This is widespread in damp woods on medium acid soils across most of eastern North America, but it is largely absent on the southeastern Coastal Plain. Traditionally, it has been treated as a species; see key in F. But subsequently it became generally treated as a variety of pubescens (e.g. Cr, McKinney & Russell 2002), and there has been much confusion in midwestern regions (e.g. D, St). A thorough revision of Ky. colls. is still needed. Mapped records here include the glabrous-fruited var. leiocarpon Fern. & Wieg., which may not deserve distinction. Ballard et al. (2023; W) has recently revived species status with the following differences: stems 1-6 (versus 1-2), partly decumbent when in flower (versus erect); basal leaves 0-3 (versus 0-1); cauline leaves along 50-80% of stem (versus upper 25%), usually ovate (versus broadly ovate to reniform), subcordate to cordate (versus broadly cunetae to truncate), abruptly acuminate to acute (versus acute to obtuse); uppermost fully expanded leaf with 5-15 marginal teeth per side (versus 13-26); upper stems and leaves glabrous or hirtellous (versus densely spreading-hirsute throughout). Also, leaves tend to be "medium green" (versus "gray-green"), thinner and not rugulose (as in pubescens sensu stricto); and stipules are usually lanceolate to ovate, often cordate-auriculate on outer side (versus broadly ovate, cuneate on both sides). There appear to be no significant differences in flowers or fruits; both species have forms with pubescent versus glabrous fruit.