Lytocaryum, Including a New Species from Bahia, Brazil
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
PALMS Noblick & Lorenzi: Lytocaryum Vol. 54(1) 2010 LARRY R. NOBLICK Lytocaryum, Montgomery Botanical Center 11901 Old Cutler Road Miami, FL 33156, USA Including a [email protected] New Species AND HARRI LORENZI from Bahia, Instituto Plantarum de Estudos da Flora Av. Brasil, 2000 Brazil Nova Odessa, Sao Paulo 13460-000, Brazil 1. Lytocaryum weddellianum, a popular cultivated palm. Photo by H. Lorenzi. With its gracefully spreading, delicate-looking, pinnate foliage, Lytocaryum is a very attractive genus. The glossy dark green foliage with the contrasting silvery, ashy gray or brownish undersides is visually very appealing. Lytocaryum weddellianum (Fig. 1) has been cultivated for years as an indoor plant. Lytocaryum is native to southeastern Brazil. Currently there are only two recognized species: L. weddellianum and L. hoehnei (Fig. 2). This paper will demonstrate that there should be four recognized species, including a species described here for the first time, L. itapebiensis. PALMS 54(1): 5–17 5 PALMS Noblick & Lorenzi: Lytocaryum Vol. 54(1) 2010 What Lytocaryum species have in common History of the Genus Lytocaryum palms have a solitary, columnar or In 1871, Hermann Wendland described the rarely acaulescent stem and the above ground first species as Cocos weddelliana. Wendland stems are usually rough, covered with wrote that “It was first discovered by Dr. persistent leaf sheath remnants. Leaves are Weddell [Hugh Algernon Weddell (1819– pinnate, with closely evenly (regularly) spaced 1877)] in 1831, on the southern slopes of the leaflets that are arranged in nearly the same Sierra dos Órgãos, in Brazil, and subsequently plane, dark glossy green above with silvery by Riedel in 1832, in woods near Macahé gray or pale brownish pubescence beneath. [Macaé].” However, it is more likely that The inflorescence is borne among the leaves Weddell collected it much later (ca. 1843), and branched to one order. Like most Arecoids, when he was selected to join the scientific flowers are unisexual and borne in triads (one expedition of the naturalist, Comte F. de female flower flanked by two males) near the Castelnau (1810–1880) to South America. base of the primary branches and dyads (two Weddell would have only been 12 years old in males) or single male flowers near the apices 1831. In the same paper Wendland further of the branches. Fruits are ovoid to ellipsoid writes “It was introduced to the Belgium with the rather uncommon character of the Gardens at the beginning of the last epicarp and mesocarp usually splitting decennium [ca. 1860], by Mr. Louis Van Houte, (dehiscing) along several vertical sutures, of Ghent, and some years afterwards was exposing the endocarp beneath. Often imported by Mr. Linden, of Brussels, and described as splitting into two or three sections distributed under the name of Leopoldinia (Fig. 3), the outer layers of fruit can split into pulchra, a genus with which it has nothing more than just three sections (Fig. 9). The whatever to do. At still a later date it appeared endocarp or nut is very thin and fragile. For a under the name of Glaziova elegantissima. I am more detailed description of the genus one informed that Martius considered it as should consult Dransfield et al. (2008). constituting a new genus and that to him the 2 (left). Lytocaryum hoehnei plant in habitat, a high altitude, rainforest palm from São Paulo. 3 (right). Lytocaryum hoehnei infructescence showing splitting of the epicarp and mesocarp layers into 2 or 3 sections. Photos by H. Lorenzi. 6 PALMS Noblick & Lorenzi: Lytocaryum Vol. 54(1) 2010 name Glaziova is to be referred, but I can see and described many plants. In 1891, Kuntze no difference between it and Cocos.” By developed his own controversial nomen- mentioning the name G. elegantissima in this clatural system and attempted unsuccessfully 1871 paper, Wendland effectively published to transfer all palms then in the genus Cocos the name as a synonym. Drude (1881) L. to the genus Calappa Rumpf, thus creating redescribed the very same species under the the names Calappa weddelliana and C. insignis. name of Glaziova martiana, but he listed Cocos In 1916, Beccari described a variety cinerea of weddelliana as a synonym without a C. weddelliana that differed from var. description, unaware that Wendland actually weddelliana by unique ashy gray (cinereus) had described it in that earlier 1871 indument on the leaflets, but this variety was publication. By doing so, Drude automatically later rejected by Glassman (1987) as both taxa invalidated his own name and any other name had this characteristic. Another variety was based on G. martiana. In addition, the generic described from horticulture by Sander. Sander name Glaziova had already been used earlier by selected seedlings with very narrow leaflets