Reply With QuoteMartin, sorry, but Fissidens sp. are not liverworts.
Lomariopsis lineata is fern gametophyte (not moss, not liverwort).
Hi all.
It is my hope, and will, to gather the most extensive list of aquatic mosses known and used in the aquarium hobby.
I hope to do this with your help.
My most recent list is this, below. When and if you have corrections or additions, I will correct the list in this post to match all new info.
Please feel free to post your thoughts and new species.
La: Latin - Eng: English Syn: Synonym
Liverworts:
La: Monosolenium tenerum Eng: (Formerly erroneously known as Pellia)
La: Riccardia graeffei Eng: Coral Pellia - Mini Pellia
La: Riccia fluitans Eng: Riccia (?) - Crystalwort
La: Ricciocarpos natans Eng: ?
Mosses
Vesicularia
La: Vesicularia dubyana Eng: Javamoss (formerly known in aquatic circles as Singapore moss)
La: Vesicularia ferriei Eng: Weeping moss
La: Vesicularia montagnei (Vesicularia dubyana var. abbreviata) Eng:
Xmas moss
La: Vesicularia reticulata Eng: Erect moss
La: Vesicularia sp. anchor Eng: Anchor moss
Taxiphyllum
La: Taxiphyllum sp. Creeping Eng: Taxiphyllum sp. Creeping
La: Taxiphyllum sp. String Eng: String moss/Japan moss
La: Taxiphyllum sp. Spiky Eng: Spiky moss
La: Taxiphyllum sp. Giant Eng: Giant Moss
La: Taxiphyllum sp. Green Sock Eng: Green Sock Moss
La: Taxiphyllum barbieri Eng: Bogor moss (Once the moss type known as Java moss)
La: Taxiphyllum alternans Eng: Taiwan moss
La: Taxiphyllum sp. Flame Eng: Flame moss
Fontinalis:
La: Fontinalis antipyretica var. gigantea Eng: Giant Willow Moss
La: Fontinalis antipyretica Eng: Willow Moss
La: Fontinalis dalecarlica Eng:
Fissidens
La: Fissidens fontanus Eng: Fountain moss
La: Fissidens nobilis Eng: ?
La: Fissidens splachnobryoides Eng: Doormat moss
La: Fissidens zippelianus Eng: Zipper moss (Earlier known as: Fissidens sp. Singapore)
La: Fissidens crassipes Eng: ?
Others:
La: Amblystegium serpens Eng: Nano moss
La: Isopterygium sp. Eng: Mini Taiwan Moss
La: Leptodictyum riparium Eng: Stringy moss
La: Platyhypnidium riparioides Eng: ? Syn: rhynchostegium riparioides
La: Drepanocladus aduncus Eng: Drepanocladus moss
La: Barbula sp. Eng: Barbula moss
La: Plagiomnium sp Eng: ?
La: Bryum pseudotriquetrum Eng: common green bryum moss
Non-bryophyte species
La: Lomariopsis lineata Eng: Loma Fern (Ger: Süsswassertang)
Kindest Regards,
Martin
'Tis a great world underneath the sea'
Martin, sorry, but Fissidens sp. are not liverworts
Lomariopsis lineata is fern gametophyte (not moss, not liverwort).
Robert.. you are very correct.
a slip of.... mind..
Kindest Regards,
Martin
'Tis a great world underneath the sea'
Dear Martin,
If you want your list to be the most extensive around, you have to be a bit more careful with the names. I'm afraid I have to tell you that I found a few mistakes in your post. They are:
1. The common name for Monosolenium tenerum isn't Pellia. M. tenerum was once wrongly identified as Pellia endiviifolia. (Take a look at this Tropica's page for more information.) But now that we know the correct Latin name, there's no reason to use the Pellia name anymore. It will only serve to confuse.
In Tropica's latest product catalogue, they described M. tenerum as an attractive liverwort that looks most like a giant Riccia. Although I think it's rather silly to use a Latin name of another liverwort as a common name for M. tenerum, I would say, if you have to have a common name, it would be better to use "Giant Riccia" than to use "Pellia". This is because almost all of us is familiar with Riccia fluitans but hardly anyone has ever seen the genuine Pellia endiviifolia.
