www.mobot.org Research Home | Search | Contact | Site Map  
 
Research
W³TROPICOS
QUICK SEARCH

MO PROJECTS:
Africa
Asia/Pacific
Mesoamerica
North America
South America
Floras
General Taxonomy
Photo Essays
Training in Latin
  America

MO RESEARCH:
Wm. L. Brown Center
Bryology
GIS
Graduate Studies
Research Experiences
  for Undergraduates

Imaging Lab
Library
MBG Press
Publications
Climate Change
Catalog Fossil Plants
MO DATABASES:
W³MOST
Image Index
Rare Books
Angiosperm
  Phylogeny

Res Botanica
All Databases
INFORMATION:
The Unseen Garden
What's New?
People at MO
Visitor's Guide
Herbarium
Jobs & Fellowships
Symposium
Research Links
Site Map
Search

Projects

 
Manual de Plantas de Costa Rica

Main | Family List (MO) | Family List (INBio) | Cutting Edge
Draft Treatments | Guidelines | Checklist | Citing | Editors

The Cutting Edge

Volume XII, Number 3, July 2005

News and Notes | Recent Treatments | Leaps and Bounds | Germane Literature | Season's Pick | Annotate your copy

Barrie, F. R. 2005. Thirty-five new species of Eugenia (Myrtaceae) from Mesoamerica. Novon 15: 4–49.

The latest issue of Novon yields a veritable bonanza of taxonomic novelties for our region (see also under Stevens, this column). Of the 35 new Eugenia spp. unveiled in this paper, 21 occur in Costa Rica, and 16 of these qualify as endemic: Eugenia belloi Barrie, from 700–1300 m elevation on the Atlantic slope of the Cordillera de Tilarán; E. cararaensis Barrie & Q. Jiménez, from 0–300 m on the Pacific slope south from Parque Nacional Carara; E. cerrocacaoensis Barrie, from ca. 1100 m on the Pacific slope of Volcán Cacao (Cordillera de Guanacaste); E. chavarriae Barrie, from 0–800 m on the Pacific slope of the Cordillera de Guanacaste and the adjacent plains; E. cocosensis Barrie, from 100–500 m on Isla del Coco; E. grayumii Barrie, from 500–1300 m on the Atlantic slope of the Cordillera Central and scattered localities on the Pacific slope; E. hartshornii Barrie, E. magniflora Barrie, and E. selvana Barrie, all from ca. 0–400 m on the Atlantic slope of the Cordillera Central and the adjacent plains; E. lithosperma Barrie, from 100–1200 m on the Atlantic slope (and near the Continental Divide) of all the main cordilleras; E. monteverdensis Barrie, from 1000–2000 m on the Atlantic slope (and near the Continental Divide) of the Cordilleras de Tilarán, Central, and de Talamanca; E. paloverdensis Barrie, from 0–100 m in Parque Nacional Palo Verde; E. riosiae Barrie, from 500–1000 m on the Atlantic slope of the Cordilleras de Tilarán and Central and both slopes of the Cordillera de Guanacaste; and E. tilarana Barrie, E. verruculata Barrie, and E. zuchowskiae Barrie, all from the 900–1600 m elevational range in the Monteverde region (Cordillera de Tilarán). Those new Eugenia spp. occurring in Costa Rica, but not endemic, are: E. corusca Barrie, from 100–1000 m on the Atlantic slope of all the principal cordilleras (and also in southern Nicaragua); E. gomezii Barrie, from (100–)1000–2100 m on both slopes of the eastern Cordillera de Talamanca and the adjacent Pacific lowlands (and also in western Panama); E. hammelii Barrie, from 200–500 m in tropical wet forest at scattered localities on both slopes (and also in western Panama); E. herrerae Barrie, from ca. 700 m on the Atlantic slope of the Cordillera Central (and also in central Panama); and E. sancarlosensis Barrie, from 0–300 m on the Llanura de San Carlos (and also in southeastern Nicaragua). All the spp. described in this paper are illustrated with black-and-white photos of herbarium specimens (mostly holotypes).

N.B.: Eugenia cocosensis becomes the second Eugenia sp. endemic to Isla del Coco, joining E. pacifica Benth. We deliberately corrected the spelling of the epithet “riosae,” honoring former parataxonomist Petrona Ríos, to “riosiae,” based on our understanding of Rec. 60C.1 of the Code (as enforced by Art. 60.11). Among the other honorees in the above account are former and current parataxonomists Erick Bello and Ulises Chavarría (respectively), former OTS and TSC head Gary Hartshorn, Monteverde field botanist Willow Zuchowski, and OTS administrator Luis Diego Gómez.

Brummitt, R. K. 2005. Report of the Committee for Spermatophyta: 56. Taxon 54: 527–536.

Now that we have been made to understand that these reports signify nothing (see under Orchard & Maslin, below), we wonder what this is all about. For whatever it may be worth, here are the latest “recommendations” in a nutshell: the rejection of Cadelium Medik. (which threatened Vigna Savi) is recommended unanimously; the conservation of Chloroleucon (Benth.) Britton & Rose against Chloroleucum Record (Fabaceae/Mimosoideae) is not recommended because it is judged unnecessary—i.e., Chloroleucon should prevail under any circumstances [see The Cutting Edge 10(3): 7, Jul. 2003]; the conservation of Ficus citrifolia Mill. and F. aurea Nutt. against F. caribaea Jacq. and F. ciliolosa Link, respectively, is not recommended in either case, but the rejection of the latter two names is instead recommended; and lastly, the conservation of Ficus maxima Mill. with a conserved type is recommended unanimously [for further information on the Ficus proposals, see The Cutting Edge 10(4): 5, Oct. 2003].

