Family List (MO) |
Family List (INBio) | Cutting Edge
Draft Treatments |
The Cutting Edge
Volume XXVI, Number 3, July 2019
News and Notes | Leaps and Bounds | Germane Literature |
Brito, E. S., L. F. G. Lima, J. F. A. Baumgratz & P. L. Viana. 2019. Lectotypification of names in Henriettea (Melastomataceae, Henrietteeae). Phytotaxa 405: 106–112.
Of the 13 names lectotypified in this paper, just one applies to a sp. occurring in Costa Rica: Melastoma fasciculare Sw., the basionym of Henriettella fascicularis (Sw.) C. Wright (the name accepted in the Manual) and Henriettea fascicularis (Sw.) M. Gómez [the name accepted nowadays; see under "Penneys," this column, in The Cutting Edge 18(1), Jan. 2011]. The application of the foregoing names is not affected.
Campbell, K. C. St. E., P. Acevedo-Rodríguez, Z. Acosta, T. Commock, A. R. L. Lourenço, B. Peguero, K. Samra & E. J. Lucas. 2019. New combinations and new names in Myrcia for West Indian species previously included in Calyptranthes (Myrtaceae). Phytotaxa 406: 143–156.
Although its title gives no indication, this paper also provides new combinations or names in Myrcia for 15 continental spp. that were overlooked in a prior paper involving two of the same authors. In our review of that paper [see under "Lourenço," this column, in The Cutting Edge 26(1), Jan. 2019], we noted the following apparent omissions for taxa occurring in Costa Rica: Calyptranthes chytraculia (L.) Sw. var. americana McVaugh, C. guanacastensis N. Zamora, S. Y. Kim & R. Espinoza, and C. hylobates Standl. ex Amshoff. Only the last of those deficiencies is remedied here, with the new combination Myrcia hylobates (Standl. ex Amshoff) E. Lucas & K. Samra. Slowly but surely...
Cßrdenas, G. G., S. Lehtonen & H. Tuomisto. 2019. Taxonomy and evolutionary history of the neotropical fern genus Salpichlaena (Blechnaceae). Blumea 64: 1–22.
Back in the day, we maintained quite adamantly that there were two distinct spp. of Salpichlaena in Costa Rica: the common, lowland S. volubilis (Kaulf.) J. Sm. and an undescribed, mid-elevation sp. with (among other things) larger leaves. The latter became Salpichlaena thalassica Grayum & R. C. Moran. However, some subsequent authors [see especially The Cutting Edge 15(4): 3–4, Oct. 2008] have disrespected our new sp. by synonymizing it under S. volubilis. It turns out that, at least according to this latest contribution, everyone was right, somehow or other: "there are two distinct species" in Costa Rica and Panama, these authors agree, yet S. thalassica is conspecific with S. volubilis! So how does this vindicate our original view? Under the new system of these authors, the taxon denoted by Salpichaena thalassica survives as S. volubilis subsp. thalassica (Grayum & R. C. Moran) G. G. Cárdenas & Tuomisto (comb. nov.), the only subsp. of S. volubilis that occurs in Central America (the authors also cite specimens from Colombia and Ecuador); the other three are restricted to South America and the Lesser Antilles (with the autonymic subsp. found only in southeastern Brazil). The "common, lowland" sp. in our region (and ranging southward to Bolivia, the Guayanas, and Paraguay) long known (e.g., at the Estación Biológica La Selva) as S. volubilis is actually (according to this study) a different and undescribed sp., christened here as Salpichlaena papyrus G. G. Cárdenas, Tuomisto & Lehtonen (the epithet refering to its scales, "which have the distinctive appearance of crumpled paper"). Who are we to argue? Our main argument (that there are two different Salpichlaena spp. in Costa Rica) is upheld, even if the names have changed. The authors' molecular analyses (published here) support their separation of S. papyrus from S. volubilis, and do not refute their classification of S. thalassica (though other options are plausible). Features synonymy, typology, and technical descriptions at all ranks, a key (non-indented) to spp. (four are recognized), distribution summaries, specimen citations, and notes for all spp. and subspp., a distribution map, a section on excluded names, and an index to exsiccatae (but no indices to names). There is no key to the subspp. of S. volubilis, but a tabular comparison fulfills the same function. The introductory part addresses taxonomic history, molecular phylogeny, and morhology. All of the taxa are depicted in color photos and/or composite line drawings.