2. There is some uncertainty with the liverwort that is commonly known as Mini Pellia. We are quite sure it's a species of Riccardia but there is doubt if it's R. graeffei or R. chamedryfolia. It could be it's neither. In Tropica's catalogue, the former name is mentioned but it is not stated if the plant is Coral Pellia or Mini Pellia. We are not sure if they are one and the same plant. Under such circumstances, I would say it's better to live with the uncertainty than to give the plant a Latin name only to find out later that we were wrong.
3. The correct spelling for the 3rd liverwort on your list should be Riccia fluitans. You left out the letter i. I hope I don't sound like I'm nit-picking but if you want to build a respectable list, you have to ensure the spelling is correct.
4. With Lomariopsis lineata, I like to point out to you that "Süsswassertang" isn't an English name. It's German, I think. Also, the L. lineata is neither a moss nor a liverwort. If you include this plant in your list, you may have to think about including other non-bryophytes too.
5. There is some controversy regarding the common names for Vesicularia dubyana and Taxiphyllum barbieri. Here in this forum, we have accepted the professor's recommendation to use Singapore Moss for V. dubyana and Java Moss for T. barbieri. But the reality of the situation is that in almost all publications related to the hobby, V. dubyana is Java Moss.
Just recently, Ms Christel Kasselmann, the author of numerous plant books and magazines wrote an article in TAG (The Aquatic Gardener) arguing that the correct common name for V. dubyana should be Java Moss and that T. barbieri should be called Bogor Moss. She also suggested that for simplicity's sake, we should discard the "Singapore Moss" name.
I have the greatest respect for Ms Kasselmann's expertise in this area. If she says that V. dubyana should be called Java Moss, it wouldn't be right for us to ignore her. I have shown her article to Professor Benito Tan but he has declined to be drawn into the controversy. To the professor, the common names are not important. Academics like him use only the Latin names. As far as they are concerned, there is no confusion.
We are just hobbyists. We do not have the authority or the expertise to make the decision. So I think it's best if we leave well alone. Just my thoughts but if you have a good suggestion on how we can solve this problem, please tell us about it. Thank you.
Loh K L
Hi Loh.
Thank you for your extensive response!
I will try and answer your well placed comments.
1. I realise that M. tenerum isn't Pellia and the other way around. I simply couldn't come up with any other common name, and Pellia is still videly used as a more..common name. No one uses endiviifolia. I have edited my common name to state the error of using Pellia.
Until a new common name emerges, I will let Pellia stand with the comment on error.
Using Giant Riccia would be as big a mistake as spreading Pellia still. Riccia and M. tenerum is NOTHING alike.
Perhaps very few people has encountered Pellia endiviifolia, but the plant once known as Pellia is well known to all.
2. Mini-Pellia, coral-pellia are both common names for, what has been id'ed as Riccardi graeffei. if you read Tropica's description they name it so:
http://www.tropica.com/productcard.asp?id=003D
As you can see, Tropica uses the common names for R. graeffei.Riccardia graeffei has previously been sold as 003N ''various mosses'' but now, this liverwort has been positively identified. Riccardia graeffei is a moss speciality on driftwood that has obtained huge popularity in Japan. Its growth form is quite similar to Monosolenium tenerum but it is a lot smaller. Riccardia graeffei is slow growing and difficult, and algae-eating fishes are disturbing its growth even if they are not directly eating the moss itself. When using CO2, the moss will grow into a spectacular cushion in the aquarium but it needs regular trimming in order to maintain its beauty. It seems that there is some confusion related to its common name but ''Coral Pellia'' and ''Mini Pellia'' seem to be among the more popular names for Riccardia graeffei
As far as I remember, speaking with Claus, the identification was made by Dr. Tan. But I am unsure of this, and will have to ask him tomorrow at work.
apart from that I agree that spreading more wrong common names should be kept at a minimum.
3. Correct. A mistype.
4. I have moved the species to it's own little category.
I also realise that Süsswassertang is the German common name, but there doesn't exist an English common name. On the net you find names like - susswassertang, suswassertang, Subwassertang and many more, erroneous names. Süsswassertang is the only "correct" name so far.
Please do mention other non-bryophytes if you know more.
5. Yes, I agree. In my Danish list I have this info. Some of this info didn't make it through to the english version... sorry
C. kasselmann sent me her article and so far I would agree, as many others do, but converting the common name from Java to Bogor is very very very very difficult.
