Cryptopodium

Cryptopodium bartrarrUoides (Hook.) Brid. D. H. Vitt 29705 (UC) New Zealand — — AY857775 AY857802... 

Pyrrhobryum was split into two sections by Manuel (1980), who recognized P. Section Bifariella and P. Section Pyrrhobryum. This view is partially supported by my results. I sampled two taxa, P. bifariella and P. mnioides, from Section Bifariella, and three taxa, P. latifolium, P. paramattense and P. spiniforme, from Section Pyrrhobryum. The taxa of Section Bifariella are in a clade (A) that includes Aulacomnium, Hymenodontopsis and Mesochaete, while the taxa of Section Pyrrhobryum sampled are in a clade (C) that includes Calomnion and Cryptopodium. The evidence from this study does not support the inclusion of these sections in a single genus, but supports the circumscription of the sections. Bell and Newton (2004) also found that the sections of Pyrrhobryum are non-monophyletic, and in their trees, the positions of the sections correspond to clades A and C. An additional seven species of Pyrrhobryum are known (Crosby et al., 2004) that were not sampled in this study, and these should be evaluated before taxonomic decisions are made. 

All of these plants are acrocarpous and will be considered together, although they represent at least three slightly different modular architectures. All are members of grade R, although only Cryptopodium and Leptotheca are currently classified in the Rhizogoniaceae. 

Pyrrhobryum paramattense Pyrrhobryum dozyanum Cryptopodium bartramioides Calomnion complanatum Calomnion brownseyi... 

Cryptopodium bartramioides (Hook.) Brid. AY631142 AF231084 ... 

---