Protea acaulos and Protea laevis

Feature	Protea acaulos	Protea laevis
Stems	Underground	Surface
Fire Survival	Resprouting from rootstock	Killed
Leaves	Stalk distinct (rounded)	Blade continuous ("winged" at base)
Scale Leaves	Rare	Often abundant

In Protea acaulos the leaves are variable, from broad and rounded to very thin (10 mm wide). However, the Piketberg, Cederberg and KoueBokkeveld races have leaves with a short stalk, abruptly broadening into the blade, with tips pointed and wavy margins. Of course, the key feature to look out for is the resprouting after a fire. Beware though, these races produce short stems that lie on the ground after a fire. Protea acaulos is not mentioned as occurring from the Swartruggens to Baviaansberg. Atlassers have rediscovered the population on the Langeberg, but that is the typical race, similar to the Grabouw form depicted in John’s book.

Protea laevis also has a wide range of leaf shapes. At the extremes we have a large, flaccid leaf (from moist sites) and a short, hard-texture leaf (dry sites). Importantly, the leaf tip is pointed in both forms. The margins can be very wavy in the short form. It is recorded from Swartruggens and Baviaansberg, with a strange isolate in the Waboomsberg near Montagu. Amateurs (not yet atlassers, unfortunately) have found a new population on Olifantsberg in the Riviersonderend Mountains, an absurd range extension for the species is otherwise only known from north of Worcester in the Hex River Range (Fonteintjiesberg). This is the large-leaf form.

However, things are not nearly so clear cut. Firstly, in the eastern Cederberg, the plants have stems above ground, but regenerate after fire from these above ground stems. They are thus like resprouting Protea laevis in GISS. Roughly half atlassers call them Protea laevis and half Protea acaulos. There is no such identification problem in the Swartruggens and Baviaansberg – all our records are of Protea laevis. All the plants have the stems lying on the ground, but all the plants have regenerated from these after the last fires! Just what is happening?

Total confusion reigned when we collected Protea laevis from Waboomberg near Montagu. It has been atlassed as Protea laevis as it "looks" like laevis – stems on the ground resembling the short-leaf form. However, in the burned areas it is resprouting from these stems. Imagine our dismay when John Rourke pronounced it Protea acaulos. Why? Because it resprouts!

Recollections and discussions reveal no records of resprouting in the large, flaccid leaf form of Protea laevis. However, all the eastern populations of Protea laevis (as described in the distribution of this species in John’s book) appear to resprout from their creeping stems.

Please cast your mind back to your having seen these species – do you remember any populations behaving otherwise? Do you recall seeing the large Protea laevis resprouting, or the small leaf form killed by fire? We will visit sites of the herbarium records to help clear up the matter. But your recollections might save a fair amount of time. Please help.

Protea acaulos and Protea laevis?