Sucioplaca
Genus of lichen
Sucioplaca is a single-species fungal genus in the family Teloschistaceae. It contains Sucioplaca diplacia, a saxicolous (rock-dwelling) crustose lichen. It is common and widely distributed in the Caribbean, Central America, and the Galápagos Islands, where it grows on coastal rocks.
Taxonomy
The genus Sucioplaca was formally proposed in 2020 by the lichenologists Frank Bungartz, Ulrik Søchting, and Ulf Arup. The name of the genus is derived from merging -placa, alluding to Caloplaca (the genus from which its species was reclassified), with sucio-, the Spanish term for "dirty". This reference is a nod to the dust-laden habitats near the ground where the sole known species of this genus is commonly found. Sucioplaca is in the subfamily Caloplacoideae of the family Teloschistaceae, where it is uniquely situated in a distinct clade, marking its isolated position within this grouping. Sucioplaca diplacia was originally described by Erik Acharius in 1814 as a species of Lecanora. In its taxonomic history, it has been proposed for inclusion in the genera Patellaria, Placodium, Caloplaca, and Callopisma.
Description
The lichen Sucioplaca diplacia has a thallus, or main body, that varies from cracked (rimose) to a cracked and patchy (rimose-areolate) appearance.
“Sucioplaca” enters the record as genus of lichen. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Sucioplaca, Genus and lichen can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“Sucioplaca” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Sucioplaca, Genus and lichen provides the most credible route into that argument.
Stable identifiers, scientific names and standards terminology offer the best bridge between this overview and specialist evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Nov 1, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q124439798. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2020 and 1814.
A general summary may omit uncertainty, sample limits or methodological disagreement that is explicit in the technical record. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.
- Current terminology
- Classification context
- Finding cited technical literature
Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Sucioplaca”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Sucioplaca primary sources, Sucioplaca archive and Sucioplaca research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Sucioplaca”?
- Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
- Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Sucioplaca” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.