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 VIII, Number 3, July 2001

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

Albach, D. C. & M. W. Chase. 2001. Paraphyly of Veronica (Veroniceae; Scrophulariaceae): evidence from the internal transcribed spacer (ITS) sequences of nuclear ribosomal DNA. J. Pl. Res. 114: 9–18.

Seek and ye shall find: molecular systematists are having a field day, as just about every traditional taxon of any size seems to be either para- or polyphyletic. Nested within Veronica (if we accept this evidence) is the woody, Australasian Hebe, together with several allied "genera." Although the authors do not address classificatory options at this premature stage, one senses that they would lean toward enlarging Veronica to include the nested taxa ("...the delimitation of Veronica, Derwentia, Parahebe, and Hebe has always been difficult"). But trouble looms if Veronica is further fragmented: the five spp. occurring in Costa Rica (where all are introduced) fall into two different clades, with V. arvensis L., V. persica Poir., and (presumably) V. polita Fr. in "Veronica III," and V. peregrina and V. serpyllifolia L. in "Veronica II." The type sp., Veronica officinalis L., is in yet a third clade ("Veronica I"), so (in the worst-case scenario) our spp. could wind up in two different genera, neither called Veronica.
——, P. S. Soltis, D. E. Soltis & R. G. Olmstead. 2001. Phylogenetic analysis of asterids based on sequences of four genes. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 88: 163–212.
This ambitious study, addressing higher-level classification of a group comprising ca. one-third of all angiosperm spp., sends a few glimmers trickling down to our benighted realm. Some nuggets we were able to sluice out: strong support favors family status for Nyssaceae (as separate from Cornaceae), as well as the restriction of Verbenaceae to subfam. Verbenoideae and the removal of Hydrolea from Hydrophyllaceae. Martyniaceae do not seem closely related to Pedaliaceae, and Icacinaceae may not even be monophyletic. We have no doubt that a more careful perusal of this article would reveal additional minutiae of this sort.
Almeda, F. 2001. Three new Mesoamerican species of Topobea (Melastomataceae). Brittonia 53: 157–166.
Two of the three novelties are recorded from Costa Rica, including the endemic Topobea lentii Almeda, known by just three collections from ca. 1300–1450 m elevation on the Atlantic slope of the Cordillera de Tilarán and the northern Cordillera de Talamanca (vicinity of Cachí). Better represented in herbaria, and extending to western Panama, is Topobea intricata Almeda, restricted in Costa Rica to Parque Nacional Tapantí (although an unnamed "regional variant" or "closely related taxon" occurs in the eastern Cordillera de Talamanca). Topobea lentii most closely resembles the widespread T. watsonii Cogn. (also in Costa Rica), while the relationships of T. intricata are obscure (it is compared with the superficially similar Blakea wilburiana Almeda). Features a distribution map and fine composite line-drawings of all three new spp.
Andersson, L. & M. W. Chase. 2001. Phylogeny and classification of Marantaceae. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 135: 275–287.
Here is another molecular study that raises many more questions than it answers. Separate and combined cladistic analyses of 43 morphological characters plus sequence variation in the rps16 intron of plastid DNA for taxa representing 22 genera of Marantaceae suggest that Calathea is paraphyletic. Specifically, a clade composed of Ischnosiphon, Pleiostachya, and those Calathea spp. with distichous bracts (here represented by C. crotalifera S. Watson) is sister to the rest of Calathea (spp. with spiral bracts). While this dilemma could be resolved by combining all three genera, the authors implicitly would opt to split Calathea. Unfortunately, the type sp. of Calathea has distichous bracts, whereas the vast majority of sp. have spiral bracts. Maranta appears polyphyletic, with Hylaeanthe included in its largest clade. Finally, although Ctenanthe and Stromanthe form a weakly supported monophyletic group, neither genus is supported as monophyletic.
Applequist, W. L. & R. S. Wallace. 2001. Phylogeny of the portulacaceous cohort based on ndhF sequence data. Syst. Bot. 26: 406–419.