Cameron, K. M. 2005. Leave it to the leaves: a molecular phylogenetic study of Malaxideae (Epidendroideae, Orchidaceae). Amer. J. Bot. 92: 1025–1032.

Thus study portends significant classificatory changes for Liparis and Malaxis (and possibly Crossoglossa), but “more thorough systematic study” is needed to iron out the kinks. It would appear that splitting is definitely on the horizon. The spp. sampled sort into two major clades corresponding with habit type, i.e., terrestrial or epiphytic. Each major clade in turn comprises two (terrestrial) or three (epiphytic) secondary clades reflecting differences in leaf morphology. Liparis and Malaxis are about equally well represented in each of the secondary clades of the terrestrial group, and Liparis spp. also occur in two of the three secondary glades of the epiphytic group. The implication is that Liparis will need to be split into five smaller genera and Malaxis in twain; a further nomenclatural complication is that both generic types occur in the same secondary clade, meaning that (barring conservation) one of these familiar genus names will probably be lost (Malaxis has priority). Because just one Costa Rican member (Malaxis soulei L. O. Williams) of tribe Malaxideae was included in the study, the potential consequences for us are not entirely clear; however, to judge from the descriptions in the Manual, at least two leaf-types of Liparis are represented in the country.

Correa, M. D., C. Galdames & M. S. de Stapf. 2004. Catálogo de las plantas vasculares de Panamá . Editora Novo Art, Panamá

We have not yet actually seen this work, but have been apprised of its existence by our friend Mario Blanco (FLAS), who himself only happened on it by chance on his recent visit to Panama. According to Mario, each sp. entry includes principal synonyms, a brief habitat description, a summary of geographical (by province) and elevational range, and bibliographic references (but no voucher citations). Copies are being offered for sale at both PMA and SCZ, and could probably be obtained by writing directly to first author Mireya Correa. The price is $60 for the hard-bound edition and $40 for the paperback (presumably excluding shipping and handling).

Dressler, R. L. & S. Dalström. 2004. A synopsis of Cischweinfia (Orchidaceae). Selbyana 25: 1–10.

This paper seems to be a direct response to Eric Christenson’s recent treatment of the same genus [see The Cutting Edge 10(2): 5–6, Apr. 2003], in which 15 spp. of Cischweinfia were accepted, with three described as new. Here, just 10 spp. are accepted, and all three of Christenson’s novelties are summarily relegated to synonymy: Cischweinfia glicensteinii Christenson (supposed to be the commonest sp. in Costa Rica and in cultivation) under C. dasyandra (Rchb. f.) Dressler & N. H. Williams; C. sheehaniae Christenson (which “may also” have been attributable to Costa Rica) under C. pusilla (C. Schweinf.) Dressler & N. H. Williams; and C. emarginata Christenson (not from Costa Rica) under C. parva (C. Schweinf.) Dressler & N. H. Williams. That brings us back to Square One, since Cischweinfia dasyandra and C. pusilla were the only two spp. treated in Bob Dressler’s Manual account of the genus. But here is where the plot thickens: it turns out that Cischweinfia pusilla, characterized by Christenson as “apparently quite rare in Costa Rica,” probably doesn’t occur there at all. Indeed, the present authors “have seen no specimens of C. pusilla from Costa Rica.” So what about Lankester 1496, the voucher cited for C. pusilla in the Manual? It becomes the holotype of the new Cischweinfia donrafae Dressler & Dalström, also known from several illustrations (but no other extant collections), including two paintings by the late Rafael (“Don Rafa”) Lucas Rodríguez C., honored in the epithet. The new sp. is a Costa Rican endemic, occurring at ca. 500–1000 m elevation on the Atlantic slope of the Cordillera Central and the northern Cordillera de Talamanca (to judge from the type locality and localities ascribed to illustrations). This atones for the loss of C. dasyandra (sensu Christenson) as an endemic; however, our “running count” remains unaffected, as we gain Cischweinfia donrafae, but lose C. glicensteinii. Incidentally, C. pusilla may now be added to the roster of Panamanian endemics.

Features full synonymy and typology, a dichotomous key to all 10 Cischweinfia spp., and composite line drawings of each, but no formal descriptions. A new subsp. of Cischweinfia pusilla is of no concern to us.

Estrada Chavarría, A., A. Rodríguez González & J. Sánchez González. 2005. Evaluación y categorización del estado de conservación de plantas en Costa Rica. CR/INBio/SINAC.

This mimeographed report, a joint effort involving Manual contributors Armando Estrada and Joaquín Sánchez (both of CR) and Alexánder Rodríguez (INB), presents an objective, repeatable, and falsifiable system for assessing the conservation status of plant spp. and comparing different spp. in this regard. The authors selected 91 spp. for evaluation (focusing primarily on timber spp.), based on previous studies and the opinions of specialist taxonomists. As a result of this document and the meetings that were prompted by its distribution, Costa Rican government agencies are now seeking to increase the number of timber spp. illegal to harvest from the current 19 to over 40. Talk about results!

