www.mobot.org Research Home | Search | Contact | Site Map  

North America
South America
General Taxonomy
Photo Essays
Training in Latin

Wm. L. Brown Center
Graduate Studies
Research Experiences
  for Undergraduates

Imaging Lab
MBG Press
Climate Change
Catalog Fossil Plants
Image Index
Rare Books

Res Botanica
All Databases
What's New?
People at MO
Visitor's Guide
Jobs & Fellowships
Research Links
Site Map


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 VII, Number 3, July 2000

News and Notes | Recent Treatments | Leaps and Bounds | Germane Literature

Almeda, F. 2000. New Costa Rican and Panamanian species of Miconia (Melastomataceae: Miconieae). Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci. 52: 33–54.

Miconia, with more than 1,000 described spp., is the largest genus of Melastomataceae in the Mesoamerican region, where it is represented by 162 spp. (126 of these in Costa Rica and Panama). Reigning New World melastome authority and Manual contributor Frank Almeda (CAS) here describes seven new spp. from our region. Four of these are restricted to Panama and one to Costa Rica, while the two others are shared by the two countries. Our endemic is Miconia vestita Almeda, known by a single collection from ca. 2500 m elevation on the Pacific versant of the Cordillera de Talamanca, in the Dota region. It does not appear to be particularly close to any other sp. in the genus. Also occurring in Costa Rica are Miconia colliculosa Almeda, from the Talamanca lowlands and eastern Panama, and Miconia talamancensis Almeda, from the higher elevations of the Cordillera de Talamanca to the Volcán Barú region of western Panama. The latter sp. is very similar and "no doubt" closely related to the Costa Rican endemic (and partly sympatric) M. schnellii Wurdack, with which it is compared minutely. With very detailed descriptions, excellent composite line-drawings, and distribution maps.
Ashworth, V. E. T. M. 2000. Phylogenetic relationships in Phoradendreae (Viscaceae) inferred from three regions of the nuclear ribosomal cistron. I. Major lineages and paraphyly of Phoradendron. Syst. Bot. 25: 349–370.
The tenuous distinction of Dendrophthora and Phoradendron, obvious even to our untrained eyes, is underscored by this analysis, which suggests that neither genus is monophyletic. Rather, Dendrophthora appears polyphyletic, and nested within a paraphyletic Phoradendron. If this phylogeny is confirmed, then sinking the former genus would probably be the most sensible classificatory option (our view). However, the author cautions that "further sampling and additional character sources...should precede any taxonomic and nomenclatural restructuring."
Backlund, M., B. Oxelman & B. Bremer. 2000. Phylogenetic relationships within the Gentianales based on ndhF and rbcL sequences, with particular reference to the Loganiaceae. Amer. J. Bot. 87: 1029–1043.
This study finds strong support for an order Gentianales consisting of Apocynaceae (including Asclepiadaceae), Gelsemiaceae, Gentianaceae, Loganiaceae, and Rubiaceae. Also strongly supported is Loganiaceae s. str., with 13 genera, of which only Mitreola, Spigelia, and Strychnos occur in Costa Rica. Potalia is affirmed as an integral member of Gentianaceae, not Loganiaceae, as formerly supposed. The remaining Costa Rican representatives of Loganiaceae s. l. are excluded not only from Loganiaceae s. str., but from Gentianales altogether. Buddleja, Peltanthera, and Polypremum are referred to Lamiales, in the families Buddlejaceae, Gesneriaceae, and Tetrachondraceae, respectively, and Desfontainia to Dipsacales, in the family Columelliaceae; Plocosperma, of unresolved ordinal affinity, is consigned to its own family, Plocospermataceae. The notion that Asclepiadaceae are nested within Apocynaceae receives strong support, and the placement of Menyanthaceae (formerly included in Gentianaceae) in Asterales is corroborated.