This analysis corroborates previous studies [see The Cutting Edge 4(3): 6, Jul. 1997] in suggesting that Cactaceae are nested within a paraphyletic Portulacaceae, but also throws Basellaceae and the Madagascan Didiereaceae into the stew. The authors refrain from any formal reclassification; however, they do discuss various possible options, revealing an inclination toward further splitting and realignment (as opposed to combining the whole lot into a single protean family). In this manner, cherished family names could probably be retained. Nonetheless, family circumscriptions might have to be altered more or less radically, and difficult choices would still have to be made (e.g., to dilute Cactaceae to unacceptable proportions or submerge it in Portulacaceae). Incidentally, Talinum (Portulacaceae s. str.) was shown to be polyphyletic.
Berg, C. C. & S. V. Dahlberg. 2001. A revision of Celtis subg. Mertensia (Ulmaceae). Brittonia 53: 66–81.
Celtis subgen. Mertensia Planch. is a neotropical taxon with six spp., characterized by the presence of thorns and/or domatia, along with bifid stigmas. Only the widespread and familiar Celtis iguanaea (Jacq.) Sarg. is known from Costa Rica. Includes a subgeneric description, a key to spp., complete synonymy and typological data, sp. descriptions and distribution summaries, sections on excluded names, nomina nuda, and nomina dubia, and an index to names, but lacks specimen citations, distribution maps, and an index to exsiccatae. Just one sp. is described as new (from South America), and that is the only one that is illustrated.
Bradford, J. C. & R. W. Barnes. 2001. Phylogenetics and classification of Cunoniaceae (Oxalidales) using chloroplast DNA sequences and morphology. Syst. Bot. 26: 354–385.
Of principal interest to us, in this wide-ranging study, is the authors' conclusion that "Brunellia is most likely not part of Cunoniaceae and Brunelliaceae should be retained." The monogeneric Brunelliaceae may be more closely related to Cephalotaceae, comprising a single sp. of insectivorous herb native to southwestern Australia. In any case, it was found that "the sister group relationship between Brunellia and Cephalotus [could not] be statistically distinguished from an alternative hypothesis placing Brunellia as the sister group to Cunoniaceae." The decision to retain Brunelliaceae reflects the consideration that this option "does not make Cunoniaceae paraphyletic, while placing Brunellia in Cunoniaceae may make [Cunoniaceae] paraphyletic with respect to Cephalotus."
Brummitt, R. K. 2001. Report of the Committee for Spermatophyta: 51. Taxon 50: 559–568.
Germane to us are three perfunctory rulings that uphold established usage. The Committee votes to conserve Andropogon bicornis L. (Gramineae) with a new type [see The Cutting Edge 6(4): 3, Oct. 1999], and to reject Pepo indicus Burm. (Cucurbitaceae), which threatened the economic Cucurbita moschata (Duchesne ex Lam.) Poir. [see The Cutting Edge 6(4): 6, Oct. 1999]. Pursuant to an unpublished request, the Committee recommends that Arberella (Poaceae) and Arberiella (used for a fossil seed-fern) not be considered homonyms, allowing continued use of the former name for an extant bamboo genus occurring in Costa Rica.
Clark, L. G. & R. H. March. 2000. Chusquea costaricensis, a new species of Chusquea sect. Swallenochloa (Poaceae: Bambusoideae). Bamboo Sci. & Cult. 14: 4–9.
Chusquea costaricensis L. G. Clark & March is one of eight spp. of sect. Swallenochloa occurring in the Cordillera de Talamanca, and one of five that are endemic to the range (although it is not endemic to Costa Rica, having been collected on Cerro Fábrega in westernmost Panama). The new sp. has previously been confused with Chusquea tonduzii Hack. and C. vulcanalis (Soderstr. & C. Calderón) L. G. Clark. Though well characterized vegetatively, C. costaricensis is not definitely known in fertile condition. Includes a composite line-drawing of the new sp., a vegetative key to all Costa Rican spp. of sect. Swallenochloa, and a tabular comparison of C. costaricensis with five sympatric spp. of sect. Swallenochloa. The publication in which this article appears was known until recently as the Journal of the American Bamboo Society.
Cristóbal, C. L. 2001. Taxonomía del género Helicteres (Sterculiaceae). Revisión de las especies americanas. Bonplandia 11: 1–206.