Chiron, G. R. & D. L. Szlachetko. 2018. Note on the Verapazia vs. Marsupiara (Pleurothallidinae, Orchidaceae) issue, with some new combinations. Richardiana n. s., 2: 172–174.
What in blazes is "Marsupiara," mentioned nowhere else in this article? Surely they mean Muscarella Luer which, the authors conclude "is of course a mere synonym of Verapazia Archila." They proceed to trot out five new combinations under the latter genus name, including Verapazia segregatifolia (Ames & C. Schweinf.) Chiron & Szlach., based on Pleurothallis segregatifolia Ames & C. Schweinf. (type from Costa Rica). However, we have good reason to believe that these authors have been hoodwinked, and that the final word has yet to be spoken. Stay tuned. In the meantime, we will stick with Muscarella [see under "Karremans," this column, in The Cutting Edge 23(4), Oct. 2016].
Christenhusz, M. J. M., L. Bangiolo, M. W. Chase, M. F. Fay, C. Husby, M. Witkus & J. Viruel. 2019. Phylogenetics, classification and typification of extant horsetails (Equisetum, Equisetaceae). Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 189: 311–352.
Equisetum bogotense Kunth, by far the commonest of the three Equisetum spp. in Costa Rica, is strongly supported as "sister to the rest of the genus," and thus becomes the basis for a new (third) subgenus, a name for which is here duly validated. Beyond our scope. The bulk of this paper is a nomenclator, enumerating (by subgenus) the 18 Equisetum spp. accepted by the authors, with full synonymy and typology. Two new combinations are validated and 77 names typified, in one way or another; the accepted names and/or synonyms of all three Costa Rican spp. are subjected to these new typifications, but prevailing usages remain intact.
Cornejo, X. 2018. Notes on the nomenclature of Neotropical Capparaceae: an answer to Global Flora. Harvard Pap. Bot. 23: 179–185.
The author of this paper, a key player in the splitting of neotropical Capparis, unsurprisingly rejects the recent GLOVAP initiative [see under "Christenhusz," this column, in The Cutting Edge 25(2), Apr. 2018] to reunite all the Capparis segregates (together with Morisonia and Steriphoma) in a single genus, under the name Morisonia. While the author raises some valid objections, we must take issue with his point that the sensu lato application of Morisonia takes us back "to the same old problem of a single generic name as was Capparis s.l. in the Neotropics." How was that a problem? We never had a problem with it, nor did anyone else over the course of many decades. Anyhow, the author seizes the opportunity to fortify his own position by enumerating all the accepted sp. and subsp. names (with basionyms and synonyms) in the system preferred by him.
Creed, J. C. & J. Samper-Villarreal. 2019. Clarification of the nomenclature of the seagrass Halophila baillonii Ascherson. Aquatic Bot. 154: 42–44.
In the Manual Hydrocharitaceae treatment (2003) by Garrett E. Crow, the binomial of the title was accepted as having been validated in an 1874 publication in which the epithet was spelled "baillonis," which spelling was accordingly adopted in the Manual (and prevails in TROPICOS). The present "clarification" hinges on two arguments: first, that the 1874 publication lacks a "description, diagnosis or illustration," resulting in a nomen nudum, and that the first true validation of the name (in 1875) used the spelling baillonii; and second, that, according to the Code, "the correct spelling for this species should be -ii, from the latinazation [sic] of the last name of a man ending in a consonant." We reject both of these arguments. These authors themselves define "diagnosis" (quoting the Code) as "a statement of that which in the opinion of its author distinguishes the taxon from other taxa." The 1874 publication contains the following statement: "As to the Halophila, there can be no doubt that the flowers, unknown to me hitherto, will prove it to be a congener of H. ovalis, from which, however, it differs specifically in its serrulate leaves [emphasis ours]." What are we missing? And as to correct latinization: "baillonis" embodies a so-called third-declension ending, as in bellonis, brunonis, chamissonis, concepcionis, hugonis, leonis, munronis, and richardsonis, all epithets in current use; endings of this sort are "discouraged" (for some unrevealed reason) by the Code (see Recs. 60C.1 and 60C.2)—but so what? The authors may be able to fashion some other argument (e.g., that the name was not yet accepted by its author in the 1874 publication, or was proposed in anticipation?), but the current ones do not cut it for us. We will concede one thing, however: the "en Dickie" of the Manual should be corrected to "en Hook. f." Dickie was apparently responsible only for a section in Hooker's paper dealing with algae, which ends immediately prior to the Halophila passages.