García-González, M. & C. O. Morales. 2005. Análisis de la literatura sobre plantas medicinales in Costa Rica (1930–2001). Lankesteriana 5: 3–40.

Although we have no particular interest in the subject of medicinal plants, we note this valuable tool as a service to those of our readers who may. This offers by far the best inroad to the relatively voluminous literature on Costa Rican medicinal plants, a favorite subject for investigation in the country. The authors have done a superb job of compiling theses by Universidad de Costa Rica students, which account for 52% of the 416 references listed. The references are listed alphabetically by author, and are cross-referenced in a separate (and extremely useful) alphabetical list of taxa. About 70% of the entries deal with phytochemistry; the most studied plant family is Asteraceae, while Citrus (Rutaceae) and Quassia (Simaroubaceae) are the most studied genera.

Grant, J. R. & W. Till. 2005. (1694) Proposal to reject the name Dendropogon (Bromeliaceae: Tillandsioideae). Taxon 54: 549.

Dendropogon Raf. is an obscure generic name, based on Tillandsia usneoides (L.) L., that would have to be deployed for a large group of spp. presently included in Tillandsia were the latter genus to be fragmented (an event that is apparently impending). Noting that T. usneoides “is…at the far morphological extreme” of this group of spp. “that for the most part do not have this same habit,” the authors propose to reject Dendropogon in favor of Diaphoranthema Beer—similarly obscure as a genus name, but which “has been used in numerous treatments at the subgeneric rank within Tillandsia.” The Pandora’s Box of conservation is indeed bottomless! And we’d like to know: is there some kind of vendetta against old Rafinesque?

Hágsater, E. & M. A. Soto Arenas. 2005. Transfers to Epidendrum L. from Oerstedella Rchb. f. Lankesteriana 5: 73–75.

We never much liked Oerstedella (Orchidaceae); always looked too much like Epidendrum for our taste. Molecular analyses have now borne out this suspicion [see, e.g., The Cutting Edge 7(3): 4, Jul. 2000], showing Oerstedella to be firmly embedded in Epidendrum. This evidence has now prompted Manual Epidendrum and Oerstedella contributor Eric Hágsater (AMO) and associates to again embrace a more broadly circumscribed Epidendrum, to include Oerstedella as well as Epidanthus and Neowilliamsia (both already included in Epidendrum in the Manual treatment). Apparently, the only way to salvage Oerstedella would be to remove an additional 27 segregate genera from Epidendrum and propose ca. 40 new ones! Fortunately, the majority of Oerstedella spp. already have names in Epidendrum; this paper provides new combinations for those few that do not, including two from Costa Rica: Epidendrum parviexasperatum (Hágsater) Hágsater, based on Oerstedella parviexasperata Hágsater, and E. ×monteverdense (Pupulin & Hágsater) Hágsater, based on O. ×monteverdense Pupulin & Hágsater [see The Cutting Edge 11(1): 9, Jan. 2004].

Heiser, C., J. Soria, C. Miller & G. Anderson. 2005. A new synthetic allopolyploid naranjilla, S. indianense (Solanaceae). Novon 15: 290–292.

A synthetic sp.? Whatever. Of potential use to some of our readers is a dichotomous key to the various spp., cultivars, and hybrids of naranjilla that are cultivated in the Neotropics, all involving S. quitoense Lam. and S. sessiliflorum Dunal (progenitors of the “synthetic” sp.), both occurring in Costa Rica.

Keating, R. C. 2005. William Gerald D’Arcy, 1931–1999: biography, bibliography, plant taxa named by him, and plant taxa named in his honor. Pp. 3–23 in, R. C. Keating, V. C. Hollowell & T. B. Croat (eds.), A Festschrift for William G. D’Arcy. The legacy of a taxonomist. Monogr. Syst. Bot. Missouri Bot. Gard. 104: 1–420.

This is the marquee paper in a special volume commemorating late MO Curator William G. D’Arcy, noted Solanaceae specialist who was initially slated to contribute the Manual treatment of that family. The title aptly describes the contents; we note additionally that the bibliography is in chronological order, one of the plant taxa honoring D’Arcy is an accepted genus (Darcya B. L. Turner & C. P. Cowan, Scrophulariaceae), and two pages of black-and-white photos terminate the paper. For some additional papers in this volume, see under the following entries in this column: Knapp et al.; Mione & Yacher; and Sawyer.

Knapp, S., M. Stafford, M. Sousa-Peña & M. Martínez. 2005. A preliminary names list for the Solanaceae of Mesoamerica. Pp. 71–116 in, R. C. Keating, V. C. Hollowell & T. B. Croat (eds.), A Festschrift for William G. D’Arcy. The legacy of a taxonomist. Monogr. Syst. Bot. Missouri Bot. Gard. 104: 1–420.

This list, a precursor to the Flora mesomericana treatment, accounts for 33 genera of Solanaceae with 308 spp. (including 99 endemics) in the Mesoamerican region, (a 10% increase since the last such assessment, in 1986). Costa Rica is a center of diversity for the family and contributes to one of two principal clusters of endemism. For each accepted name, the nomenclator cites the original place of publication and basionym (if any), and provides information on habit type and geographic and altitudinal range. Synonymy is indicated for names that are not accepted. The introductory part features a regional map, tabular presentations of species numbers by genus and region, and a color plate of habitat photos.

Kress, W. J., K. J. Wurdack, E. A. Zimmer, L. A. Weigt & D. H. Janzen. 2005. Use of DNA barcodes to identify flowering plants. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 102: 8369–8374.