Helicteres, a genus of 60 spp. in seven sections, is widely distributed in the Neotropics and in tropical Asia and Australia. The 38 New World spp. are apportioned among five sections, of which three are monospecific. There are no changes here for Costa Rica, with just two widespread spp., Helicteres baruensis Jacq. and H. guazumifolia Kunth, representing both polytypic New World sections [Orthothecium (C. Presl) Cristóbal and Sacarolha K. Schum., respectively]. Features a generic description, a key to sections and nested keys to American spp., comprehensive specimen citations, distribution maps, composite line-drawings of American spp. (all but one), a section on excluded and dubious names, and indices to exsiccatae and Latin names. An appendix provides descriptions of the Asian sections and typological data for the Asian spp. The introductory part discusses taxonomic history, morphology (with a color plate of flowers), floral biology, karyology, distribution, and both intra- and intergeneric relationships. Two sections and nine spp. (none occurrring in Costa Rica) are described as new.
Davidse, G. & N. J. Turland. 2001. (1480) Proposal to reject the name Holcus saccharatus (Poaceae). Taxon 50: 577–580.
Holcus saccharatus L. (1753) threatens Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench, the name most commonly used for grain sorghum in the broad sense. Although Sorghum saccharatum (L.) Moench has been used in a few recent works, the authors advocate the rejection of H. saccharatus, citing the trauma already caused by the shift (in the mid-1970's) from the illegitimate S. vulgare Pers. to S. bicolor.
Ehlers, R. 1999. T. delicata, eine besonders hübsche Neuentdeckung. Bromelie 3: 64–70.
The new sp. referred to in the title (a Tillandsia) is Mexican, so does not concern us. What may (or might have) is the author's apparent attempt to formally elevate Tillandsia ionantha Planch. var. scaposa L. B. Sm. (said to occur in Costa Rica) to full sp. rank. Unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately, the new combination is invalid, because the author has failed to provide "a full and direct reference...to its...place of valid publication, with page or plate reference and date," as required by Art. 33.3 of the Code. Notably, this taxon was not accepted even as a variety by John F. Utley (NOLS), in his 1994 Flora mesoamericana treatment of Tillandsia (vol. 6: 100–122).
Faden, R. B. 2001. A new species of Tradescantia (Commelinaceae) from Costa Rica. Novon 11: 31–35.
The white-flowered Tradescantia grantii Faden, honoring Manual contributor Jason R. Grant (NEU), is compared minutely with T. deficiens Brandegee and T. plusiantha Standl., both of northern Mesoamerica. Though endemic to Costa Rica, T. grantii is widespread there, from the region of Volcán Arenal to the Jardín Botánico Wilson, near the Panamanian border. A 1968 collection by William Burger is the earliest cited (and we thought we'd been the first to get it!). Includes an excellent composite line-drawing, plus photomicrographs of mitotic chromosomes (2n = 12).
Flores-Franco, G. & M. Sousa S. 2000. Especie nueva de Chamaecrista (Leguminosae, Caesalpinioideae) de Mesoamérica. Anales Inst. Biol. Univ. Nac. Autón. México, Bot. 71: 19–23.
Chamaecrista molinae G. Flores & M. Sousa has an unusual distribution, being known by just one collection from Honduras and another from Costa Rica. The Costa Rican record is from CATIE (Turrialba), where C. molinae was collected as a weed in Macadamia groves by Honduran botanist Antonio Molina (to whom the sp. is dedicated) in 1972. The new sp. belongs to sect. Chamaecrista ser. Chamaecrista and is "closely related" to Chamaecrista rufa (M. Martens & Galeotti) Britton & Rose (not occurring in Costa Rica), with which a tabularized comparison is presented. Illustrated with a composite line-drawing.  
Hilu, K. W. & L. A. Alice. 2001. A phylogeny of Chloridoideae (Poaceae) based on matK sequences. Syst. Bot. 26: 386–405.
Chloris and Eragrostis do not appear monophyletic, nor does Enteropogon.
Hufford, L., M. L. Moody & D. E. Soltis. 2001. A phylogenetic analysis of Hydrangeaceae based on sequences of the plastid gene matK and their combination with rbcL and morphological data. Int. J. Pl. Sci. 162: 835–846.
Any way you cut it, Hydrangea looks seriously paraphyletic, with six other genera nested among its spp.! This issue, however, is scarcely addressed, the authors being more concerned with tribal and subfamilial classification.