Barringer, K. & W. Burger. 2000. Family #193 Scrophulariaceae. Pp. 1–69 in, W. Burger (editor), Flora costaricensis. Fieldiana, Bot. n. s., 41: 1–174.
Scrophulariaceae heads up the 11th installment of the Flora costaricensis series, which has now dealt with a total of 51 families (including Orchidaceae, only partially completed; see under both Burger and Gómez, below, for the other five families covered in this issue). Seventy-two spp. of Scrophulariaceae are formally treated here, more or less evenly dispersed among 37 genera. These totals correspond roughly to those of first author Kerry Barringer's Manual account of the family, allowing for recently described spp., and taxa included hypothetically (four genera and 9 spp.) in Flora costaricensis. Both treatments accept Scrophulariaceae in the traditional sense, notwithstanding recent efforts by molecular workers to fragment the family [see, e.g., The Cutting Edge 7(1): 12, Jan. 2000]. The most diverse genera in Costa Rica are Bacopa (7 spp.), Castilleja (6 spp.), Calceolaria and Veronica (5 spp. each), and Stemodia (4 spp.). Seven spp. are Costa Rican endemics: four of Castilleja, two of Tetranema, and Darcya costaricensis (B. L. Turner) B. L. Turner. Five genera and nine spp. are known (or expected) solely from cultivation. Richly illustrated, as the rest of this issue, with the ever exemplary line-drawings of series founder William Burger.
Berg, C. van den, W. E. Higgins, R. L. Dressler, W. M. Whitten, M. A. Soto Arenas, A. Culham & M. W. Chase. 2000. A phylogenetic analysis of Laeliinae (Orchidaceae) based on sequence data from internal transcribed spacers (ITS) of nuclear ribosomal DNA. Lindleyana 15: 96–114.
This study, involving an unusually large number of spp., shows (among many other things) that Cattleya, Encyclia s. l., Epidendrum, and Laelia are "clearly polyphyletic." From our perspective, the first two genera are the worst-case scenarios: from Cattleya, a group of spp. including C. skinneri Bateman (the Costa Rican national flower!) and C. patinii Cogn. will probably have to be removed to Rhyncholaelia, or a new genus, while there seems no alternative but to split off a large chunk of Encyclia as Prosthechea [see The Cutting Edge 5(2): 4, Apr. 1998]. Epidendrum would apparently need to be more finely divided so that smaller genera such as Barkeria, Nanodes, and Oerstedella could be maintained (here, we'd vote to lump the smaller genera). Finally, a proposed breakup of Laelia (at least partially formalized, in a companion paper, with the transfer of all the Brazilian spp. to Sophronitis) may not affect the sole Costa Rican representative, L. rubescens Lindl. Although "nearly all species in the Cattleya alliance" were sampled for these analyses, the authors emphasize that "much more thorough taxonomic sampling" is still required for groups such as Encyclia s. l. and the Epidendrum alliance.
Brummitt, R. K. 2000. Report of the Committee for Spermatophyta: 49. Taxon 49: 261–278.
The following decisions are relevant to spp. occurring in Costa Rica: rejection of the name Cerastium vulgatum L. (Caryophyllaceae) is recommended unanimously, protecting the threatened C. glomeratum Thuill., to which all potential lectotypes of the former name are referable; the recommended rejection of Poa malabarica L. (Poaceae) protects Leptochloa fusca (L.) Kunth; Pyracantha coccinea M. Roem. (for a sp. cultivated in Costa Rica) is conserved over Mespilus pauciflora Poir. (Rosaceae); conservation of Polygonum barbatum L. (Polygonaceae) with a new type is recommended, preserving the standard application of the name to an Old World sp., and protecting P. hydropiperoides Michx. (to which the original type of P. barbatum is referable); conservation of Euonymus (Celastraceae) as feminine is not recommended (it is upheld as masculine, with no consequence to E. costaricensis Standl.); conservation of Bidens (Asteraceae) as feminine is recommended (our data-base, and most New World references, already have it that way); conservation of Paepalanthus (Eriocaulaceae) to change the author, place of publication, and type is recommended unanimously (according to current views, the former type is referred to the genus Blastocaulon); conservation of Boerhavia diffusa L. (Nyctaginaceae) with a new type is recommended unanimously, protecting also B. coccinea Mill. (to which all the original material of B. diffusa seems referable); finally, conservation of Celastrus (Celastraceae) as feminine is unresolved (but the point is moot with respect to C. vulcanicola Donn. Sm., the only Costa Rican representative).
