Intermountain Flora observes that "the taxonomic definition of Cymopterus is a vexed question.... Even the distinction between Cymopterus and Lomatium is subject to failure.  Ordinarily one or more of the dorsal ribs [of the seeds have wings in] Cymopterus, but not in Lomatium.  Cymopterus newberryi completely bridges the difference.  In this species the dorsal wings vary from nearly or fully as large as the lateral ones to poorly developed or even obsolete".

     Also perplexing is the distinction between Cymopterus bulbosus, Cymopterus purpurascens, and Cymopterus constancei, three very similar plants.  Botanical keys by various authors do not agree on the characteristics which separate the three plants.  I have little information on C. constancei but following are some distinguishing characteristics given by some authors for the other two species:

When mature, C. bulbosus is up to ten inches tall; C. purpurascens is six inches tall.  As the flowers mature, their stems elongate beyond the bracts only in C. bulbosus.  C. bulbosus fruit is in an open versus tight cluster and the wings on its fruit are about 1.7-3 millimeters wide versus 3-6.5 mm wide.  C. bulbosus has a carpophore (a very slender filament to which the seeds are attached).  C. bulbosus has a star-shaped involucre versus the cup-shaped involucre of C. purpurascens and the involucels (those bracts that subtend the individual flower clusters) have a single nerve for C. bulbosus, three nerves for C. purpurascens.  See the last photographs below for more details.

I thoroughly enjoy these lovely, very early spring flowers  --  even if they are difficult to tell apart!

In early spring, the white papery bracts of Cymopterus bulbosus are eye-arresting.  Purple/pink flowers push through the bracts and enlarge, the bracts folding back and becoming less prominent.  Leaves are a beautiful pale green on broad flat stalks and provide a tasty treat for small critters -- notice the clipped  stalks to the left of center.

Alice Eastwood first collected specimens of this plant in Durango, Colorado in 1890 and Marcus Jones named the plant Cymopterus utahensis variety eastwoodae in 1895.  Aven Nelsen renamed this species Cymopterus bulbosus in 1899.

Semi-desert. Openings, shrublands, woodlands. Spring.
Canyons of the Ancients National Monument, March 27, 2005, April 2, 2005, March 24, 2009, Lone Mesa State Park, May 14, 2009, Utah Fours area, April 17, 2010, and BLM lands near the San Juan River, April 6, 2005.

Flowers start completely enclosed in tight papery white bracts (actually "bractlets", since the bracts are those structures that enclose the entire flower cluster) and gradually enlarge; bracts and bractlets remain as the flowers mature and seeds begin to form, but they eventually age and disappear as the seeds fully mature.

Albino plants are rare.

In the photograph of the flower cluster from the underside, you can see the star-shaped bract (the involucre), the rays that support the individual flower clusters, the white bractlets (the involucels), and the single green-to-purple vein on each petal lobe.  The shape and size of the involucre and involucel and the number of veins are key in distinguishing C. bulbosus from C. purpurascens and other similar Cymopterus species.

Semi-desert. Openings, shrublands, woodlands. Spring.
Mike and Mona's Three Springs Farm, May 8, 2010.

C. purpurascens, C. bulbosus, and C. constancei are very similar plants, distinguished by various expert botanists with various, and not agreed upon, characteristics, as discussed at the top of this page.  However, a careful examination of the photographs on this page does show several characteristics separating the plants in the photographs at the top of this page from those at left:  Leaflets of the plants at left are more finely and repeatedly notched.  Their long and narrow bracts (bottom arrow) and their  wide and cleft bractlets (top arrow) have more stripes.  Their fruits have broader wings and the fruits are in a tighter cluster.

The plants at left are clearly then not C. bulbosus and they do fit Stanley Welsh's description of C. purpurascens, but might they be C. constancei?  I am presently searching for a complete description of C. constancei to see how it differs from C. purpurascens.

William Weber believes that C. purpurascens does not exist in Colorado and that Colorado plants are C. constancei.  John Kartesz, the ultimate authority for all plant names and ranges for this web site, does indicate that all three species occur in Colorado.

"Purpurascens" is Latin for "tending toward purple".  Asa Gray named this species "Cymopterus montanus variety purpurascens" in 1861 from a collection made by James Newberry near the northern border of Arizona and New Mexico.  Marcus Jones renamed the species "Cymopterus purpurascens" in 1893. 

Range map © John Kartesz,
Floristic Synthesis of North America

State Color Key

Species present in state and native
Species present in state and exotic
Species not present in state

County Color Key

Species present and not rare
Species present and rare
Species extirpated (historic)
Species extinct
Species noxious
Species exotic and present
Native species, but adventive in state
Eradicated
Questionable presence

Range map for Cymopterus bulbosus  

Range map for Cymopterus constancei

Range map for Cymopterus purpurascens