Deanna, R., A. Orejuela & G. E. Barboza. 2018. An updated phylogeny of Deprea (Solanaceae) with a new species from Colombia: interspecific relationships, conservation assessment, and a key for Colombian species. Syst. Biodivers. 16: 680–691.
The topics enumerated in the title are mostly of little interest to us, with the possible exception of "interspecific relationships," under which perhaps falls the one item that is relevant to Costa Rica floristics. Readers of this rag may recall that the sp. treated in Manual Vol. 8 (2015) as Larnax sylvarum (Standl. & C. V. Morton) N. W. Sawyer was subsequently returned to Deprea [see under "Deanna," this column, in The Cutting Edge 22(3), Jul. 2015]. In the present paper, it is concluded that the Colombian Larnax sylvarum subsp. novogranatensis N. W. Sawyer is in fact a synonym of the likewise South American Deprea glabra (Standl.) Hunz. This means that our Costa Rican populations of Deprea sylvarum (Standl. & C. V. Morton) Hunz. need not be qualified as belonging to the autonymic subsp., and that "O Col." should be deleted from the geographic range of Larnax sylvarum in the Manual.
Ferm, J. 2019. A preliminary phylogeny of Zapoteca (Fabaceae: Caesalpinioideae: Mimosoid clade). Pl. Syst. Evol. 305: 341–352.
The genus Zapoteca is confirmed as monophyletic (though sister, it would appear, to Calliandra). Of the taxa occurring in Costa Rica, Zapoteca portoricensis (Jacq.) H. M. Hern. subsp. portoricensis is also shown to be monophyletic. The author states that "the other subspecific taxa of Z. formosa and Z. portoricensis are not supported as monophyletic"; that statement would include Zapoteca formosa (Kunth) H. M. Hern. subsp. formosa, the sole Costa Rican representative of its sp., but Z. portoricensis subsp. flavida (Urb.) H. M. Hern. (also in Costa Rica) was not a part of this study. Whatever.
Karremans, A. P., D. Aguilar-Sandí, M. Artavia-Solís, M. Cedeño-Fonseca, I. F. Chinchilla, K. Gil-Amaya, G. Rojas-Alvarado, N. Solano-Guindon & J. Villegas-Murillo. 2019.
Nomenclatural notes in the Pleurothallidinae (Orchidaceae): miscellaneous. Phytotaxa 406: 259–270.
Issues "detected during the preparation of a complete catalogue of taxa published within Pleurothallidinae" result in numerous nomenclatural and taxonomic changes, though only a few are relevant to Costa Rica. Masdevallia driesseniana Luer & Sijm and M. rostriflora Luer & Sijm, both recently described from near (if not in!) Costa Rica [see under "Luer," this column, in The Cutting Edge 25(4), Oct. 2018], are here synonymized under Masdevallia smallmaniana Luer (type from Ecuador). The last-mentioned sp. itself "most likely represents a peloric form" of the locally sympatric Masdevallia cupularis Rchb. f., but the two are maintained provisionally as distinct "because of their striking floral differences pending genetic studies." Prior coinage of nomina nova without due consideration of available synonyms necessitates (at least in part) the validation of new combinations in Stelis for two spp. formerly (e.g., in the Manual) included in Pleurothallis: thus, the former Pleurothallis dolichopus Schltr. becomes Stelis poasensis (Ames) Chinchilla & Karremans [supplanting S. lamprophylla Karremans; see under "Mabberley," this column, in The Cutting Edge 25(2), Apr. 2018, for further information], while the former P. floribunda Poepp. & Endl. becomes S. pittieri (Schltr.) Rojas-Alv. & Karremans (supplanting S. vulgaris Pridgeon & Chase).