Burger, W. 2000. Family #195 Pedaliaceae. Pp. 162–164 in, W. Burger (editor), Flora costaricensis. Fieldiana, Bot. n. s., 41: 1–174.
As here construed in the narrow sense (to exclude Martyniaceae), this family is represented in Costa Rica only by the rarely cultivated sesame, or ajonjolí (Sesamum orientale L.), an Old World native.
——. 2000. Family #196 Martyniaceae. Pp. 164–165 in, W. Burger (editor), Flora costaricensis. Fieldiana, Bot. n. s., 41: 1–174.
The only Costa Rican representative of this small, New World family (sometimes included in Pedaliaceae) is Martynia annua L., an uncommon herb of the Guanacaste region with viscid-pubescent foliage and large, horned fruits.
—— & K. Barringer. 2000. Family #193a Schlegeliaceae. Pp. 69–77 in, W. Burger (editor), Flora costaricensis. Fieldiana, Bot. n. s., 41: 1–174.
This contribution treats eight spp., equally divided between Gibsoniothamnus and Schlegelia. One sp. (G. stellatus A. H. Gentry & Barringer, of western Panama) is included hypothetically. The only sp. endemic to Costa Rica is Gibsoniothamnus epiphyticus (Standl.) L. O. Williams; Schlegelia brachyantha Griseb. has been collected only on Isla del Coco, though it is widespread elsewhere in the Neotropics. This small, Neotropical family has been included variously in Bignoniaceae (especially Schlegelia) or Scrophulariaceae (especially Gibsoniothamnus). Our members are mostly epiphytic shrubs or lianas, of primary forest.
—— & A. Gentry. 2000. Family #194 Bignoniaceae. Pp. 77–162 in, W. Burger (editor), Flora costaricensis. Fieldiana, Bot. n. s., 41: 1–174.
Full treatment is accorded 80 spp., in 37 genera. Two spp. and one genus (Saritaea) are included hypothetically, while nine spp. and five genera are known (or expected) only in cultivation. Best represented in Costa Rica are Arrabidaea (9 spp.), Tabebuia (6 spp.), and Amphitecna, Anemopaegma, Cydista, and Mansoa (5 spp. each). Just two spp. are endemic: Amphitecna gentryi W. C. Burger (here described as new) and Parmentiera valerii Standl. These totals compare quite favorably with the corresponding stats from our Manual contribution, by Francisco Morales and Quírico Jiménez [see The Cutting Edge 4(3): 2, Jul. 1997]. Costa Rican Bignoniaceae are mostly lianas or (Tourrettia) herbaceous vines, excepting the following arborescent genera: Amphitecna, Crescentia, Godmania, Jacaranda, Parmentiera, Tabebuia, Tecoma, and the strictly cultivated Kigelia and Spathodea. Inevitably, a few recent discoveries missed the deadline, including Clytostoma pterocalyx (see under "Leaps and Bounds," this issue) and Tynanthus croatianus A. H. Gentry [see The Cutting Edge 6(1): 4, Jan. 1999].
Camelbeke, K. & P. Goetghebeur. 2000. (1455) Proposal to conserve Scleria flagellum-nigrorum with a conserved type (Cyperaceae). Taxon 49: 295–296.