I have changed the common names to reflect the updated Danish version.
V. dubyana did, as you know, once have the common name Javamoss. Bogormoss has also been known as Bogor moss. Problem is that Bogormoss and Javamoss got mixed physically, and apparently Bogormoss outgrew Javamoss, but kept the name. Big mistake!
To convince people that what they have as Javamoss is Bogor, you need to keep telling people over and over. Tell them WHY they have a different moss than they thought. That the mosses "got mixed up".
Spread the articles around the world in all languages possible.
Again thank you for your comments.
Kindest Regards,
Martin
'Tis a great world underneath the sea'
Common names have no real value, especially scientifically. It really wouldn't be worth the effort to try to change a common name that has been used for decades simply because it doesn't accuarately reflect the current taxonomy of the plant. Should we start a grass-roots effort to start calling the krib "the pulch," or start caling the various asparagus ferns "asparagus asparagi?"For that matter, is it time to stop calling the cichlid everyone as the brichardi something else since the name Neolamprologus brichardi has been invalidated?
Common names are mostly decided by group consensus - there are many fish and plants whose common names reflect incorrect/outdated nomenclature. I think it would creat MORE confusion to start messing with the names now.
Dave S.
Dave, you're absolutely right that the common names are decided by group consensus and that even if they are wrong, we should leave well alone. I really wouldn't want to mess around with the common names or try to change them when they are already well-established but in the case of Java Moss, there's already a lot of confusion going around. Honestly, I don't think we can make the situation any worse than what it is now.Originally Posted by lampeye
For years, to hobbyists everywhere (except maybe in Japan) Java Moss has always been Vesicularia dubyana. Then we brought the moss to the professor and after he examined and identified the moss, we made the announcement on the world-wide-web that Java Moss isn't V. dubyana but Taxiphyllum barbieri. On hindsight, maybe we shouldn't have been so hasty but then again, the evidence was overwhelming. It wasn't just Professor Benito who identified Java Moss as T. barbieri. Years earlier, in 1982, another bryologist, Professor Z. Iwatsuki came to the same conclusion after examining Java Moss samples that were sold in the fish shops of Japan.
Whilst helping Chishio Hidaka with her DNA fingerprinting project, I received many samples of Java Moss from hobbyists living all over the world. They came from countries such as Poland, Finland, Germany, England, Thailand, Indonesia, USA, Spain and Italy. Of course, there were also a few samples from my own country, Singapore. I also got one sample from Tropica. Chishio examined all the samples and without a single exception, they all turned out to be Taxiphyllum barbieri. You can say Tropica, being a professional setup should have known better but it isn't just them, you know. I know, for a fact, that Oriental Plant Farm, the largest aquatic plant importer/exporter in the world also calls their T. barbieri Java Moss. Of course, in their catalogues and invoices, they list Java Moss as Vesicularia dubyana but the moss they are selling is T. barbieri.
So, you can quite safely say that to hobbyists and aquatic plant businesss everywhere, the moss they know as Java Moss is T. barbieri. How in the world are they to know that the Java Moss they have isn't the correct one?
So, what can we do about it? Should we even try? Or should we just live with the mistake? I would prefer we leave things as they are but that would mean ignoring what's being written in aquatic plant publications everywhere. In all aquatic plant books and magazines, if the common name is mentioned, Java Moss is Vesicularia dubyana.
What are we to do?
Loh K L
I'm just a beginner in the moss world so I will let this great discussion to the experts here in the forum, but as an enthusiast I would like to make a suggestion:
I think it would be great if some pictures of each moss (macro and general aspect) could be submitted to complement the compendium, I know that the same specie could have different looks, and the image showing could lead to wrong identifications, but even so I think it would be a positive addition.
Yes, I suppose it is but here in Singapore, M. tenerum is known in Chinese as "Giant Riccia" but I'm not sure if this name has caught on with the English-speaking hobbyists.