Jaramillo, M. A. & P. S. Manos. 2001. Phylogeny and patterns of floral diversity in the genus Piper (Piperaceae). Amer. J. Bot. 88: 706–716.
Sequence analysis of internal transcribed spacers of nuclear ribosomal DNA from 51 spp. of Piper (with ca. 1000 spp.) affirms that Pothomorphe (or is it Lepianthes?) is nested among neotropical spp. of the larger genus. Moreover, the familiar Piper auritum Kunth is a member of the Pothomorphe clade. The South American Trianaeopiper appears to be both polyphyletic and nested within Piper.
Kim, S., C.-W. Park, Y.-D. Kim & Y. Suh. 2001. Phylogenetic relationships in family Magnoliaceae inferred from ndhF sequences. Amer. J. Bot. 88: 717–728.
According to this study, involving 99 taxa representing all sections in Magnoliaceae, the future does not look bright for either Magnolia or Talauma (here accepted a priori as a subgenus of Magnolia). Both are polyphyletic, with the New World members of Talauma closely related to some New World Magnolia spp., and distant from Old World Talauma.
Kurz, H. 2000. Revision der Gattung Licaria (Lauraceae). Mitt. Inst. Allg. Bot. Hamburg 28/29: 89–221.
What to do about names in limbo? Specifically, we're talking about names for well known Costa Rican taxa that have been proposed in theses, but never effectively published. For our (Manual) purposes, this type of "ined." name poses a dilemma: we won't use it, and are reluctant to publish it (or a different one) ourselves. Resurrected suddenly and unexpectedly from protracted "ined." status is the name Licaria multinervis Holger Kurz, in unsanctioned use since it first appeared in the author's 1983 Universität Hamburg dissertation. The sp. so christened, one of 38 accepted in this neotropical genus, is locally abundant in the Turrialba region, and also occurs in the Valle de El General and Nicaragua. Five other fully treated Licaria spp. are attributed to Costa Rica: L. debilis (Mez) Kosterm. (including L. sarapiquensis Hammel), L. guatemalensis Lundell, L. excelsa Kosterm., L. misantlae (Brandegee) Kosterm. (including L. cufodontisii Kosterm.), and L. triandra (Sw.) Kosterm. None is endemic. Updating from the thesis version is detectable (e.g., L. sarapiquensis is addressed), but limited; the Costa Rican endemics Licaria brenesii W. C. Burger and L. pergamentacea W. C. Burger, both published in 1990, are merely mentioned as "species incertae sedis," with the explanation that no material was available. Omitted entirely, unless we missed something (there is no index to scientific names), are two additional, more recently published endemics: Licaria herrerae (van der Werff) Kosterm. [better known as Gamanthera herrerae van der Werff; see The Cutting Edge 1(2): 9, Apr. 1994] and L. caribaea Gómez-Laur. & Cascante [see The Cutting Edge 6(3): 7, Jul. 1999]. We find no reference to Manual co-PI Barry Hammel's "Licaria sp. A," nor to the contention that Kurz's sole Costa Rican voucher for L. guatemalensis (Holdridge 5249, US) represents L. sarapiquensis [for further information on both items, see the Flora costaricensis Lauraceae treatment (Fieldiana, Bot. n. s., 23: 1–129. 1990) by William Burger and Henk van der Werff]. Includes a full genus description, a key to the three subgenera (all here validated) and nested keys to spp. and subspp., descriptions of all infrageneric taxa, exsiccatae citations, composite range maps, line-drawings of taxa, and an index to exsiccatae. The introductory part discusses taxonomic history, morphology, classification of Licaria, wood anatomy, chemistry, distribution and ecology, and relationships to other genera. The effectively validated novelties comprise three new spp. (apart from L. multinervis) and one new subsp., in addition to the three subgenera. For the record, five of the six fully treated spp. occurring in Costa Rica are referred to subgen. Licaria, with only L. debilis in subgen. Armeniaca Holger Kurz.
Miller, J. T. & R. J. Bayer. 2001. Molecular phylogenetics of Acacia (Fabaceae: Mimosoideae) based on the chloroplast matK coding sequence and flanking trnK intron spacer regions. Amer. J. Bot. 88: 697–705.
