Senecio L.
Annual, biennial, or perennial herbs, shrubs, trees or climbers. Lvs simple, entire to pinnately or palmately toothed, lobed, or compound, alternate. Capitula in corymbs, panicles, or solitary; involucral bracts in 1 row, usually with shorter supplementary bracts subtending base of involucre. Receptacle ± flat or convex; scales 0. Outer florets ♀ and ligulate, ♀ and tubular, or ⚥ and tubular; ligules usually yellow, sometimes white, pink, orange, or mauve to purple; inner florets ⚥. Achenes usually ± cylindric, 5-10-ribbed, often with short antrorse hairs, sometimes glabrous, rarely dimorphic with ray achenes glabrous and disc achenes hairy; pappus present but sometimes caducous, denticulate, simple or rarely plumose.
Key
c. 1500 spp., cosmopolitan. Native spp. 18, naturalised 16.
Senecio is one of the largest genera of flowering plants. The genus as defined here differs from Allan's (1961) circumscription in 2 respects: firstly, Australasian spp. previously treated in Erechtites are placed in Senecio following Belcher, R. O., Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 43 : 1-85 (1956). Two N. American spp. of Erechtites sens. strict. are naturalised in N.Z. Drury, D. G., New Zealand J. Bot. 12 : 513-540 (1974), provided a key to, and excellent illustrations of, all erechtitoid N.Z. senecios and his treatment is followed here. Secondly, the segregation from Senecio of cacalioid genera is accepted (Nordenstam 1978, op. cit., see notes under key to genera of Senecioneae).
Within Senecio as circumscribed here, the greatest taxonomic problems are in the S. lautus and S. glaucophyllus groups. An attempt has been made to correct some of the more obvious difficulties by making new combinations and describing new spp. [Sykes, W. R., New Zealand J. Bot. 25 : 611-613 (1987); Webb, C. J., in Connor, H. E. and Edgar, E., ibid. 25 : 148 (1987)]. Ornduff, R., Trans. Roy. Soc. N.Z. 88 : 63-77 (1960), also considerably advanced our understanding of this group of spp., but the relationship of N.Z. and Australian plants assigned to S. lautus remains unclear [Ali, S. I., Austral. J. Bot. 12 : 282-291 (1964), ibid. 17 : 161-176 (1969)], and difficulties remain at intraspecific level in S. colensoi, S. glaucophyllus and S. rufiglandulosus.
Lf shape and hairs are important in identification (Fig. 30 illustrates lvs of erechtitoid spp.); lf descriptions, unless otherwise stated, apply to the lower to mid cauline lvs which are still present at flowering and fruiting. The number of involucral bracts, with modal values of c. 7-8, 13, or 21, is a useful character; achene shape, length and hair distribution aid identification of the erechtitoid spp.