The professor and I met Claus Christensen and Troels Andersen when they were in Singapore 2 months ago. Unfortunately, I didn't ask them about how they got the Latin name for Mini-Pellia. It could be the professor was the one who made the identification but he has never mentioned it to me. But then again, there's no reason why he has to tell me everythingMini-Pellia, coral-pellia are both common names for, what has been id'ed as Riccardi graeffei. As far as I remember, speaking with Claus, the identification was made by Dr. Tan. But I am unsure of this, and will have to ask him tomorrow at work.Anyway, since the Latin name is listed in Tropica's website, please ignore what I've written earlier about this liverwort.
Actually, there is one. The professor suggested "Loma Fern". This common name is good because it tells everyone that the plant is a fern and not a bryophyte. Although we do not necessarily have to take up the professor's suggestion, I would say we should bear in mind he was one of the bryologists on the team who identified the plant.I also realise that Süsswassertang is the German common name, but there doesn't exist an English common name.
There's also another problem with the Bogor name. According to Christel Kasselmann, Bogor (in Indonesia) is the place where T. barbieri was originally found but the professor has said that as far as he knows, T. barbieri is native to Vietnam.C. kasselmann sent me her article and so far I would agree, as many others do, but converting the common name from Java to Bogor is very very very very difficult.
I don't know if such measures will work, especially when it would mean we adopt the Bogor name and discard the "Singapore Moss" one. I'm sure many Singaporeans won't like that. Actually, I tried to find consensus a couple of months ago. I put up this post and even tried to conduct a poll but the response was miserable.To convince people that what they have as Javamoss is Bogor, you need to keep telling people over and over. Tell them WHY they have a different moss than they thought. That the mosses "got mixed up".
Spread the articles around the world in all languages possible.
Loh K L
It certainly is a mess, isn't it?
My personal view is that we should simply make an effort, wherever possible, to let people know that their Java moss is actually not V. dubyana. For my part, I'll be bringing it up at aquarium club meetings (where invariably large amounts of Java moss are distributed).
There is something of a precedent: Look at plant cultivars. If we think of names like Java moss or Singapore moss as cultivar names, the problem basically goes away. I'll use as an example the plant Aechmea X "Foster's Favorite," an attractive bromeliad hybrid. If another plant comes along that Foster like better, is there an urgent need to change the cultivar name to "Foster's Second Favorite?"
Folks in the bromeliad hobby tend to give newly discovered plants cultivar names, something which would give us in the killie hobby fits: If a new, unusual population is found, it tends to simply get a cultivar name rather than locality data. Cryptanthus "Cascade" is a good example. A thick-leaved, stoloniferous crypt was found on a rock outcropping near Buzios, Brazil. Instead of being called C. sp. Buzios [date of collection], it was named for its growth habit. Even now, when its identity has been ascertained, it is still called C. sinuosus "Cascade," to separate it from similar conspecific plants (there's actually a C. sinuosus "Road to Buzios" now, too - very similar).
If we remember that most of our aquarium mosses are unique clones (cultivars), it's easier to accept naming them by those conventions.
This solves the problem of Peacock vs. Spiky quite elegantly - if they exhibit different appearances from one another when grown under identical conditions, they must be separate clones, and in the world of cultivated plants, it's quite acceptable (desirable even!) to give them different cultivar names, even if they are the same species.
Then the job of our group of moss fanciers becomes putting the each cultivar under the proper umbrella of a species name. Which...is what you have all been doing all along, yes?
Oh, BTW, Martin: If you're looking for completeness, "Crystalwort" is a common name (though becoming obsolete) for Riccia.
I'm not a big fan of the name Loma fern because to me, the Loma is the fog desert region of coastal Peru.
Dave S.
It certainly is a mess, isn't it?
My personal view is that we should simply make an effort, wherever possible, to let people know that their Java moss is actually not V. dubyana. For my part, I'll be bringing it up at aquarium club meetings (where invariably large amounts of Java moss are distributed).
There is something of a precedent: Look at plant cultivars. If we think of names like Java moss or Singapore moss as cultivar names, the problem basically goes away. I'll use as an example the plant Aechmea X "Foster's Favorite," an attractive bromeliad hybrid. If another plant comes along that Foster like better, is there an urgent need to change the cultivar name to "Foster's Second Favorite?"