We have previously alluded in these pages to the growing initiative to implement DNA barcoding as a tool for sp.-level identification of plants [see The Cutting Edge 11(3): 1, Jul. 2004]. Well, the bandwagon is now rolling! This seminal contribution seeks “to determine appropriate DNA regions for use in flowering plants.” The authors conclude that sequences from two loci (the nuclear internal transcribed spacer region and the plastid trnH-psbA intergenic spacer), used in conjunction, can “serve as good starting points for large-scale testing of DNA barcoding across a large sample of angiosperms.” Significantly, they experienced a high degree of success in extracting DNA from herbarium specimens. The closing statement suggests the flora of Costa Rica as “a good test” for these methods. Bring it on!

Kriebel, R. 2005. Una nueva especie y un nuevo registro de Drymonia (Gesneriaceae) en Costa Rica. Lankesteriana 5: 81–83+.

The new sp. is Drymonia glandulosa Kriebel, known by just two collections (both by the author) from near Boca Tapada in the Llanura de San Carlos. Provisionally treated as “Drymonia sp. A” in the author’s Manual account of the family (see under “Treatments Recently Received,” this issue), D. glandulosa is carefully distinguished from D. conchocalyx Hanst., a sp. of rather higher elevations. The new sp. is apparently much less floriferous than D. conchocalyx, which (as the author speculates) may explain why it has been so seldom collected. The “nuevo registro” concerns the discovery in Costa Rica of Drymonia mortoniana Wiehler and the concomitant liberation of that name from synonymy under D. stenophylla (Donn. Sm.) H. E. Moore, matters already reported in these pages [see The Cutting Edge 11(3): 4, Jul. 2004]. Drymonia glandulosa is illustrated by drawings and a lurid color plate (on an unnumbered page at the end).

Kyndt, T., E. Romeijn-Peeters, B. Van Droogenbroeck, J. P. Romero-Motochi, G. Gheysen & P. Goetghebeur. 2005. Species relationships in the genus Vasconcellea (Caricaceae) based on molecular and morphological evidence. Amer. J. Bot. 92: 1033–1044.

This contribution jolts our memories to recall the unpalatable and counterintuitive proposal by Víctor M. Badillo (MY) to restrict Carica to the cultivated papaya, C. papaya L., and separate the other 21 spp. in Vasconcellea [see The Cutting Edge 8(1): 3, Jan. 2001 and 9(1): 3, Jan. 2002]. Apparently that view has now been adopted, at least by the molecular crowd. The molecular portion of the present study supports the recognition of Vasconcellea, at least as a viable option, in portraying Carica papaya as sister to all the remaining spp. of Carica s. l.; moreover, reference is made to previous studies indicating that Vasconcellea “is slightly more related to Jacaratia…than with Carica” (which also could be taken as evidence that all three genera should be lumped!). On the other hand, the separate analysis of morphological data “does not adequately support the genetic divergence between Carica and Vasconcellea” (au contraire, it shows C. papaya to be deeply embedded in Vasconcellea).

Luckow, M., C. Hughes, B. Schrire, P. Winter, C. Fagg, R. Fortunato, J. Hurter, L. Rico, F. J. Breteler, A. Bruneau, M. Caccavari, L. Craven, M. Crisp, A. Delgado S., S. Demissew, J. J. Doyle, R. Grether, S. Harris, P. S. Herendeen, H. M. Hernández, A. M. Hirsch, R. Jobson, B. B. Klitgaard, J.-N. Labat, M. Lock, B. MacKinder, B. Pfeil, B. B. Simpson, G. F. Smith, M. Sousa S., J. Timberlake, J. G. van der Maesen, A. E. Van Wyk, P. Vorster, C. K. Willis, J. J. Wieringa & M. F. Wojciechowski. 2005. Acacia : the case against moving the type to Australia. Taxon 54: 513–519.

Uncle! The case is perhaps made by numbers alone (and it is worth noting that at least two of the co-authors are Australian, or at least based at Australian institutions). The recent movement to conserve the name Acacia with a new type that would virtually restrict the name to spp. native to the Australasian region (see under Orchard & Maslin, below) is finally resisted. Several strong counter-arguments are adduced, e.g., that many of the 955 Australian spp. are narrowly endemic, and that spp. in other areas of the world are of considerably greater economic importance than the Australians have let on. The authors conclude that “the principle of priority should prevail when conservation for one part of the world would create disadvantageous change in another part of the world.” We would agree emphatically, but end the sentence after “prevail.” Period.

Mione, T. & L. Yacher. 2005. Jaltomata (Solanaceae) of Costa Rica. Pp. 117–130 in, R. C. Keating, V. C. Hollowell & T. B. Croat (eds.), A Festschrift for William G. D’Arcy. The legacy of a taxonomist. Monogr. Syst. Bot. Missouri Bot. Gard. 104: 1–420.

This study segregates three spp. from Costa Rican material that has previously gone under a single name, Jaltomata procumbens (Cav.) J. L. Gentry. The latter is here restricted to relatively high elevations (1000–2900 m), mainly in cloud or elfin-forest habitats. Separated largely on the basis of floral morphology are Jaltomata darcyana Mione sp. nov., occurring at 0–320 m elevation principally in the Guanacaste region, and J. repandidentata (Dunal) Hunz., which grows at 400–1200 m, mainly as a weed among crops in the Valle Central and Valle de General. The former is a Costa Rican endemic, while J. procumbens and J. repandidentata range much more widely. Includes a key to the Costa Rican spp. (at the end), as well as synonymy and typology and specimen citations (representative, except for the new sp.) for all three. Each sp. is depicted in photos of living plants plus drawings of stamens and anthers. Principal components analysis of morphological characters was employed for this study.