in Bureau in 1868 as a genus in the Bignoniaceae a nursery of Pynaert Van Gurt of Ghent and family, giving that use of the name priority. obtained a certificate from the Royal Carl Kuntze, a wealthy businessman, retired Horticulture Society for var. pinaetii. This early and devoted himself to the study of variety was also rejected by Glassman (1987) botany. He traveled the world and collected because “palms vary considerably under 5. A. Seeds of Lytocaryum hoehnei with ruminate endosperm and non-basal endocarp pores. B. Seeds of Lytocaryum insigne with homogeneous endosperm and basal pores. C. Seeds of Lytocaryum weddellianum with homogeneous endosperm and basal pores. Grid = 0.5 cm. Photos by H. Lorenzi. A B C 7 PALMS Noblick & Lorenzi: Lytocaryum Vol. 54(1) 2010 cultivation,” but he indicated a need for Lytocaryum Toledo, Arq. Bot. Estado São further study. Paulo, n.s., f.m., 2: 6. 1944. A second species, Cocos insignis, first appeared Glaziova Mart. ex H.Wendl., Florist & Pomol. in print in Wendland in Kerchove (1878). The 1871: 116. 1871. name was later validated by Drude (1881) Microcoelum Burret & Potztal, Willdenowia 1: under the genus Glaziova, but he thought the 378. 1956. name came from a cultivated origin and named it Cocos insignis Hort., unaware of The four species, from SE Brazil, can be Wendland’s earlier mention of the name. In differentiated by the following key: 1916, Beccari transferred the species to the Key to Lytocaryum genus Syagrus, creating Syagrus insignis. 1a. Acaulescent palm, inflorescence far In 1937, Max Burret described a third species, exceeding the length of the peduncular Syagrus hoehnei, from collections made in the bract, rachillae lying in ± one plane, fruit state of São Paulo by Frederico Carlos Hoehne, red, 1.2–1.5 cm long and the fleshy part a Brazilian botanist, and some collections (epicarp and mesocarp) not dehiscing made by A. Gehrt. Another Brazilian botanist, (splitting) by vertical sutures at maturity Joaquin Franco de Toledo (1944) later . L. itapebiensis transferred all three species to his new genus, 1b. Aborescent palm1–10 m tall, inflorescence Lytocaryum, because he noticed that S. hoehnei, shorter than the peduncular bract, S. weddelliana and S. insignis had a number of rachillae spiralled around the rachis in characters in common: leaflets dark green with multiple planes, fruit greenish brown to abundant silvery gray to pale brown yellowish green at maturity, 1.7–3.3 cm pubescence beneath, epicarp and mesocarp long and fleshy part dehiscing by vertical splitting along vertical sutures and thin, fragile sutures at maturity (Figs. 2, 9) . 2. endocarps. In 1956, Burret and Potztal found that L. hoehnei had ruminate endosperm as 2a. Trees to 5 m tall and to 10 cm in diameter, opposed to the homogeneous endosperm fruit 3–3.3 cm long, endocarp pores not observed in the other two (Fig. 4) and therefore basal but slightly above the base, and they retained L. hoehnei in Lytocaryum, while endosperm ruminate (Fig. 4A) (São Paulo) transferring the other two species to their new . L. hoehnei genus, Microcoelum. Glassman (1972) made an 2b. Tree to 3–10 m tall and to 6–10 cm in unpopular move by resurrecting all of the diameter, fruit 1.7–2.3 cm long, endocarp species in the genus Syagrus. He had difficulty pores basal and endosperm homogeneous in getting his revision of the genus Syagrus (Fig. 4B, C ) (Rio de Janeiro, Espirito Santo) accepted for publication with its broader . 3. concept for the genus. So in 1987, he reluctantly restored all to their former genera 3a. Tree to 10–12 m tall, middle series pinnae accepting the concept of one Lytocaryum and to 1.5 cm wide (0.9–1.5 cm ), peduncular two Microcoelum species, following both Burret bracts with dense dark brown to blackish (1956) and Moore (1963). But in the same year, brown tomentum (Fig. 5), seasonally dry Uhl and Dransfield (1987) transferred all of forest . L. insigne the species back to Lytocaryum. 3b. Tree smaller to 3 m tall, middle series Both, Uhl and Dransfield (1987) and Glassman pinnae to 0.8 cm wide (0.4–0.9 cm), (1987) recognized three species in this peduncular bracts with chestnut brown complex. Henderson, Galeano and Bernal tomentum (Fig. 6), humid forest . (1995) recognized only two, placing L. insigne . L. weddellianum in synonomy with L. weddellianum and so Much of the descriptive data is placed in a Govaerts and Dransfield (2005) also recognize table to make it easier to compare the only two. After conferring with Brazilian differences between the species (Table 1). colleagues, and based on our own field work, we prefer to accept Uhl and Dransfield and Lytocaryum hoehnei (Burret) Toledo, Arq. Glassman’s 1987 species concept and recognize Bot. Estado São Paulo, n.s., f.m., 2: 7. 1944. three species, together with a new recently Holotype: Brazil, São Paulo, Barragem Nova discovered one that is described here as L. de Cofia, A.