Folks in the bromeliad hobby tend to give newly discovered plants cultivar names, something which would give us in the killie hobby fits: If a new, unusual population is found, it tends to simply get a cultivar name rather than locality data. Cryptanthus "Cascade" is a good example. A thick-leaved, stoloniferous crypt was found on a rock outcropping near Buzios, Brazil. Instead of being called C. sp. Buzios [date of collection], it was named for its growth habit. Even now, when its identity has been ascertained, it is still called C. sinuosus "Cascade," to separate it from similar conspecific plants (there's actually a C. sinuosus "Road to Buzios" now, too - very similar).
If we remember that most of our aquarium mosses are unique clones (cultivars), it's easier to accept naming them by those conventions.
This solves the problem of Peacock vs. Spiky quite elegantly - if they exhibit different appearances from one another when grown under identical conditions, they must be separate clones, and in the world of cultivated plants, it's quite acceptable (desirable even!) to give them different cultivar names, even if they are the same species.
Then the job of our group of moss fanciers becomes putting the each cultivar under the proper umbrella of a species name. Which...is what you have all been doing all along, yes?
Oh, BTW, Martin: If you're looking for completeness, "Crystalwort" is a common name (though becoming obsolete) for Riccia.
I'm not a big fan of the name Loma fern because to me, the Loma is the fog desert region of coastal Peru.
well posted!
I've added Crystalwort to the compendium.
What I will do, and try and encourage others to do, is to use the name Bogor moss, when using the common name, and Taxiphyllum barbieri when speaking of the latin name.
I will never use Singapore moss, but use 'Vesicularia dubyana' & javamoss, but explain what moss I am really talking about.
I not to try and correct the name, then just for my own sake!
Kindest Regards,
Martin
'Tis a great world underneath the sea'
I spoke with Troels today.The professor and I met Claus Christensen and Troels Andersen when they were in Singapore 2 months ago. Unfortunately, I didn't ask them about how they got the Latin name for Mini-Pellia. It could be the professor was the one who made the identification but he has never mentioned it to me. But then again, there's no reason why he has to tell me everything Laughing Anyway, since the Latin name is listed in Tropica's website, please ignore what I've written earlier about this liverwort.
he added the coral-pellia & mini-pellia info to Riccardia graeffei. He did this based on one of your posts here on Killies.
I will try and get a copy of the post he's referring to.
Kindest Regards,
Martin
'Tis a great world underneath the sea'
Well, I guess we'll be cancelling each other out, since I'll be pushing for the hobby to keep using "Java moss."
Dave S.
hm.
using javamoss for taxiphyllum barbieri?
Kindest Regards,
Martin
'Tis a great world underneath the sea'
It makes more sense to me - it's been called that for so many years, it will be easier than changing it to a name no-one's ever heard before (and which is ALSO geographically incorrect).
Dave S.
Dave,
Your suggestion to think of common names as being the same as cultivar names is a good one but I believe that if we adopt your suggestion, it will confuse people even more. Because then, we will also have to explain to people the differences between a cultivar, a scientific and a common name. In any case, it isn't up to us. Because with cultivar names, there's an authority. With common names, there is none. If you ask me, cultivar names are almost similar to scientific names so there's little reason to introduce the former into our hobby. It will only make a confused situation more confusing.
One big problem with aquarium mosses is that it isn't easy to tell one from the other. Even seasoned hobbyists can often be wrong. That's the main reason I have never sought to clarify with the professor the identity of mosses like the Green Socks Moss. It's impossible to be sure which is the right Green Socks Moss. The difference in appearance is very slight and there's a high probability it can be attributed to the tank parameters. The Giant Moss and so-called Creeping Moss are another 2 examples of mosses that are very difficult to distinguish apart from the other aquarium mosses.
With terrestrial plants like Bromeliads, differences in appearance can be attributed to the plant's adaption to its local environment. But with aquarium mosses, we are seeing the differences only in fish tanks. Heck, with most of the aquarium mosses, we don't even know where they can be found in nature. If we give a new cultivar name to every moss that grows differently, it will become a nightmare for everyone. What do we do with the hobbyist who grows a moss poorly, resulting in the moss taking on a stringy appearance and then insisting he has a new cultivar? It happens, you know. With poorly maintained tanks, many mosses lose the vibrancy in their colours and take on a stringy look.