This investigation corroborates previous work by the same authors [see The Cutting Edge 8(2): 11, Apr. 2001] in portraying Acacia as polyphyletic. Citing the enormity of the nomenclatural changes implicit in the creation of at least two new genera from Acacia (with at least 1000 spp.), together with the inadequacy of the present study (just 39 Acacia spp. were sampled), the authors wisely postpone the formalities.
Monro, A. K. 2001. Synopsis of Mesoamerican Pilea (Urticaceae), including eighteen typifications and a key to the species. Bull. Nat. Hist. Mus. London (Bot.) 31: 9–25.
This valuable precursor to the author's impending Flora mesoamericana treatment provides a key to all Mesoamerican Pilea spp., full synonymy and typology, distribution by country, and an index to exsiccatae. Twenty-seven naturally occurring spp. are attributed to Costa Rica, compared with 24 in William Burger's 1977 Flora costaricensis account (Fieldiana, Bot. 40: 218–283). Four spp are added: Pilea cornmaniae Killip (regarded by Burger as a synonym of P. auriculata Liebm.), P. fasciata Wedd., and the recently described P. conjugalis A. K. Monro [see The Cutting Edge 7(4): 5, Oct. 2000] and P. tripartita A. K. Monro [see The Cutting Edge 6(4): 7, Oct. 1999]. The name P. beguinotii Cufod., based on a Costa Rican type and used for an accepted sp. by Burger, is nowhere accounted for here (a remarkable oversight for a work of this sort). However, judging from the index to exsiccatae, we gather that it is to be considered a synonym of Pilea glabra S. Watson, together with P. quichensis sensu Burger (non Donn. Sm., according to Monro a synonym of P. mexicana Wedd., of Mexico and Guatemala). Four other names used by Burger for spp. occurring in Costa Rica become synonyms of earlier names: Pilea diversissima Killip (now P. ecboliophylla Donn. Sm.), P. donnell-smithiana Killip (now P. purulensis Donn. Sm.), P. gracilipes Killip (now P. vulcanica Liebm.), and P. ptericlada Donn. Sm. (now P. pteropodon Wedd.). Four Pilea spp. may be counted as Costa Rican endemics: P. angustifolia Killip, P. gomeziana W. C. Burger (of Cocos Island), P. pittieri Killip, and P. tilarana W. C. Burger. If the "aff." qualifications in the index to exsiccatae are any indication, several additional spp. may occur in Costa Rica, e.g., the southern Pilea latifolia Wedd. and the northern P. quercifolia Killip.
Muasya, A. M., D. A. Simpson, M. W. Chase & A. Culham. 2001. A phylogeny of Isolepis (Cyperaceae) inferred using plastid rbcL and trnL-F sequence data. Syst. Bot. 26: 342–353.
Isolepis is not monophyletic, but this conclusion does not figure to affect the two spp. occurring in Costa Rica, one of which is the generic type and is in the same clade with the other.
Neyland, R. 2001. A phylogeny inferred from large ribosomal subunit (26S) rDNA sequences suggests that Cuscuta is a derived member of Convolvulaceae. Brittonia 53: 108–115.
The title is practically an abstract unto itself, leaving us little to add. Suffice it to say that bootstrap support for monophyly of Convolvulaceae (including Cuscuta) is 91%, and that the author's conclusion is already embodied in co-PI Barry Hammel's Manual treatment of this family.
Pryer, K. M., A. R. Smith, J. S. Hunt & J.-Y. Dubuisson. 2001. RbcL data reveal two monophyletic groups of filmy ferns (Filicopsida: Hymenophyllaceae). Amer. J. Bot. 88: 1118–1130.
Hymenophyllaceae have been traditionally partitioned into two large genera, Trichomanes and Hymenophyllum. Inevitably, these have been variously carved up over the years, into as many as 42 smaller genera. The results of this study confirm the monophyly of the family, and also "provide robust support for two monophyletic groups that correspond to the two classical genera." With Alan Smith's imprimatur, we take this as gospel. So, lumpers like us can now rest more easily with the knowledge that there is no pressing need, cladistically speaking, to dismantle these very excellent, large genera.
Pupulin, F. 2001. Extending the range: a new Dracula from Costa Rica. Orchids 70: 564–567.