Though rare in Costa Rica, the sp. long known as Scleria flagellum-nigrorum P. J. Bergius is widespread throughout the Neotropics. However, the name is illegitimate, because an earlier name (Scirpus lithospermus L.) that ought to have been adopted was cited in the protologue. Thus S. flagellum-nigrorum automatically becomes a synonym of Scleria lithospermus (L.) Sw., and the long-forgotten Scleria nigricans J. Presl & C. Presl becomes operative for the sp. heretofore known as S. flagellum-nigrorum. The last-mentioned sp. and S. lithospermus are clearly distinct; indeed, they belong to different infrageneric taxa. Because S. flagellum-nigrorum is generally considered the generic type of Scleria, the indicated change in its application inevitably affects the established nomenclature of sections, subgenera, etc. Acceptance of this proposal would avert that result, and maintain the prevailing application of a well-known name to a widespread sp.
Gómez P., L. D. & W. Burger. 2000. Family #197 Orobanchaceae. Pp. 165–168 in, W. Burger (editor), Flora costaricensis. Fieldiana, Bot. n. s., 41: 1–174.
Here accepted in its traditional sense, as a smallish family of achlorophyllous root parasites, Orobanchaceae is represented in Costa Rica by just two spp. in as many genera. Most familiar is Conopholis alpina Liebm., occasional in oak forests above 2000 m elevation. News to us is Orobanche minor Sm., collected just once, by the first author, near Prusia de Cartago, at 1500 m elevation on the south slope of Volcán Irazú. This locality has yielded many interesting records, especially of ferns. The Costa Rican population of O. minor, an Old World native, "probably came from introduced grass or forage."
Grant, J. R. 2000. New Mesoamerican species of Dichorisandra and Tradescantia sect. Mandonia (Commelinaceae). Novon 10: 117–123.
Two new spp. are described, both occurring in Costa Rica, but neither endemic. Finally we have a name, Dichorisandra amabilis J. R. Grant, for the erect, shrubby, glabrous plants long recognized by field workers as distinct from the scandent, pubescent D. hexandra (Aubl.) Standl. The new sp. ranges from southern Mexico to Panama. A key is provided to separate all three Dichorisandra spp. recorded from Mesoamerica (including the cultivated, Brazilian D. thyrsiflora J. C. Mikan). Tradescantia petricola J. R. Grant occurs disjunctly in Parque Nacional Palo Verde, Prov. Guanacaste, Costa Rica, and northern Venezuela (the three Venezuelan collections being placed here tentatively). It is compared with T. ambigua Mart., of Brazil, and T. velutina Kunth & C. D. Bouché, of northern Central America. Excellent composite drawings of both new spp.
Jiménez, Q. & S. Knapp. 2000. A new species of Heisteria (Olacaceae) from Mesoamerica. Bull. Nat. Hist. Mus. London (Bot.) 30: 1–5.
Heisteria is a taxonomically difficult genus; the spp. tend to look much alike, and useful characters seem few. Recent treatments of Olacaceae in Flora costaricensis (Burger, Fieldiana, Bot., n. s. 13: 14–27. 1983) and Flora neotropica (Sleumer, Fl. Neotrop. Monogr. 38: 1–159. 1984) differ substantially in taxonomy and nomenclature of Costa Rican Heisteria. Heisteria povedae Q. Jiménez & S. Knapp sp. nov. is widespread at middle elevations from southern Mexico to western Panama, and well represented in the world's herbaria by a prodigious number of collections (all explicitly cited) dating back to at least 1889. This material was subsumed within Heisteria macrophylla Oerst. by Sleumer, but differs from the type in having smaller leaves with prominent, yellowish venation and strongly flattened and winged stems. The taxonomy espoused here corresponds essentially to that of Burger, with H. macrophylla restricted to relatively large-leaved plants of the Atlantic lowlands; however, Burger misapplied the name Heisteria acuminata (Humb. & Bonpl.) Engl. to what is here called H. povedae, and used the name Heisteria cyanocarpa Poepp. for the sp. correctly (fide Sleumer and the present authors) known as H. acuminata. From the widespread Heisteria acuminata (sensu Sleumer), H. povedae differs in its subglobose fruits and shorter, thicker fruiting pedicels. Features a range map and line drawing of H. povedae.
