Scapania asperaM.Bernet & Bernet

WFO wfo-0001207080 Accepted WFO 2026-06 8 photographs CC BY

Plate 1 figs. a–h · 8 separate observations

Scapania aspera, photographed by Christian Berg
fig. a Christian Berg, CC BY 4.0 / 2022-05-12 / obs. 198323638

Every figure is a research-grade observation under CC0, CC BY or CC BY-SA, rehosted with the photographer’s name, the licence and the observation it came from. Photographs under a NonCommercial licence are excluded from this site and are never stored, which costs us a great many pictures and is not negotiable.

Also published as 21 synonyms

A synonym is not an error. It is a record of botanists disagreeing, in print, about where this plant belongs. Each of these was somebody’s considered answer.

  • Martinellius aspera (M.Bernet & Bernet) Broth.
  • Scapania aequiloba f. dentata Gottsche & Rabenh.
  • Scapania aequiloba f. major Killias
  • Scapania aequiloba f. speciosa Saut.
  • Scapania aequiloba var. aspera (M.Bernet & Bernet) Boulay
  • Scapania aequiloba var. dentata Carrington
  • Scapania aspera f. aspera
  • Scapania aspera f. elongata Meyl.
  • Scapania aspera f. gracilior Schiffn.
  • Scapania aspera f. inermis (Müll.Frib.) Müll.Frib.
  • Scapania aspera f. intercedens Schiffn.
  • Scapania aspera f. luxurians Schiffn.
  • Scapania aspera f. minor Loitl. ex Schiffn.
  • Scapania aspera f. sepulta Schiffn.
  • Scapania aspera f. subplana Schiffn.
  • Scapania aspera var. aspera
  • Scapania aspera var. elongata Schiffn.
  • Scapania aspera var. inermis Müll.Frib.
  • Scapania aspera var. isoloba Schiffn.
  • Scapania aspera var. minor Schiffn.
  • Scapania aspera var. pumila Warnst.

Sourcesevery claim on this page

  1. World Flora Online Plant List. accepted name, authority, classification. CC0. Retrieved 2026-07-12.
  2. iNaturalist. photographs and flowering annotations, CC0 / CC BY / CC BY-SA only. per photograph. Retrieved 2026-06-27.

We publish what we can source and we say so when we cannot. This page has no care advice and no toxicity claim, because we do not yet have those from a source we can cite. It has no native range either: Kew's checklist does not cover this taxon.