United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. Young, P. The Botany Coloring Book. 1982. 37.
Species List and Their Authorities.
- Acarospora citrina (Tayl.)
- Buellia sp.
- Buellia stigmaea Tuck.
- Rinodina oreina (Ach.) Mass.
- Caloplaca sp.
- Caloplaca aurantiaca (Lightf.) Th. Fr.
- Caloplaca flavovirescens (Wulf.) D.T.& S.
- Caloplaca murorum (Hoffm.) Th. Fr.
- Candelaria concolor (Dicks.) Stein.
- Cladonia apodocarpa Robbins
- Cladonia caespiticia (Pers.) Flk.
- Cladonia chlorophaea (Flk.) Spreng.
- Cladonia pyxidata (L.) Hoffm.
- Cladonia santensis Tuck.
- Cladonia strepsilis (Ach.) Vain.
- Cladonia subtenuis (des Abbayes)
- Diploschites scruposus (Schreb.) Norm.
- Psora sp.
- Lecidea albocaerulescens (Wulf.) Ach.
- Lecidea tessellina Tuck.
- Lecidea virgihiensis Nyl.
- Lecanora muralis (Schreb.) Ach.
- Parmelia bolliana Mull. Arg.
- Parmelia conspersa (Ehrh.) Ach.
- Parmelia isidiata (Anzi) Gyel.
- Parmelia stenophylla (Ach.) Heug.
- Parmotrema michauxianum (Zahlbr.) Hale
- Parmotrema tinctorum (Nyl.) Hale
- Xanthoparmelia subramigera (Gyel.) Hale
- Peltigeria sp.
- Physcia aipolia (Ehrh.) Hampe
- Physcia halei Thomas.
- Physcia subtilis Degel.
- Teloschistes chrysophthalmus (L.) Th. Fr.
- Xanthoria sorediata (Vain.) Poelt
- Dermatocarpon moulinsii (Mont.) Zahlbr.
- Verrucaria calciseda DC.
- Lichenes Imperfecti
- Crocynia membraneacea (Dicks.) Zahl.
- Lepraria chlorina Ach.
Tabular View of The Families Family Genera Species Acarosporaceae 1 1 Buelliaceae 2 3 Caloplacaceae 1 4 Candelariaceae 1 1 Cladoniaceae 1 7 Diploschistaceae 1 1 Lecideaceae 2 4 Lecanoraceae 1 1 Parmeliaceae 3 7 Peltigeraceae 1 1 Physciaceae 1 3 Teloschistaceae 2 2 Dermatocarponaceae 1 1 Verrucariaceae 1 1 Leprariaceae 2 2 Totals: 15 20 39
Species Occurrence by Rock Type Species Name A B C D E F G Acarospora citrina XX XX Buellia sp.
XX Buellia stigmaea XX XX XX Caloplaca sp. XX
Caloplaca flavovirescens XX
Caloplaca murorum XX
Candelaria concolor XX Cladonia apodocarpa XX Cladonia caespiticia XX Cladonia chlorophaea XX Cladonia pyxidata XX Cladonia santensis XX Cladonia strepsilis XX Cladonia subtenuis XX Crocynia membraneacea XX XX Dermatocarpon moulinsii XX XX XX Diploschites scruposus XX Lecanora muralis XX XX Lecidea albocaerulescens XX Lecidea tessellina XX Lecidea virginiensis XX Lepraria chlorina XX Parmelia bolliana XX Parmelia conspersa XX XX XX Parmelia isidiata XX XX Parmelia stenophylla XX Parmotrema michauxianum XX Parmotrema tinctorum XX Peltigeria sp. XX Physcia aipolia XX Physcia halei XX XX XX Physcia subtilis XX XX Psora sp. XX Rinodina oreina XX Teloschistes chrysophthalmus XX Verrucaria calciseda XX Xanthoparmelia subramigera XX Xanthoria sorediata XX Total Species 10 8 4 5 16 11 1A. Cambrian granite D. Limestone B. Conglomerate limestone E. Pre-cambrian granite C. Garber sandstone F. Rush Springs sandstone G. Shale