Luer, C. A. 2000. Systematics of the genus Barbosella. Pp. 7–35 in, C. A. Luer, Icones pleurothallidinarum XX. Monogr. Syst. Bot. Missouri Bot. Gard. 79: 1–140.
Barbosella (Orchidaceae) comprises 18 spp., ranging from Guatemala to Bolivia, Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela, and the Antilles. Two subgenera are recognized, including the monospecific Barbosella subgen. Cardinella Luer (here described as new), not represented in Costa Rica. As per previous accounts (e.g., Luer's Manual treatment), three spp. are attributed to Costa Rica, including the endemic B. geminata Luer. However, there is one name change: Barbosella anaristella (Kraenzl.) Garay, formerly reserved for certain populations in Costa Rica and Panama, is now synonymized under a more liberally circumscribed Barbosella dolichorhiza Schltr., ranging southward to Peru. No range maps or index to names, but all spp. are illustrated with at least one composite line-drawing.
——. 2000. Systematics of Pleurothallis subgenus Effusia. Pp. 53–103 in, C. A. Luer, Icones pleurothallidinarum XX. Monogr. Syst. Bot. Missouri Bot. Gard. 79: 1–140.
The taxon here described anew as Pleurothallis subgen. Effusia Luer was formerly recognized as P. subgen. Specklinia (Lindl.) Garay sect. Effusae Lindl. One of about 29 subgenera of Pleurothallis (Orchidaceae), it is characterized by lateral sepals variously to completely connate (sometimes forming a deeply concave synsepal) and entire, obtuse petals (rarely microscopically denticulate). This contribution omits ca. 21 spp. of subgen. Effusia found only in Brazil, to be treated in "the Pleurothallis of Brazil." The 40 remaining spp., treated here, range southward from Mexico and the Antilles (with two entering Brazil). Of the 10 spp. recorded from Costa Rica, just one, P. amparoana Schltr., is ostensibly endemic (Luer's Manual treatment attributes it to Panama as well); two others, P. listerophora Schltr. and P. vaginata Schltr., are shared only with western Panama. Two spp. are added to Luer's Manual account of Pleurothallis: P. vaginata, freed from synonymy under P. imraei Lindl., and P. villosa Knowles & Westc., which had been considered a synonym of Trichosalpinx ciliaris (Lindl.) Luer. Pleurothallis villosa is attributable to Costa Rica on the sole basis of an Endres illustration at Vienna. No range maps, but good, composite line-drawings of all spp., plus an index to scientific names.
Michelangeli, F. A. 2000. A cladistic analysis of the genus Tococa (Melastomataceae) based on morphological data. Syst. Bot. 25: 211–234.
This study involved 41 of the 57 currently recognized spp. of this genus, widespread in the Neotropics, together with 11 outgroup spp. The analysis, based on 58 morphological characters, showed that Tococa is not monophyletic, as some spp. are more closely related to Miconia than to the remaining Tococa spp. The author suggests that Tococa might be recircumscribed so as to exclude those spp. related to Miconia, and include the monotypic Myrmidone (which is nested within Tococa s. str.). Synapomorphies for Tococa s. str. would include emarginate petals, truncate ovaries, and straight anticlinal cell walls in the seed testa. Under this scenario, the two Tococa spp. occurring in Costa Rica would part ways, with T. guianensis Aubl. remaining in Tococa, and T. platyphylla Benth. going elsewhere. However, the author regards this study as preliminary, with formal reclassification contingent upon additional evidence.
Park, K.-R. & W. J. Elisens. 2000. A phylogenetic study of tribe Euphorbieae (Euphorbiaceae). Int. J. Pl. Sci. 161: 425–434.
