Monographs Details: Campylopus crispifolius E.B.Bartram
Authority: Buck, William R. 1987. Bryostephane Steereana: A Collection of Bryological Papers Presented to William Campbell Steere On The Occasion of His 80th Birthday. Mem. New York Bot. Gard. 45: 1-749.
Description:Distribution and Ecology - Distribution: New Guinea, Malaysia (Fig. 88).Ecology: This species occurs in exposed sites on various substrates such as sandy soil, humus, rotten logs and sometimes at the base of trees at elevations ranging from 1080 to 1770 m in peninsular Malaysia and 1700 to 2700 m on Mt. Kinabalu.Specimens examined: MALAYSIA. Pahang: Genting Highlands, Damanhuri 2462 (KLU), Gunung Ulu Kali, area between microwave station and radar station, Damanhuri 2913, 2939 (KLU); Sabah: Mt. Kinabalu, summit trail above Layang Layang hut, 2700 m alt., on open soil beside footpath, Campylopodes Malaysiae Exsiccatae 7.
This species was described relatively recently from Papua New Guinea. It is closely related to Campylopus fragilis (Brid.) B.S.G. which is distributed widely in Central and South America, Africa and parts of North America and Europe. It differs mainly in possessing rectangular upper laminal cells rather than quadrate upper cells as in the latter. The subhyaline leaf apices are also longer in C. crispifolius. This species may be interpreted as a geographical vicariant of Campylopus Campylopus fragilis in Southeast Asia. Campylopus zollingerianus (C. Müll.) Bosch & Lac, which is distributed in India, Sri Lanka and Sumatra, seems to be another vicariant species of this complex. All three species produce brood leaves in the axils of the comal leaves.
Campylopus crispifolius is closely related to C. laxitextus from which it differs in the light to yellowish green color of the plants, presence of brood leaves, smaller size and shorter upper laminal cells. The presence of brood leaves may indicate that C. crispifolius m a y be only a stressed form of C. laxitextus. However, a mixed tuft of both species has been collected at Mt. Kinabalu (Menzel et al. 3784B) indicating that both taxa are genotypically different.