Dracula inexperata Pupulin is founded on a single specimen, collected along a much-frequented trail near the Río Grande de Orosi in Parque Nacional Tapantí. The new sp. is the first Central American representative of an otherwise South American sp.-group, within which its "only close relative" is the Colombian Dracula platycrater (Rchb. f.) Luer. A living plant cloned from the type is in cultivation at the Jardín Botánico Lankester, near Cartago. Illustrated with color photos from life. Our running total of new orchid spp. described from Costa Rica since the inception of this newsletter (in 1993) is now up to 165. The journal in which this paper appears was formerly known as the American Orchid Society Bulletin.
Roalson, E. H., J. T. Columbus & E. A. Friar. 2001. Phylogenetic relationships in Cariceae (Cyperaceae) based on ITS (nrDNA) and trnT-L-F (cpDNA) region sequences: assessment of subgeneric and sectional relationships in Carex with emphasis on section Acrocystis. Syst. Bot. 26: 318–341.
This work supports previous studies [see, e.g., The Cutting Edge 8(1): 10, Jan. 2001] in suggesting that Uncinia is nested within Carex (as are the remaining three genera of tribe Cariceae).
Tanaka, N. 2001. Taxonomic revision of the family Cannaceae in the New World and Asia. Makinoa n. s., 1: 1–74.
Cannaceae, with the single genus Canna, occurs naturally only in the New World. However, several spp. were introduced to the Old World tropics at an early date and have become widely naturalized there. Implying that New World workers have failed to adequately account for early names based on Old World material, the author (with very limited field experience in the Neotropics) takes it upon himself to settle the score. Whereas only 9 or 10 spp. of Canna have been accepted by most recent authors, 19 are recognized here, along with 7 infraspecific taxa. But, for whatever reason, the author did not study material from MO, US, or any Costa Rican institution, and thus attributes just three spp. to Costa Rica, one less than Paul Maas's Manual treatment of Cannaceae. Overlooked is Canna jaegeriana Urb.; the other three Canna spp. treated by Maas are accounted for, albeit with some nomenclatural modifications. While Maas does not utilize infraspecific categories, Tanaka cites Costa Rican vouchers for three vars. of Canna indica L. alone: var. indica, var. maculata Hook., and var. sanctae-rosae (Kraenzl.) N. Tanaka, comb. nov. These vars. are neither keyed nor well characterized. New World material of Canna glauca L. would have to sport the nominate varietal apellation, if one accepts as distinct C. glauca var. siamensis (Kraenzl.) N. Tanaka, occurring widely in South and Southeast Asia (where it is supposed to have differentiated within the past few centuries). Finally, Canna tuerckheimii Kraenzl., heretofore accepted for a sp. occurring in Costa Rica, is treated by Tanaka as a synonym of C. latifolia Mill. The horticultural Canna generalis L. H. Bailey, though spoken of at one point as though it were an accepted sp., is not otherwise mentioned. Includes a brief generic description, a key to spp., full synonymy, rather brief sp. descriptions, meagre specimen citations, brief discussions, sections on natural hybrids and doubtful spp., and an index to sp. epithets (but no index to exsiccatae). The introduction touches on taxonomic history and various aspects of morphology, with some color photos and pollen micrographs, and a cladogram of the Canna indica complex. Two new taxon names and three new combinations are validated, all at varietal rank, and we count 18 new lectotypifications. However, many dozens of names, mostly heterotypic and at sp. rank, are listed in synonymy or in the "Doubtful Species" section with no typological data whatsoever, suggesting that much work remains to be done.
Taylor, C. M. 2001. Rubiacearum americanarum magna hama pars III. Five new species and a new subspecies of Coussarea (Coussareae) from Central America and Colombia. Novon 11: 135–142.
The new subsp. and two of the new spp. occur in Costa Rica, and all are endemic or (in the case of the subsp.) virtually so. Coussarea duplex C. M. Taylor, most similar to C. talamancana Standl., is known only from the Atlantic slope of the Cordillera de Talamanca north from Fila Matama. From the Golfo Dulce region (especially the Península de Osa) hails Coussarea grandifructa C. M. Taylor, compared with C. psychotrioides C. M. Taylor & Hammel of northeastern Costa Rica. Lastly, Coussarea loftonii (Dwyer & M. V. Hayden) Dwyer may be added to the Costa Rican flora by virtue of its newly described subsp. occidentalis C. M. Taylor. The latter is known principally from the Golfo Dulce region (mostly on the Península de Osa), with a single collection from near Bribrí, and another from adjacent Prov. Bocas del Toro, Panama. All the new taxa are illustrated with line-drawings. Incidentally, the Latin title of this series is translated as "A big bucket of American Rubiaceae."