Cladistic analyses of 61 spp. using 52 morphological characters suggest that Chamaesyce, Pedilanthus, and Poinsettia, often accepted at generic rank, are nested within a paraphyletic Euphorbia. The authors note that "one solution to this problem...is to divide the largest genus Euphorbia into several monophyletic genera and to keep the generic ranks for previously recognized genera" (their study supports monophyly for five subgenera within Euphorbia s. l., including Chamaesyce and Poinsettia, but not for three others). Another (and, we think, better) solution would be to sink these smaller genera into Euphorbia; Chamaesyce and Poinsettia, at least, already have extensive experience as subgenera.
Persson, C. 2000. Phylogeny of the neotropical Alibertia group (Rubiaceae), with emphasis on the genus Alibertia, inferred from ITS and 5S ribosomal DNA sequences. Amer. J. Bot. 87: 1018–1028.
Separate and combined analyses of the data sets, involving 38 spp. of the Alibertia group and two outgroup spp., all suggest that Amaioua is nested within a paraphyletic Duroia, and that Borojoa is polyphyletic and nested in Alibertia.
Pupulin, F. 2000. New species of Costa Rican Orchidaceae. Lindleyana 15: 21–32.
Six new spp. in as many genera are described, all exclusively from on one or a few collections by the author. Chondrorhyncha lankesteriana Pupulin, based upon "a confiscated plant" of unknown origin "flowered in cultivation," is Costa Rican only by speculation. The other novelties, all endemic, are: Crossoglossa aurantiilineata Pupulin, from 1480 m on the Atlantic slope of Volcán Turrialba; Kefersteinia orbicularis Pupulin, from 1100 on Cerro Nara, on the central Pacific slope; Ornithocephalus castelfrancoi Pupulin, from 740 m on Cerro Nara; Sigmatostalix pseudounguiculata Pupulin & Dressler, from San Joaquín de Dota (ca. 1150 m), also on the Pacific slope; and Trisetella lasiochila Pupulin, from near the continental divide in the northern Cordillera de Talamanca. All sp. entries feature generous descriptions, discussions of relationships, and excellent composite line-drawings. N.B.: The correct spelling of the sp. epithet of the new Crossoglossa is problematical. Certainly the author's "aurantilineata" is incorrect, according to Art. 60.8 of the Code. Our "aurantiilineata" minimizes the required change by assuming a derivation from the Latin "aurantius." However, this contradicts the author's stated intent that the name be based on "aurantiacus." If it is necessary to preserve the author's intended etymology, then it seems the cumbersome "aurantiacilineata" would have to be adopted. The Code does not enlighten us.

Update: our running total of new Orchidaceae sp. described from Costa Rica since ca. 1993 now stands at 158.

Roalson, E. H. & E. A. Friar. 2000. Infrageneric classification of Eleocharis (Cyperaceae) revisited: evidence from the internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region of nuclear ribosomal DNA. Syst. Bot. 25: 323–336.
In which the monotypic Websteria (accepted by both Flora mesoamericana and Jorge Gómez-Laurito's Manual treatment) is portrayed as nested within the much larger Eleocharis, albeit with "weak" bootstrap support.
Robinson, J. & S. A. Harris. 2000. A plastid DNA phylogeny of the genus Acacia Miller (Acacieae, Leguminoseae). Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 132: 195–222.
The huge (ca. 1200 spp.), pantropical Acacia is shown to be diphyletic, with one of its three subgenera, the mainly Australian Phyllodineae (DC.) Ser. (formerly Heterophyllum Vassal), sister to tribe Ingeae. Although subgen. Phyllodineae comprises the majority (perhaps 75%) of spp. in the genus, it does not harbor the type sp. Thus, according to the Code, the name Acacia should remain applicable to the other two subgenera (including all the spp. occurring in Costa Rica), and that appears to be the recommendation of the authors. Nonetheless, the specter of conservation has already been conjured on behalf of the Aussie contingent, so we could ultimately be impacted by this. We are puzzled by the strange spelling of the family name in the title.