Morales, J. F. 2005. Nuevas especies de Weinmannia (Cunoniaceae) para Costa Rica y Colombia. Novon 15: 327–331.

Two new spp. are described here, but only one occurs in Costa Rica. Material from high elevations in the Cordilleras Central and de Talamanca formerly identified as Weinmannia trianaea Wedd. is reconceived as an endemic (so far as is known) element bearing the name Weinmannia vulcanicola J. F. Morales. The latter is distinguished, on the basis of several leaf and pubescence features, from W. trianaea s. str., now confined to South America, as well as the likewise South American W. polyphylla Moric. ex Ser. The differences among the three spp. are summarized in a dichotomous key. Illustrated with a black-and-white photo of the holotype.

-- . 2005. Una nueva especie de Werauhia (Bromeliaceae) para Costa Rica. Novon 15: 332–334.

Werauhia anitana J. F. Morales sp. nov. is known by just two collections from La Palma, a classic (and very well botanized!) cloud-forest site in the pass between Volcán Barva and Volcán Irazú. The new sp. is compared with Werauhia osaensis (J. F. Morales ) J. F. Morales and W. viridiflora (Regel) J. R. Grant. Illustrated with a rather basic line drawing. The epithet honors North American botanical illustrator Anita Cooper, who collaborated with Chico on some of his INBio field guides. Circumstantial evidence very strongly suggests that this is the same sp. that was treated in the Manual (against our better judgment) under the unpublished name “Werauhia cooperiana J. F. Morales”; oddly, though, the voucher cited for that sp. in the Manual is not repeated here, and is currently identified in the INBio database as a Cissus sp. (Vitaceae)!

-- & A. Rodríguez. 2005. Una nueva especie de Sphyrospermum (Ericaceae) para Costa Rica. Novon 15: 335–337.

The narrowly linear leaves of the aptly dubbed Sphyrospermum linearifolium Alex. Rodr. & J. F. Morales are unique in this widespread neotropical genus of some 22 mostly epiphytic spp. The new spp. is endemic to Costa Rica, where it has been found at middle elevations (700–1500 m) on the Atlantic slopes of Volcán Barva and Volcán Irazú. The six Sphyrospermum spp. presently recorded from Costa Rica are distinguished in a dichotomous key. Illustrated with a fine composite line drawing by INBio’s Claudio Aragón.

Müller, K. & T. Borsch. 2005. Phylogenetics of Amaranthaceae based on matK/trnK sequence data—evidence from parsimony, likelihood, and Bayesian analyses. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 92: 66–102.

Despite “using the densest sampling so far obtained for Amaranthaceae s. str. and a representation of all major lineages of Chenopodiaceae,” this study fails to capitalize on the only one of its “primary goals” of interest to us, viz., “to investigate relationships of [Amaranthaceae s. str.] to Chenopodiaceae.” The inevitable “more data” and “further study” will be needed “before a clear picture emerges” as to the possibility of maintaining two monophyletic families bearing those names.

Mytnik, J. 2003. Rewizja taksonomiczna podplemienia Cyclopogoninae Szlach. (Spirantheae, Orchidaceae) obszaru Ameryki Środkowej/The taxonomic revision of the subtribe Cyclopogoninae Szlach. (Spirantheae, Orchidaceae) from Mesoamerica. Genus (Suppl.): 57–61.

A volume of abstracts supplemental to a Polish journal of invertebrate taxonomy unexpectedly yields numerous new combinations for Mexoamerican Orchidaceae, including one that applies to a taxon represented in Costa Rica: Pelexia olivacea Rolfe subsp. congesta (Ames & C. Schweinf.) Szlach., Mytnik & Rutk. comb. nov. is based on P. congesta Ames & C. Schweinf. (the name used in the Manual). In Polish.

Orchard, A. E. & B. R. Maslin. 2005. The case for conserving Acacia with a new type. Taxon 54: 509–512.

Hey, we thought this was a done deal [see The Cutting Edge 12(1): 5–6, Jan. 2005]! Guess we don’t understand how all of this works. Here, two Australian workers take on the rest of the world (see under Luckow et al., this column), reiterating their arguments [see The Cutting Edge 10(4): 10–11, Oct. 2003] one final time in an effort to conserve the name Acacia for the largest (and mainly Australian) segregate group. We are relieved to learn that there is still a chance to squash this bug. Priority über alles!

Ormerod, P. 2005. Studies of Neotropical Goodyerinae (Orchidaceae). Harvard Pap. Bot. 9: 391–423.