——. 2001. Rubiacearum americanarum magna hama pars IV: new taxa and combinations in Elaeagia and Warszewiczia (Rondeletieae) from Mexico, Central America, and Colombia. Novon 11: 274–279.
Elaeagia glossostipula C. M. Taylor, mainly of western Panama, is known by two Costa Rican collections, one from the the Atlantic slope of the Cordillera de Talamanca and the other from Fila Chonta, on the Pacific slope. The new sp. is illustrated, and compared with E. karstenii Standl. The new combination Warszewiczia uxpanapensis (Lorence) C. M. Taylor, based on Elaeagia uxpanapensis Lorence, pertains to a sp. of sporadic occurrence in southern Mexico, Costa Rica, and Colombia. Populations in the latter two countries differ from Mexican plants in having larger fruits, and are thus segregated as W. u. subsp. meridionalis C. M. Taylor, subsp. nov. (not illustrated).
—— & D. H. Lorence. 2001. Rubiacearum americanarum magna hama pars II. New and newly circumscribed taxa of Guettarda (Guettardeae). Novon 11: 127–134.
A reappraisal of the Guettarda crispiflora Vahl complex accepts five subspp., of which three (all comb. and stat. nov.) are attributed to Costa Rica. But in the process, we lose at least two full spp. Guettardia crispiflora subsp. cobanensis (Donn. Sm.) C. M. Taylor and subsp. poasana (Standl.) C. M. Taylor are said to occur in northern Costa Rica, where the latter (which we have known as G. poasana Standl.) is endemic. Intergrading with subsp. poasana, and prevailing from southern Costa Rica to Bolivia, is subsp. sabiceoides (Standl.) C. M. Taylor, heretofore known to us as Guettarda conferta Benth. (newly synonymized). A key to the subspp. of G. crispiflora emphasizes details of pubescence, which are also illustarated with line drawings. No specimens are cited (except types).
Torres González, A. M., O. Toro Chica & D. G. Debouck. 2001. Phaseolus talamancensis, a new wild bean species (Leguminosae, Phaseolinae) from montane forests of eastern Costa Rica. Novon 11: 280–286.
Talk about sweet relief (see under Kurz, above), here is an "ined." name that has been kicking around in our data-base for about 15 years now, ever since co-author Daniel Debouck handed us the annotated "type" (turned out to be a paratype) back when we were still headquartered in the Museo Nacional. Phaseolus talamancensis Debouck & Torres Gonz. (Fabaceae/Papilionoideae) is still known (at least to its authors) by just two collections, one from each versant of the Cordillera de Talamanca, at 1800–1900 m elevation. The new sp. is compared most carefully with the Guatemalan P. macrolepis Piper, as which it has been (mis)identified. Features a compositie line-drawing, black-and-white photos of seeds and a living plant, and SEM micrographs of pollen and style/stigma.
Ulloa Ulloa, C. & P. M. Jørgensen. 2001. Billia rosea: the correct name for Billia columbiana. Novon 11: 287.
The name Billia columbiana Planch. & Linden (Hippocastanaceae), in use for "almost 140 years," suddenly goes down in flames. Turns out that the earlier Putzeysia rosea Planch. & Linden is valid, even though the monotypic Putzeysia Planch. & Linden was stillborn as a later generic homonym. This detail, overlooked for so long, is here rectified with the new combination Billia rosea (Planch. & Linden) C. Ulloa & P. M. Jørg.
Weigend, M. 2001. Four new combinations in the genus Nasa (Loasaceae). Novon 11: 153–154.
Loasa speciosa Donn. Sm., of Costa Rica and Panama, is lectotypified, and effectively reborn as Nasa speciosa (Donn. Sm.) Weigend. The basionym is incorrectly cited, although this (we believe) does not invalidate the combination. For further information on Nasa, see The Cutting Edge 7(2): 6 (Apr. 2000).


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

Technical Support