Knapp, S., G. E. Barboza, L. Bohs & T. Särkinen. 2019. A revision of the Morelloid Clade of Solanum L. (Solanaceae) in North and Central America and the Caribbean. PhytoKeys 123: 1–144.
This is the second installment of a three-part monograph of the so-called "Morelloid Clade," the first having treated the Old World spp., the third (yet to be published) the South American ones. The clade in question (one of "10 robustly supported major clades within Solanum") comprises 74 spp. (including the generic type) characterized by a "non-spiny herbaceous and suffrutescent" habit and "simple or branched hairs with or without glandular tips and inflorescences usually arising from the internodes." Eighteen spp. are recognized in the region specified in the title, 10 of which are regarded as native and eight as "putatively naturalised, introduced and/or invasive." With respect to the Manual treatment of Solanum (2015) by the third author of this paper, there are no major changes to report: S. americanum Mill., S. macrotonum Bitter, and S. nigrescens M. Martens & Galeotti (all regarded as native) remain the only Costa Rican members of this group. Features synonymy and typology, technical descriptions, distribution summaries, and discussions at all levels, assorted artificial and regional keys (all non-indented) to spp., conservation assessments, distribution maps, and sections on "Doubtful species" and invalidly published names. Specimen citations are deferred to "Supplementary materials," and therer are no indices. The generous introductory part (with various tables and illustrations) addresses taxonomic history, relationships, morphology, karyology, biology and natural history (including distribution), conservation status, uses, and sp. concepts. Every sp. is illustrated with color photos from life and (in most case) a composite line drawing.
Monteiro, F. K. S., A. S. Pinto, F. C. P. Costa & J. I. M. Melo. 2018. A taxonomic synopsis of Acathaceae Juss. native to Paraíba State, Brazil. Harvard Pap. Bot. 23: 189–204.
Neotypes are designated in a perfunctory fashion for Hygrophila costata Nees & T. Nees and Justicia imbricata Vahl [the basionym of Elytraria imbricata (Vahl) Pers.], with no evident effects on the application of those names. Moving right along...
Ormerod, P. 2018. Studies in Fernandezia Ruiz & Pav. (Orchidaceae: Oncidiinae). Harvard Pap. Bot. 23: 217–268.
There is very little here of interest to us. The author found it "necessary to propose several new taxa" (45 spp. and 11 vars.!), but none of these is Costa Rican (or even Central American). A section classification is proposed, with six sections (mostly new), but we don't care about that either. It seems that the only item germane to Costa Rican floristics is the author's treatment of Fernandezia crystallina (Lindl.) M. W. Chase (Pachyphyllum crystallinum Lindl. of the Manual), which includes as a synonym Pachyphyllum pasti Rchb. f. (a mere "sensu" synonym according to the Manual), thus extending the range of the sp. southward to Bolivia.
Pupulin, F. & D. Bogarín. 2018. Orchids of paradise. Exploring the lower Talamanca seashores of Costa Rica, the "Coast of Plenty" of Columbus. Orchids (West Palm Beach) 87: 846–857.
This semi-popular (and copiously illustrated) account distills the results of six years of orchid exploration in the Baja Talamanca region (especially Parque Nacional Cahuita), for which an Orchidaceae checklist accounting for 51 spp. in 33 genera is provided. The two most frequent orchid spp. in the area (based on sampling in 170 plots established by the authors) were Catasetum maculatum Kunth and Vanilla planifolia Andrews. Two new country records are documented: Kefersteina alata Pupulin (previously known only from Prov. Bocas del Toro, Panama) and Vanilla cf. mexicana Mill. The authors also present a tabularized comparison of the orchid floras of the Baja Talamanca and "Central Pacific" regions of Costa Rica, resulting in the proclamation "These are two different countries!" Just nine orchid spp. are common to both regions, although, in many genera, "unique 'sister' species" are shared. Not surprisingly, the differences in floristic composition between the two slopes appear to diminish with increasing altitude.