The 39 new taxa described here (including 38 new spp. and one new subspp.) all belong to genera segregated from Erythrodes, under which name they would have been treated in the Manual. However, as far as we could ascertain, just one of these novelties is attributed to Costa Rica: Microchilus valverdei Ormerod, based on a single collection made by former Universidad de Costa Rica student Óscar Valverde at 500–600 m elevation in the Tarrazú region. The new sp. is compared to the sym- or parapatric M. calophyllus (Rchb. f.) Ormerod [i.e., Erythrodes calophyllus (Rchb. f.) Ames of the Manual], from which it differs most notably in its thin, translucent (vs. opaque) floral bracts and flowers with two thin lamellate keels on the hypochile of the labellum (vs. lacking keels). A key (dichotomous, but non-indented) is provided to help separate the 32 new taxa (31 spp. and one subsp.) of Microchilus described in this paper, which boost the generic total to 77 taxa; Microchilus corresponds to the New World members of Erythrodes s. str., as the latter designation is employed in the Manual.

Oxelman, B., P. Kornhall, R. G. Olmstead & B. Bremer. 2005. Further disintegration of Scrophulariaceae. Taxon 54: 411–425.

Okay, let’s review (for the umpteenth time) the current classification of the genera formerly included in Scrophulariaceae, as we now understand it. Considering only those genera represented in Costa Rica, Scrophulariaceae s. str. now comprises Alonsoa, Buddleja, Capraria, and Limosella. The hemiparasitic genera and allies (Agalinis, Buchnera, Castilleja, Lamourouxia, etc.) are shunted to Orobanchaceae, while most of the remaining genera join Callitriche and Plantago in Plantaginaceae. Exceptions are Calceolaria, segregated into its own family; and Hemichaena, Leucocarpus, and Mazus, referred (with Mimulus) to Phrymaceae. The analyses reported here, involving sequences from three plastid DNA regions for a wide range of taxa throughout Lamiales, support all of the above, except for the inclusion of Mazus in Phrymaceae. Also in limbo is the genus Peltanthera, long included in Loganiaceae or Buddlejaceae, but now adrift in no-man’s land somewhere in the general vicinity of Gesneriaceae. Tribe Lindernieae (with Lindernia, Micranthemum, and Torenia in Costa Rica) forms a strongly supported clade with “unclear relationships to the rest of Lamiales”; this agrees with the results of two other recent studies, in one of which the family name Linderniaceae was validated [see The Cutting Edge 12(2): 13, Apr. 2005]. However, the present results support the second of these recent studies [see The Cutting Edge 12(2): 4, Apr. 2005] in retaining tribe Gratioleae (including, e.g., Angelonia, Mecardonia, Scoparia, and Stemodia) within Plantaginaceae. Capraria and Limosella, here confirmed as belonging to Scrophulariaceae s. str., have generally been included in tribe Gratioleae and whatever family it was assigned to (or Capraria has sometimes been referred to Myoporaceae, here also included in Scrophulariaceae s. str.).

What about the option of lumping all these splinter familes back into Scrophulariaceae s. l.? According to the cladograms presented here, such a move would suck Acanthaceae, Bignoniaceae, Lamiaceae, Lentibulariaceae, Martyniaceae, Pedaliaceae, and Verbenaceae into the same vortex! So now we’re believers.

Pipoly, J. J., III & J. M. Ricketson. 2005. New species and nomenclatural notes in Mesoamerican Ardisia (Myrsinaceae). Novon 15: 190–201.

Three new sp. and two new combinations are here validated, but only one of the latter need concern us: Ardisia furfuracella Standl. subsp. veraguasensis (Lundell) Pipoly & Ricketson (based on A. veraguasensis Lundell) applies to a taxon ranging from Nicaragua to central Panama, while automatically creating the autonymic subspp., also ascribed to Costa Rica. In the final analysis, the impact on us may be essentially nil, since the Manual Myrsinaceae treatment by Francisco Morales [see The Cutting Edge 7(1): 3, Jan. 2000] synonymizes A. furfuracella under an inclusive concept o f Ardisia compressa Kunth. As a useful bonus, dichotomous, indented keys are provided to all the Mesomerican spp. of Ardisia subgenera Ardisia and Icacorea (Aubl.) Mez.

Pupulin, F. 2004. A note on Prosthechea (Orchidaceae: Laeliinae), with a new species. Selbyana 25: 17–22.

Prosthechea barbozae Pupulin sp. nov. is known from a single, living collection made by Gabriel Barboza at ca. 900 m elevation on the Atlantic slope of the Cordillera de Tilarán in the Monteverde reserve; the type was prepared from Barboza’s cultivated material. The new sp. is most similar to the Mexican P. glauca Knowles & Westc. (the generic type), and is also compared with the Costa Rican endemic P. ortizii (Dressler) W. E. Higgins. We have a hard time believing that the decades-long botanical dragnet of the Monteverde region by William Haber and associates never produced a single specimen of P. barbozae, yet none is cited. The “note” comprises the author’s painstaking consideration of recent efforts to subdivide Prosthechea [see, e.g., The Cutting Edge 11(1): 3–4, Jan. 2004], concluding that “it seems advisable to retain a wide concept” of the genus, at least for the time being. Illustrated with a fine composite line drawing. Our running total of new orchid spp. described from Costa Rica since 1993 has now reached 215. N.B.: We have deliberately corrected the author’s spelling of the sp. epithet (‘barbozaei’) in accordance with Art. 60.11 of the Code.

Reinheimer, R., R. Pozner & A. C. Vegetti. 2005. Inflorescence, spikelet, and floral development in Panicum maximum and Urochloa plantaginea (Poaceae). Amer. J. Bot. 92: 565–575.

