Apometzgeria pubescens (Schrank) Kuwah. var. kinabaluensis Kuwah., J. Hattori Bot. Lab. 28: 166. 1965.
Distribution: India [AR: Anjaw (D.K. Singh & al., 2015b); HP: Dalhausie – Chamba road, Chamba – Pangi road, Kullu, Bhaboo Pass (Kashyap, 1929 as M. pubescens), Shimla (Mitten, 1861 as M. pubescens), Rahla, Rohtang Pass (S.C. Srivastava & Udar, 1975c), GHNP, Jalori Pass (S.K. Singh & D.K. Singh, 2009; D.K. Singh & S.K. Singh, 2015); JK: Kashmir (Dar & al., 2002), Burzil Valley (S.C. Srivastava & Udar, 1975c); MN: Ukhrul, Sirohi Hill, Hongava Hill (D. Singh & al., 2010a); SK: North Sikkim, Shingba Rhododendron Sanctuary (D.K. Singh & al., 2008), West Sikkim, Phalut – Dentam (Hattori, 1966 as A. pubescens var. kinabaluensis); TN: Nilgiri ‘NeelGherries’ (Montagne, 1942 as M. pubescens); UT: Kumaon, Mussoorie, Near Gangotri, Tehri Garhwal, Chansil range (Kashyap, 1929 & 1932 as M. pubescens), Valley of Flowers NP, Hemkund (S.C. Srivastava, 1986; Nath & al., 2010a); WB: Phalut (Hattori, 1966), Tonglu, Jorpokhari, Darjeeling (Hattori, 1966; S.C. Srivastava & Udar, 1975c), near Sandakphu (Kuwahara, 1975)], Bhutan (Long & Grolle, 1990), China (Piippo, 1990), Hawaii (Staples & Imada, 2006 as M. pubescens), Indonesia (Menzel, 1988 as A. pubescens var. kinabaluensis), Japan (Yamada & Iwatsuki, 2006), Korea (Yamada & Choe, 1997), Malaysia (ChuahPetot, 2011 as A. pubescens var. kinabaluensis), Nepal (Pradhan & Joshi, 2009, also as A. pubescens var. kinabaluensis), Phillipines (Tan & Engel, 1986 as A. pubescens var. kinabaluensis), Russia (Konstantinova & al., 2009), Taiwan (Kuo & Chiang, 1988), Thailand (Lai & al., 2008 as M. pubescens), Turkey (Kürschner & Erdağ, 2005), Europe (Söderström & al., 2007), North America (Stotler & CrandallStotler, 1977), South America (Schuster, 1992 as M. pubescens). Note: Kuwahara (1965) established var. kinabaluensis with epidermal cells over the midrib in 5–7(8) rows and the wings 26–33 cells wide on either side of the midrib as against 8–17 rows of epidermal cells over the midrib and 14–20 cells wide wing in the typical variety. However, as these differences are covered within the range of variations exhibited by the typical variety, even in the same population, taxonomic individuality of var. kinabaluensis was found untenable (D. Singh & D.K. Singh, unpubl.).
