On Anomodon
I've been having a difficult time coping with the Anomodon sp. in Kentucky. Taxa that are renown for their difficulty in identifying (such as lichens and other cryptogams) are becoming increasingly common as iNaturalist observations. While it is admirable that people are getting interested in these taxa, the issue of misidentification begins to appear.
Specifically, with Anomdon sp. (inluding Pseudoanomodon), I reckon >85% of Anomodon observations are identified as Anomodon attenuatus. Do not get me wrong, A. attenuatus is a cosmopolitan species. However, in my research, I've found that Anomodon rugelii, Anomdon rostratus, and Anomodon minor are all appearing more and more. In samples that I would have guessed A. attenuatus right of the bat, I have found that A. rugelii is appearing more frequently than I would have predicted.
Because of my increased awareness of the abundance of varieties of Anomodon species, I'm finding myself increasingly skeptical of Anomodon observations. What once was a simple identity confirmation is now becoming a difficult puzzle of morphology.
With that, I think it is important that bryologists approach all observations with a healthy dose of skepticism. It would be a shame if bryophytes are as misidentified as lichens are on this website.