The ubiquitous tropical weed long comfortably known as Panicum maximum Jacq. (under which name it was treated in the Manual) has lately suffered the scrutiny of agrostologists, who have proposed its transfer to Urochloa or (in a paper overlooked by us) Megathyrsus, a new, ditypic genus (formerly a subgenus of Panicum). The separation of Megathyrsus from Urochloa was proposed mainly on the basis of differences in the degree of inflorescence branching (see Simon & Jacobs, Austrobaileya 6: 571–574. 2003). Here the exclusion of P. maximum from Urochloa gains additional support with the discovery of eight additional differences in “fundamental developmental features” between its inflorescences and flowers and those of U. plantaginea (Link) R. D. Webster. The authors take no explicit position on the issue of Megathyrsus per se.

Roalson, E. H., J. K. Boggan, L. E. Skog & E. A. Zimmer. 2005. Untangling Gloxinieae (Gesneriaceae). I. Phylogenetic patterns and generic boundaries inferred from nuclear, chloroplast, and morphological cladistic datasets. Taxon 54: 389­–410.

The biggest surprise here is that Kohleria appears paraphyletic with respect to the oligotypic Capanea. Although “the taxonomic implications of a Capanea clade nested within Kohleria” are deferred to another paper said to be “in prep.,” we expect that lumping will be the result (Kohleria is the older name by two years). Diastema is revealed as polyphyletic, however the two spp. occurring in Costa Rica (one of which is the generic type) do not stand to be affected by the implied taxonomic adjustment. Also polyphyletic and with two spp. in Costa Rica is Phinaea, but neither of our spp. was included in the molecular analysis.

Rojas Alvarado, A. F. 2005. El complejo de Campyloneurum angustifolium (Sw.) Fée (Polypodiaceae) en Costa Rica. Lankesteriana 5: 41–48.

This paper addresses discrepancies among previous accounts of this difficult group, which have attributed different spp. to Costa Rica, or perhaps the same spp. under different names. This author apparently accepts all the spp. and all the names (though with virtually no explanation), and describes a new sp. to boot! Campyloneurum gracile A. Rojas sp. nov., distinguished from C. angustifolium (Sw.) Fée, is widespread at low elevations from Costa Rica to Colombia. A dichotomous (but non-indented) key is provided to separate the seven spp. of this complex represented in Costa Rica, together with two tabular comparisons of morphological characters. The new sp. is illustrated with a photo of a paratype, and rhizome scales of all seven spp. are depicted. Curiously, “Paratipos” are segregated from “Otros especímenes estudiados” in the exsiccatae citations, though all must be paratypes, according to our understanding of the Code.

-- . 2005. Una nueva especie de Blechnum L. (Blechnaceae) en el Neotrópico. Lankesteriana 5: 49–52.

Blechnum fuscosquamosum A. Rojas sp. nov. is segregated from material that has been identified as B. fragile (Liebm.) C. V. Morton & Lellinger from Costa Rica to Bolivia and Venezuela (with B. fragile s. str. now restricted to the Mesoamerican region). Numerous morphological differences are adduced, mainly involving characters of the rhizome scales and laminar architecture. Furthermore, the new sp. occurs at higher elevations (2200–3200 m vs. 800–2100 m). A photo depicting the holotype of Blechnum fuscosquamosum is augmented with enlargements of rhizome scales of both B. fragile and B. fuscosquamosum.

Romero-González, G. A. & G. Carnevali Fernández-Concha. 2005. The nomenclatural status of Campylocentrum tyrridion (Orchidaceae: Angraecinae). Harvard Pap. Bot. 9: 425–427.

The main point of this article is that Campylocentron tyrridion Garay & Dunst. was not validated by the indicated authors in the 1961 publication cited in the Manual (and elsewhere), because a type was not designated. Nine years later, Foldats (in Flora de Venezuela) inadvertently validated the name by indicating its type as one of the two collections cited by the original authors. Thus, the authority and protologue reference for this sp. should be amended to read as follows: Campylocentron tyrridion Garay & Dunst. ex Foldats, en Lasser, Fl. Venez. 15(5): 441. 1970. As added bonuses, C. tyrridion is illustrated with a composite line drawing and a dichotomy is provided to distinguish it from C. fasciola (Lindl.) Cogn. An enumeration of specimens examined extends the geographic range given in the Manual to southern Mexico (Quintana Roo) and coastal Ecuador (Prov. Los Ríos).

Sawyer, N. W. 2005. Systematics of Deprea and Larnax (Solanaceae) based on morphological evidence. P. 259–285 in, R. C. Keating, V. C. Hollowell & T. B. Croat (eds.), A Festschrift for William G. D’Arcy. The legacy of a taxonomist. Monogr. Syst. Bot. Missouri Bot. Gard. 104: 1–420.

Conventional cladistic analyses of morphological data show that Deprea is monophyletic as long as two spp., including D. sylvarum (Standl. & C. V. Morton) Hunz. (the only sp. occurring in Costa Rica), are removed to Larnax; the indicated transfer was recently accomplished by the author [see The Cutting Edge 9(1): 12, Jan. 2002]. Six synapomorphies distinguishing Larnax from Deprea are enumerated.

Schulz, C., P. Knopf & T. Stützel. 2005. Identification key to the Cypress family (Cupressaceae). Feddes Repert. 116: 96–146.