Radosavljevic, A. 2019. The rise of Cynometra (Leguminosae) and the fall of Maniltoa: a generic re-circumscription and the addition of 4 new species. PhytoKeys 127: 1–37.
First, read our review [under "Radosavljevic," this column, in The Cutting Edge 25(2), Apr. 2018] of the phylogenetic study that prompted these taxonomic changes. In the present paper, new combinations are validated in Cynometra for the spp. (all paleotropical) formerly included in Maniltoa; however, "a treatment that proposes a new genus" for most African spp. formerly included in Cynometra is still "in preparation." All four new spp. are neotropical, but none occurs in Costa Rica (though one is from eastern Panama). In summary: no substantive changes are in order for the Cynometra account in Manual Vol. 5 (2010).
Rossetto, E. F. S., A. D. Faria, P. M. Ruas, C. F. Ruas, N. A. Douglas & J. E. L. S. Ribeiro. 2019. Clarifying generic delimitation in Nyctaginaceae tribe Pisonieae after more than a century of taxonomic confusion. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 189: 378–396.
The molecular analyses of this study portray Guapira, Neea, and Pisonia all as polyphyletic, with spp. of the first two genera intermingled promiscuously in the same few clades. The authors conclude that Guapira and Neea should be combined under the former name (which is older, though presently applied to somewhat fewer spp.). They suggest that Pisonia should be downsized to exclude two groups of spp. from the Asian tropics and the Australasian and Indo-Pacific regions (no Costa Rican spp. would be affected). However, no formal taxonomic changes are implemented in this paper.
Santamaría-Aguilar, D. & A. K. Monro. 2019. Compendium of Freziera (Pentaphylacaceae) of South America including eleven new species and the typification of 22 names. Kew Bull. 74(14): 1–47.
Clearly a rich source of information where Andean South America is concerned, this exemplary contribution is of only passing interest to us, by virtue of the lectotypifications of four names applicable to spp. that reach Costa Rica. These are: Freziera calophylla Triana & Planch., F. candicans Tul., and F. grisebachii Krug & Urb., all accepted names, plus F. macrophylla Tul., a questionable (according to this work) synonym of F. candicans. There are no changes in the usages of any of these names; that said, it seems peculiar that the designation of a lectotype for F. macrophylla (which is not discussed) apparently failed to clarify its identity.
Silva, O. L. M., P. Dias, R. Riina & I. Cordeiro. 2019. Redelimitation of Astraea lobata (Euphorbiaceae) and other taxonomic rearrangements in Astraea. Phytotaxa 404: 127–136.
Two new combinations, Astraea surinamensis (Miq.) O. L. M. Silva & Cordeiro and A. trilobata (Forssk.) O. L. M. Silva & Cordeiro, are validated for spp. newly segregated from Astraea lobata (L.) Klotzsch sensu lato—i.e., in the sense of the Manual Euphorbiaceae treatment (2010). However, the changes for the Manual are minimal; as far as we can tell, A. lobata remains the correct name for Costa Rican material (though A. surinamensis has been collected as near as Panama). That said, "Guayanas" (we think) and "O África" should be deleted from the Manual distribution statement of A. lobata, and "introd. India" added at the end. The three spp. in question are compared in a table. None of the other "taxonomic rearrangements" is of concern to us.
Silva, T. S. & J. I. M. Melo. 2019. New synonym, new combination and typifications in Varronia (Cordiaceae, Boraginales). Phytotaxa 411: 293–300.
The new synonym and new combination are tangential to our interests, but two of the names typified are accepted for spp. occurring in Costa Rica: Varronia curassavica Jacq. (both lecto- and epitypified) and V. globosa Jacq. (lectotypified). As far as we can tell, the applications of those names are not affected.