Silba, J. 2000. Variation géographic et populations isolé de les Gymnospermes rarissime. J. Int. Conifer Preserv. Soc., Ser. B, 7(1): 17–40.
Neither the title nor the "summary" suggest that this article is mainly a miscellany of nomenclatural novelties and range extensions. Buried on p. 32 is an "additional locality" for Podocarpus monteverdeensis de Laub. (Podocarpaceae), until now considered endemic to the Monteverde region of the Cordillera de Tilarán. This "leap" is based on a reidentification (presumably by the author) of Herrera & Chacón 2762 (CR), presently in our data-base as Podocarpus macrostachyus Parl. If correct, this new determination establishes the presence of P. monteverdeensis on the Atlantic slope of the Cordillera de Talamanca, interestingly, at the exact elevation (1600 m) and habitat (a swampy site) as the type locality. Could this weakly distinguished taxon be merely an ecotype of the widespread P. macrostachyus? We thank MO curator George Schatz for bringing this obscure but intriguing item to our attention.
Vizoni Scudeller, V. 2000. (1458) Proposal to conserve the name Adenocalymma Mart. ex Meisn. (Bignoniaceae) with a conserved spelling. Taxon 49: 303–304.
This reasonable proposal seeks to end, once and for all, the aimless and incessant confusion over the spelling of this name (also rendered as Adenocalymna).
Zamora, N. 2000. Nuevas especies y combinaciones en Leguminosas de Mesoamérica. Novon 10: 175–180.
The two new spp. and two new combinations here proposed all pertain to taxa occurring in Costa Rica. The new spp. are Dalbergia tilarana N. Zamora (Nicaragua to Panama) and Pterocarpus michelianus N. Zamora (southern Mexico to central Pacific Costa Rica), both illustrated by fine composite drawings. The former could be confused with Dalbergia stevensonii Standl., and the latter has been confused with both Pterocarpus amphymenium DC. and P. rohrii Vahl. The author's conclusion that Cymbosema does not merit distinction from Dioclea necessitates the new combination Dioclea rosea (Benth.) N. Zamora, and Desmodium strobilaceum Schltdl. is demoted to Desmodium sericophyllum Schltdl. var. strobilaceum (Schltdl.) N. Zamora. A key summarizes the differences (in pubescence type and leaflet shape) from the autonymic variety.
—— & P. J. M. Maas. 2000. Two new Costarican species of Guatteria (Annonaceae). Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 122: 241–248.
Both new spp. are endemic, as far as is known, and members of Guatteria sect. Chasmantha R. E. Fr. Guatteria talamancana N. Zamora & Maas is restricted to a very small area on the Pacific slope of Cerro Chirripó, at ca. 1700–2000 m elevation. Just three collections have been made, flowering in January and February. Most similar, among spp. occurring in Costa Rica, is Guatteria elegantissima R. E. Fr., from which G. talamancana differs in its larger flowers and monocarps. The other new sp. is Guatteria pudica N. Zamora & Maas, so named because its flowers and fruits are usually concealed below the leaves. Found only in the Golfo Dulce region at 0–500 m elevation, G. pudica has mostly been confused with the Atlantic G. aeruginosa Standl. (which has larger leaves and monocarps). It is also "probably a very close relative" of the sympatric Guatteria chiriquiensis R. E. Fr., from which it differs in details of leaf shape, venation, and pubescence. Each new spp. is illustrated with a composite line-drawing, courtesy of INBio's Claudia Aragón, plus color photographs (totaling three) of fresh material.


© 1995-2021 Missouri Botanical Garden, All Rights Reserved
4344 Shaw Blvd.
St. Louis, MO 63110
(314) 577-5100

Technical Support