This useful work should come in handy to identify spp. of Cupressaceae cultivated in Costa Rica, most of which were only briefly mentioned (if at all) in the Manual. The entire family (including Taxodiaceae) is covered worldwide, with a master key (neither indented nor strictly dichotomous) to genera leading to separate keys to spp. and even infraspecific taxa for each of the 30 genera. All 134 spp. and 46 infraspecific taxa accepted for the family are accounted for. Morphological details are illustrated in 11 composite plates of color photos at the end of the paper.

Steinmann, V. W. 2005. Four new neotropical species and a new combination of Urera (Urticaceae). Acta Bot. Mex. 71: 19–43.

Three of the new spp. are restricted to Mexico and northern Central America, but the fourth, Urera rzedowskii V. W. Steinm., ranges southward to Costa Rica and beyond. Characterized as “one of the most common species of Urera in Mexico and Central America,” U. rzedowskii “corresponds, at least in part, to Burger’s [in Flora costaricensis] concept of U. elata (1977) and Pool’s [in Flora de Nicaragua] use of U. eggersii (2001),” as well as “Urera alceifolia Gaud., sensu Standley and Styermark [in Flora of Guatemala] (1952).” Well, that certainly clears things up! Those were mostly fairly nebulous concepts, and, from the few Costa Rican specimens cited as paratypes, we suspect the same may be true of U. rzedowskii. The new combination, Urera verrucosa (Liebm.) V. W. Steinm. (based on Urtica verrucosa Liebm.) is also applied to a sp. that is attributed to Costa Rica (as well as Mexico, but apparently nowhere in between). This is separated somewhat diffidently from U. corallina (Liebm.) Wedd. (whatever that is). Just three Costa Rican specimens are cited (including the type), from the Cordillera de Tilarán (Monteverde), the Cordillera Central (Volcán Irazú), and the Cerros de Escazú. As the author notes, Urera is in desperate need of monographic study. This is a welcome beginning, but much more field work will be needed in places other than Mexico before a clear picture can begin to emerge. Incidentally, Urera alceifolia is here considered a synonym of U. caracasana (Jacq.) Griseb., alleged to reach its northern limit in Panama (though both names have been widely used throughout the Mesoamerican region).

Stevens, W. D. 2005. Fourteen new species of Gonolobus (Apocynaceae, Asclepiadoideae) from Mexico and Central America. Novon 15: 222–244.

Seven of these occur in Costa Rica, and the following five are believed endemic: Gonolobus asterias W. D. Stevens, collected just once, by the late Alexander Skutch, in the Valle de General; G. hammelii W. D. Stevens, also based on a single collection, from ca. 300 m elevation in the northern Fila Costeña (near Palmar Norte); G. truncatifolius W. D. Stevens, from 1500–2750 m on the Pacific slope (and near the Continental Divide) of the Cordilleras Central and de Talamanca; G. ustulatus W. D. Stevens, known from just one collection, by Jorge Gómez-Laurito (USJ), from 900–1200 m in the Reserva Biológica Alberto Manual Brenes (on the Atlantic slope of the Cordillera de Tilarán); and G. variabilis W. D. Stevens, from 600–1300 m on the Atlantic slope of the Cordilleras de Tilarán and Central, as well as the southern Fila Costeña (Fila de Cal) on the Pacific slope. Extending to adjacent countries are: Gonolobus grayumii W. D. Stevens, from 1350–1900 m on the Atlantic slope of the Cordillera Central and the Pacific slope of the Cordillera de Talamanca (and also in western Panama); and G. hadrostemma W. D. Stevens, known from Costa Rica only by the type, collected by William Haber (MO) at ca. 800 m elevation on the Pacific slope of the Cordillera de Tilarán (but also on Isla Ometepe, Nicaragua). All the new spp. are illustrated, either with composite line drawings or black-and-white scanned images of the holotype.

Tate, J. A., J. Fuertes Aguilar, S. J. Wagstaff, J. C. La Duke, T. A. Bodo Slotta & B. B. Simpson. 2005. Phylogenetic relationships within the tribe Malveae (Malvaceae, subfamily Malvoideae) as inferred from ITS sequence data. Amer. J. Bot. 92: 584–602.

Numerous segregate genera have been removed from both Sida (e.g., Allosidastrum and Sidastrum) and Abutilon (e.g., Bakeridesia, Bastardia, Herissantia, Hochreutinera, and Pseudabutilon) in an effort to render those protean, cosmopolitan taxa more natural; yet, according to this study, the residual spp. still do not form monophyletic groups in either case. A “core” Sida clade has been identified that includes the following spp. represented in Costa Rica: Sida abutifolia Mill., S. aggregata C. Presl, S. glutinosa Comm. ex Cav., S. linifolia Cav., S. rhombifolia L., and S. urens L. At least these, we presume, will stand an excellent chance of remaining in Sida once the inevitable restructuring of that genus has been completed. Few insights on Abutilon emerge, as only three spp. (none occurring in Costa Rica) were included in the study.

Zanin, A. & H. M. Longhi-Wagner. 2005. Lectotypifications in the genus Andropogon (Poaceae). Novon 15: 250–252.

Among the names dealt with here are several that are accepted in the Manual for spp. occurring in Costa Rica, viz., Andropogon bicornis L., A. carinatus Nees, and A. selloanus (Hack.) Hack.; however, as far as we can determine, none of the lectotypifications affects current usage.

TOP
 

 
 
© 1995-2014 Missouri Botanical Garden, All Rights Reserved
P.O. Box 299, St. Louis, MO 63166-0299
(314) 577-5100

E-mail
Technical Support