Sylvester, S. P., R. J. Soreng, W. J. Bravo-Pedraza, L. E. Cuta-Alarcon, D. Giraldo-Cañas, J. Aguilar-Cano & P. M. Peterson. 2019. Páramo Calamagrostis s.l. (Poaceae): an updated list and key to the species known or likely to occur in páramos of NW South America and southern Central America including two new species, one new variety and five new records for Colombia. PhytoKeys 122: 29–78.
"Calamagrostis s.l." of this paper includes a total of 54 spp. in the study region described in the title. Of these, 47 spp. belong in Calamagrostis as "currently circumscribed," while the remaining seven were "recently transferred to Deschampsia" (too recently for this paper to have been completely revamped, we gather). The Manual Poaceae chapter (2003) by Francisco Morales treated three spp. of Calamagrostis [C. intermedia (J. Presl) Steud., C. nuda (Pilg.) Pilg., and C. pittieri Hack.], plus Deschampsia flexuosa (L.) Trin. The last-named sp. has since been transferred to the genus Avenella [see The Cutting Edge 14(2): 4, Apr. 2007], hence does not figure into the present account. The "updated list" actually comprises a very small part (just three pages) of this paper, but yields the most useful information for our purposes. It turns out that two of the three Costa Rican representatives of Calamagrostis have suffered name changes: C. intermedia remains in place, but C. nuda has been subsumed under C. bogotensis (Pilg.) Pilg., while C. pittieri bows to C. planifolia (Kunth) Trin. ex Steud. The latter synonymization is effected in this paper, while the former was revealed in a couple of those massive grass catalogues that we have done a poor job of monitoring. Calamagrostis pittieri was believed (at the time the Manual treatment was published) to be a Costa Rica endemic, but that status has since been lost; now, the geographic range of C. planifolia can be expressed (in Manualese) as "CR, Col.–Bol. y Ven." A final surprise in the checklist is the attribution of a fourth Calamagrostis sp., C. rigida (Kunth) Trin. ex Steud., to Costa Rica; however, looking more closely, we see that the basis for this assertion is highly unreliable, and find no other supporting evidence. A key (horrifically non-indented) to the 54 listed spp. is provided (with a Spanish version appended electronically).
Thureborn, O., S. G. Razafimandimbison, N. Wikstr÷m, A. Khodabandeh & C. Rydin. 2019. Phylogeny of Anthospermae of the coffee family inferred using clock and nonclock models. Int. J. Pl. Sci. 180: 386–402.
Some good news here for Nertera, the only genus in the titular tribe that occurs in Costa Rica. The Manual account of Nertera by Charlotte M. Taylor (MO) dismissed a prior classification of that taxon as a section of the large, Indo-Pacific genus Coprosma, a threat (if it ever was one) that is here largely defused. A more pressing problem (that does not concern us) is that Coprosma (exclusive of Nertera) is polyphyletic. Nertera is indeed confirmed as sister to the clade that harbors the type sp. of Coprosma, which allows but does not mandate a merger of the two genera; these authors seem content with the status quo, noting that "the nine species of Nertera are morphologically homogeneous and distinct from Coprosma s.s. by their bisexual flowers and herbaceous habit."
Van der Werff, H. 2019. A new species and new combinations of Neotropical Cinnamomum. Novon 27: 137–139.
Confusion and discord prevail in Lauraceae. In a recent paper [see under "Rohde," this column, in The Cutting Edge 25(1), Jan. 2018], all the neotropical spp. of Cinnamomum (with 4-locular stamens) were transferred, on cladistic grounds, to Aiouea (otherwise with 2-locular stamens). However, the present author "disagree[s] with this" (he does not elaborate) and "prefer[s] to leave the 4-locular species in Cinnamomum." To that end, he validates six new combinations in Cinnamomum for spp. described under Aiouea in the previous paper. One of these, Cinnamomum paratriplinerve (Lorea-Hern.) van der Werff, applies to a somewhat dubious entity endemic to Costa Rica [though subsumed under C. tonduzii (Mez) Kosterm. in the Manual Lauraceae treatment (2007)]. The new sp. is Ecuadorean.