Description
The foliage is a dull dark to light green color, with scale-like leaves 1-1.5 mm long, with the leaf tips not spreading; seedlings bear needle-like leaves 8-10 mm long. The cones are small, 11-24 mm long, and almost spherical, with six or eight scales arranged in opposite decussate pairs, with the bract visible as no more than a small lump or short spine on the scale. The seeds are 3-5 mm long, with a pair of small wings along the sides. The cones remain closed on the trees for many years, until the trees are killed by a forest fire; after the tree is dead, the cones open to release the seeds which can then germinate successfully on the bare fire-cleared ground.
The Mendocino Cypress differs little from C. goveniana in morphology, with the most conspicuous difference in herbarium material being the usually glossy black seeds, unlike the dull brown seeds of C. goveniana, but even this character is not constant, with dull brown seeds found in the southernmost populations of C. pygmaea near Point Arena. Preliminary genetic studies have shown some differences, with notably some plastid sequences (matK, rbcL, and trnL) suggesting a possible closer relationship to C. macrocarpa, though other sequences confirm its close relationship to C. goveniana. In cultivation together with C. goveniana, it retains a very different crown shape, with a tall slender crown, contrasting with the broad, shrubby crown of C. goveniana; it also has darker green foliage (paler, yellow-green in C. goveniana).
The largest recorded specimen is located in Mendocino County, with recorded dimensions of 43 m height, 2.13 m diameter, and 12 m crown spread, in 2000.
Read more about this topic: Cupressus Pigmaea
Famous quotes containing the word description:
“God damnit, why must all those journalists be such sticklers for detail? Why, they’d hold you to an accurate description of the first time you ever made love, expecting you to remember the color of the room and the shape of the windows.”
—Lyndon Baines Johnson (1908–1973)
“Everything to which we concede existence is a posit from the standpoint of a description of the theory-building process, and simultaneously real from the standpoint of the theory that is being built. Nor let us look down on the standpoint of the theory as make-believe; for we can never do better than occupy the standpoint of some theory or other, the best we can muster at the time.”
—Willard Van Orman Quine (b. 1908)
“Why does philosophy use concepts and why does faith use symbols if both try to express the same ultimate? The answer, of course, is that the relation to the ultimate is not the same in each case. The philosophical relation is in principle a detached description of the basic structure in which the ultimate manifests itself. The relation of faith is in principle an involved expression of concern about the meaning of the ultimate for the faithful.”
—Paul Tillich (1886–1965)