Loh K L
Martin,
Besides being geographically incorrect (as Dave has pointed out), the Bogor name could also have already been taken by another moss. Some time ago, Fabrizio who lives in Italy raised a discussion on the moss that was once called Glossadelphus zollingeri but now better known as Ectropothecium zollingeri. It seems that in France, this moss is also known as Bogor Moss. I received a small sample of it from a hobbyist living in France. When I showed it to the professor, he said it was a species of Vesicularia.
For more details, please take a look at this thread.
Loh K L
Loh, that is a good point.
There is no worldwide governing body of the aquarium hobby, so there's no one that can say "FROM NOW ON, SUCH-AND-SUCH A MOSS WILL BE CALLED..." In the end, I guess it all comes down to the Latin names.
Perhaps the only real solution is to adopt a taoist perspective on the issue and have faith that it will all work itself out in the end.
Dave S.
NOTES:
1)
Rhynchostegium riparoides is now classified as:
Platyhypnidium riparoides
official English: long beaked water feather moss
(which is worse than its scientific name IMO)
2)
I am growing the true Pellia endiviifolia out of the water. It looks exactly like M tenerum which is why Tropica some years ago confused the two. M tenerum was commonly known as Pellia and even when it was correctly identified its common name stuck. Most of the aquaristic world indentifies pellia as the common name for M.tenerum. On the other hand I see little resemblance between R. fluitians and M. tenerum except a general liverwort shape. But if in Singapore it is known as Giant riccia so be it. As Prof Tan rightly points it is the scientific name which counts. If I were going to list common names for M tenerum I would list Pellia first (that was the original common name and is most widely used) and then Giant riccia (Both are misleading and point to species they are not but related to)
3)
The controversy of the Java moss/V dubyana/ T barbieri/Singapore moss? Which name belongs to which?
Most recent books on aquarium plants apparently show T barbieri in photos, identify it as V dubyana and call it Java moss! Maybe even Ms Kasselmann's. I stand to be corrected on this but if that is the truth than KL is right ie Java moss = T barbieri. It does not matter what it was originally, the plant which is being grown the world over as Java moss is T barbieri. Noone is going to start calling it Bogor moss now!! There is no law which dictates what I call my moss. The only thing that matters is that when I say Javamoss my friend understands what I am saying. Even peoples' names start of as nicknames (at least in the western world) but they stick and become official even replacing the original.
With all due respect to Ms Kasselmann who maybe an expert on many aquatic plants (even though her theories of plant fertilisation are not justified by common practice) noone can dictate how the common language can or cannot be used. Languages evolve, change and adapt (even more rapidly than living organisms) to suit the people who use them and not the other way round. I'm with you on this one KL.
4) The list above is far from complete. Take a look at mosses being sold on ebay and the list in http://www.bryoecol.mtu.edu/chapters_VOL5/4Aquarium.pdf
Some errors may be included in the above however and I have written to Prof Glime who promised a future revision.
Killies.com is also the most extensive site re aquarium mosses. Many mosses have been listed and shown here. I have a Barbula species for example which is an excellent aquarium moss that was first described here.
Almost a complete list of mosses used in aquaria is found within the archives of this excellent forum.
regards
In all fairness, I don't think Ms Kasselmann was trying to dictate her views on anyone when she argued in her TAG article that the common name Java Moss should be used for V. dubyana and that T. barbieri should be called Bogor Moss. I do believe she has the best of intentions.
Ms Kasselmann wrote me a couple of months ago to ask for my co-operation. She wanted me to help her put things right. You know, I would have gladly given my help if I believe that there's a chance we could educate the hobbyists around the world on using the correct common names for the 2 mosses. But it's a daunting task. It's like trying to change the world.
Stephan has pointed out that the original names matter far less than the present ones. I think he's right. Although this would mean we ignore the good work that has been done in the past by the botanists and bryologists who first examined the 2 mosses, we have to be realistic on this.
You know, Stephan's post has given me a new perspective to the problem and it's this - It's far easier to get hobbyists and fish shop owners around the world to accept that there has been a mistake with the scientific name for Java Moss than to get them to accept the thought that the moss they have always known to be Java Moss is actually another moss instead. The reason for this is simple. From the hobbyist's perspective, the former would mean someone else made the mistake whereas with the latter, it would be the hobbyist himself who made the mistake. Well, you know how it's like. We all hate to be wrong.
Loh K L
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks