THE GARDENS’ BULLETIN, SINGAPORE

The Gardens^ Bulletin, Singapore is a peer-reviewed journal publishing original papers and

reviews on a wide range of subjects: plant taxonomy (including revisions), phytogeography,

floristics, morphology, anatomy, as well as horticulture and related fields, such as ecology and

conservation, with emphasis on the plant life of the Southeast Asian-Pacific region.

Dr David J. Middleton Dr Jana Leong-Skomickova

(Editor-in-Chief) (Managing Editor)

S. Lee Y.W. Low Christina Soh

(Graphics Editor) (Copy Editor) (Business Manager)

Editorial Advisory Board

Professor Sir Peter Crane

Yale University!

USA.

Dr Rogier P.J. de Kok

Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew

UK.

Dr W. John Kress

National Museum of Natural History

Smithsonian Institution

USA

Dr Mark Hughes

Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh

UK.

Dr Kiat W. Tan

Gardens By The Bay

Singapore

Dr Nigel P. Taylor

Singapore Botanic Gardens

National Parks Board, Singapore

Dr Ian M. Turner

Singapore Botanic Gardens

National Parks Board, Singapore

Dr Jan-Frits Veldkamp

National Biodiversity Center

The Netherlands

Dr Jun Wen

National Museum of Natural History

Smithsonian Institution

US.A.

Professor Nianhe Xia

South China Institute of Botany

PR. China

Published twice yearly by the National Parks Board, Singapore, the annual subscription for the journal

is Singapore $100.00 including postage. Overseas subscribers should make payment in the form of

bank draft or international money order in Singapore currency, payable to National Parks Board. Please

forward payment to ‘■‘Accounts Receivable Section, National Parks Board, Headquarters,

Singapore Botanic Gardens, 1 Cluny Road, Singapore 259569’’’-

Instructions for contributing authors

(more details in http://www.sbg.org.sg/research/instructions-for-authors.pdf)

Manuscripts should be sent by e-mail to <gardbullsing@gmail.com> or posted to

The Editor, Gardens’ Bulletin Singapore, Singapore Botanic Gardens, 1 Cluny Road,

Singapore 259569.

The language used is English. Prior to submission, it may be advisable to have manuscripts checked by

someone fluent or proficient in that language. Contributions must not have been published or be under

consideration elsewhere. There are no page charges. Submitted material cannot be returned.

Authors will receive a pdf reproduction of their contribution, gratis.

Cover letter, submission and copyright. In your cover letter or message, state clearly you are submitting

your manuscript (state title) for publication in tlie Gardens’ Bulletin, Singapore. By submitting the

manuscript(s), authors agree that upon acceptance, copyright of the entire work becomes the property

of the Singapore Botanic Gardens, National Parks Board, Singapore. Authors must ensure all required

permission has been obtained in writing to publish any material they present; proof may be required.

Manuscripts are best submitted in electronic form (Microsoft Word 97-2003 preferred). Use Times New

Roman, 10-point font, 1.5-line spacing. Do not send original artwork unless requested by the Editor.

Number all pages serially including the title and abstract on the first.

(continued on inside back cover)

Instructions for contributing authors (continued)

Title and authorship. The title should concisely describe the contents. If a scientific name is used, its

authority is normally excluded, but the family name would be provided. Authors’ names, affiliations

and postal/ e-mail addresses are stated below the title. If more than one author, indicate “corresponding

author”. Avoid footnotes. A short running title (up to six words) should also be provided.

Abstract. The abstract should be less than 200 words. It should concisely indicate the article’s contents

without summarising it; mentioning novelties and name changes. Keywords. Suggest at most eight

keywords, in alphabetical order.

Scientific names and author abbreviations. Genus and species names of organisms must be italicised and

followed by the authority (witli family name in parentheses) when first mentioned in the text or diagnoses.

Standards for author abbreviations should follow:

IPNI <http://www.ipni.org/ipni/autliorsearchpage.do>

Authors of Fungal Names <http://www.indexfungorum.org/authorsoffungalnames.htm>

Herbarium abbre\>iations follow

Thiers, B. (2013). [continously updated] Index Herbariorum: A global directory of public herbaria and

associated staff New York Botanical Garden's Vii'tual Herbarium, <http://sweetgum.nybg.org/ih/>

Journal and book title abbreviations. For journals:

Bridson, G.D.R., Townsend, S.T., Polen, E.A. «& Smith, E.R. (eds) (2004). BPH-2: periodicals with

botanical content: comprising a second edition ofBotanico-Periodicum-Hunlianum. Pittsburg; Hunt

Institute for Botanical Documentation.

For books:

Stafleu, FA. & Cowan, R.S. (eds) (1976-88). Taxonomic Literature. 2nd edition. 7 vols [Regnum Veg.

vols 94, 98, 105, 110, 112, 115, 116].

Stafleu, FA. & Mennega, E.A. (eds) (1992-). Taxonomic Literature. Supplements [Regnum Veg. vols

125,130,132].

A useful source of verifying names of publications is

<http://asaweb.huh.haivard.edu:8080/databases/publication_index.html>. If in doubt, list full titles.

Other abbreviations and units of measurement. If using standard abbreviations and acronyms, give the

full term on first mention. Dates are cited as: 1 Jan 2000. SI (metric) units of measurement are used and

spelled out except when preceded by a numeral; they are abbreviated in standard form: g, ml, km, etc.

Coordinates should be given in the form I1‘^46'44.8"N 109°10'44.5"E.

Tables. Tables are numbered in arabic numerals in the order they are first mentioned in the text and earry

an indicative legend at the head. Tables are given at the end of the manuscript.

Illustrations. All drawings, maps, graphs and photographic images (individually or collected in a plate)

are to be numbered in arabic numerals in the order they are first mentioned in the text, as Fig. 1, Fig. 2,

etc. (plate components would be referred to in the text as Fig. lA, IB, Fig. 1 A-D, etc. ). If relevant, scale

bars should be used to indicate magnification.

When grouping photographs, the maximum page area 19.5 x 1 3 cm must be heeded. High resolution digital

images may be submitted as separate files (line drawings in black and white at 600 dpi, photographs at

300 dpi) sent electronically or in a CD. Captions on figures should be added as a layer so that they can be

further edited or send both captioned and uncaptioned versions. Do not embed images into the main text

file and provide the legends for all figures at the end of the manuscript-

References in the text. Citation in the text should take the fonn: King & Gamble (1886) or (King &

Gamble, 1886), or King et al. ( 1 886) if more than two authors to a work. Use 2000a, 2000b, etc. if several

papers by the same author(s) in one year are cited.

References listed at the end. There, works mentioned in the text are listed alphabetically as follows:

Dallwitz, M.J., Paine, T.A. & Zurcher, E.J. (1999). User’s Guide to the DELTA Editor, http://

biodiversity.uno.edu/delta/ (accessed on 2 Aug. 2010).

Persson, C. (2000). Phylogeny of Gardenieae (Rubiaceae) based on chloroplast DNA sequences from the

rps 16 intron and ?mL(UAA)-F(GAA) intergenic spacer. Nordic J. Bot. 20: 257-269.

Ridley, H.N. (1930). The Dispersal of Plants Throughout the World. Ashford, U.K.: L. Reeve.

Smith, A.C. & Damin, S.P. (1988). Rubiaceae. In: Smith, A.C. (ed) Flora Vitiensis Nova, A New Flora

of Fiji A. 143-193.

References to web-based resources should include either a doi (digital object identifier) specification

or full URL mentioning also the date it was accessed. Use of DNA sequences from GenBank should be

acknowledged and the studies for which the sequences were generated should be cited.

Style of nomenclatural summaries. The following style is required:

Ornithoboea arachnoidea (Diels) Craib, Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 11: 251 (1920); Burtt, Notes

Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 22: 294 (1958).

Ornithoboea parishii C.B. Clarke in A. DC. & C.DC., Monogr. Phan. 5(1): 148 (1883).

If authors include full bibliographic data for these works in the list of references at the end of the paper,

they should also be mentioned in tlie text briefly, e.g., “Nomenclatural references researched include

Blume (1849) and Roxburgh (1 824).”

Homotypic synonyms should be provided in a block, stating the type at the end.

Front cover picture: Zingiber singapurense (Photo by Jana Leong-Skomickova)

The Gardens’ Bulletin

Singapore

VOL. 66(2) 2014

ISSN 0374-7859

CONTENTS

Y.R Deng

Phlogacanthus magnus, a new combination in the Acanthaceae

from Malaysia 121

R. Kiew

Two new species and one new subspecies of Ridleyandra (Gesneriaceae)

from Peninsular Malaysia 125

R. Kiew

Two new white-flowered Codonoboea species (Gesneriaceae)

from Peninsular Malaysia 137

J. Leong-Skornickova

Anew lectotypification of Zingiber gracile var. elatius (Zingiberaceae) 145

J. Leong-Skornickova, A. Thame & P.T. Chew

Notes on Singapore native Zingiberales I: Anew species of Zingiber

and notes on the identities of two further Zingiber taxa 153

S. Lindsay 4& C.W. Chen

Three new combinations in Haplopteris (Pteridaceae subfam. Vittarioideae) 169

R.O. Makinson & B.J. Conn

Puccinia psidii (Pucciniaceae - Eucalyptus Rust, Guava Rust, Myrtle Rust)

- a threat to biodiversity in the Indo-Pacific region 173

D.J. Middleton, J. Leong-Skornickova & Q.B. Nguyen

A new species of Billolivia (Gesneriaceae) from Vietnam 189

M. MoUer, W.-H. Chen, Y.-M. Shui, H. Atkins & D. J. Middleton

A new genus of Gesneriaceae in China and the transfer of Briggsia species

to other genera 195

J.D. Mood, J.F. Veldkamp & L.M. Prince

A new species and a new record of Boesenbergia (Zingiberaceae)

for Thailand 207

J.D. Mood, J.F. Veldkamp, S. Dey & L.M. Prince

Nomenclatural changes in Zingiberaceae: Caulokaempferia is a superfluous

name fox Monolophus and Jirawongsea is reduced to Boesenbergia 215

L. Wijedasa, Z.Q. Shee & E. Chia

Conservation status and lectotypfication of Alangium ridleyi (Comaceae)

in Singapore 233

BOOK REVIEWS

Flora of Peninsular Malaysia. Series 11: Seed Plants, Volume 4. R. Kiew,

R.C.K. Chung, L.G. Saw & E. Soepadmo (eds). 2013. (Y.W. Low) 241

A Guide to the Native Palms of Singapore. Adrian H.B. Loo, Ang Wee Foong,

William J. Baker & Hugh TW Tan. 2014. (K.M. Wong) 243

Date of publication: 20 November 2014

National Parks Board

Singapore Botanic Gardens

1 Cluny Road

Singapore 259569

Printed by Oxford Graphic Printers Pte Ltd

Gardens’ Bulletin Singapore 66(2): 121-123. 2014

121

Phlogacanthus magnus^ a new combination in the

Acanthaceae from Malaysia

Y.F. Deng

Key Laboratory of Plant Resources Conservation and Sustainable Utilization,

South China Botanical Garden, Chinese Academy of Sciences,

Guangzhou 510650, China

yfdeng@scbg.ac.cn

ABSTRACT. An examination of the type material of Gymnostachyum magnum C.B. Clarke

(Acanthaceae) from Malaysia reveals that it is a Phlogacanthus rather than a Gymnostachyum

due to having two staminodes in addition to the two fertile stamens and muticous anther-thecae.

The new combination, Phlogacanthus magnus (C.B. Clarke) Y.F.Deng is therefore proposed.

Keywords. Acanthaceae, Gymnostachyum, Malaysia, Phlogacanthus

Introduction

Gymnostachyum Nees is a genus of about 30 species of Acanthaceae distributed in the

Asian tropics (Mabberley, 2008; Flu et ah, 2011). It belongs to tribe Andrographideae

together with Andrographis Nees, Phlogacanthus Nees, Cystacanthus T.Anderson,

Diotacanthus Benth., Graphandra Imlay, Haplanthodes Kuntze and Indoneesiella

Sreem. (Lindau, 1895; Scotland, 1992; Scotland & Vollesen, 2000; Stevens, 2014;

McDade et al., 2008).

For the Malay Peninsula, Clarke (1908) recognised eleven species of

Gymnostachyum, including ten new species, and Ridley (1923) recognised 13 species.

They also suggested that Phlogacanthus and Gymnostachyum might be united

into a single genus but this is in part because they confused the circumscription of

Gymnostachyum and Phlogacanthus. Phlogacanthus, a genus of about 35 species

distributed in tropical regions of Asia, can be easily distinguished from Gymnostachyum

by having two staminodes, in addition to the two fertile stamens, and muticous anther-

thecae (Hu et al., 2011; Xia & Deng, 2013). In Gymnostachyum, the staminodes are

absent and one or both of anther-thecae are mucronate at the base. The separation

of Phlogacanthus from Gymnostachyum is also supported by molecular evidence

(McDade et al., 2008). During a visit to Singapore Botanic Gardens’ Herbarium in

2013, 1 had the opportunity to examine the type material of Gymnostachyum magnum

C.B.Clarke, one of species described by Clarke (1908). Gymnostachyum magnum has

two stamens, two staminodes and muticous anther- thecae, characters that conform

well to Phlogacanthus. Therefore, the new combination, Phlogacanthus magnus

(C.B.Clarke) Y.F.Deng, is proposed below.

122

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

Phlogacanthus magnus (C.B.Clarke) Y.F.Deng, comb. nov. - Gymnostachyum

magnum C.B.Clarke, J. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, Pt. 2, Nat. Hist. 74(3): 664 (1908). TYPE:

Malaysia, Negri Sembilan, Biikit Tampiii waterfall, May 1894, J.S. Goodenough 1893

(holotype K; isotype SING!).

Distribution and habitat. This species is endemic to Peninsular Malaysia. Its habitat

details are not well known.

Provisional lUCN Conservation Assessment. Currently, this species is only known

from three localities in Peninsular Malaysia comprising only five, mostly fairly old,

collections, but no attempt has yet been made to assess its frequency in the field. Given

the lack of knowledge of the cun*ent status of the species it should be assessed as Data

Deficient (DD) (lUCN, 2001, 2011).

Additional specimens examined: PENINSULAR MALAYSIA. Kedah: Katanh, Koh Mai

Forest Reser\^e, 4 Apr 1938, Kiah s.n. (SING). Negeri Sembilan: Sungei Ujong, Bukit Sutu,

1 Nov 1885, V.M. Alvins 1955 (SING). Selangor: Kajang, Sungei Lalauy, 9 Mar 1930, C.F.

Symington 22710 (K); ibidem, without date, C.F. Symington 22763 (SING); ibidem, 28 Mar

1931, C.F. Symington 22947 (SING).

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. The author would like to thank Dr Wong Khoon Meng, Mr Low

Yee Wen and Ms Serena Lee for their help during my visit to the Herbarium of Singapore

Botanic Gardens (SING). This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation

of China (grant nos. 31070175, 31270247, 31470302) and the Singapore Botanic Gardens’

Fellowship.

References

Clarke, C.B. (1908). Acanthaceae. In: King, G. & Gamble, J.S. Materials for a Flora of the

Malayan Peninsula. J. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, Pt. 2, Nat. Hist. 74: 628-698.

Hu, J.Q., Deng, Y.F, & Wood, J.R.I. (2011). Acanthaceae. In: Wu, C.Y, Raven, P. & Hong,

D.Y. (eds) Flora of China 19: 369^77. Beijing: Science Press & St. Louis: Missouri

Botanical Garden Press.

lUCN (2001). lUCN Red List Categories and Criteria, Version 3.1. Switzerland, Gland and

UK, Cambridge; lUCN.

lUCN (2011). Guidelines for using the lUCN Red List Categories and Criteria, Version 9.

http://www.iucnredlist.org/documents/RedListGuidelines.pdf (accessed on 29 Jun.

2014).

Lindau, G. (1895). Acanthaceae. In: Engler, A. (ed). Die Naturliche Pflanzenfamilien 4(3b):

274-354. Leipzig.

Mabberley, D.J. (2008). Mabberleys Plant-book: a Portable Dictionaiy of Plants, their

Classifications, and Uses. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

McDade, L.A., Daniel, T.F. & Kiel, C.A. (2008). Toward a comprehensive understanding of

phylogenetic relationships among lineages of Acanthaceae s.l. (Lamiales). Amer. J. Bot.

95: 1136-1152.

Phlogacanthus magnus, a new combination from Malaysia

123

Ridley, H.N. (1923). Acanthaceae. In: Ridley, H.N. (ed) The flora of the Malay Peninsula 2:

554-610. London: L. Reeve & Co.

Scotland, R.W. (1992). Pollen morphology of Andrographideae (Acanthaceae). Rev. Palaeobot.

Palynol. 72: 229-243.

Scotland, R.W. & Vollesen, K. (2000). Classification of Acanthaceae. Kew. Bull. 55: 513-589.

Stevens, P.F. (2014). [continuously updated]. Angiosperm Phylogeny Website, version 13.

http://www.mobot.org/MOBOT/research/APweb/ (accessed on 29 Jun. 2014).

Xia, C. & Deng, Y.F. (2013). Phlogacanthus yangtsekiangensis, a new combination in Chinese

Acanthaceae. Phytotaxa 104(1): 58-60.

Gardens’ Bulletin Singapore 66(2): 125-135. 2014

125

Two new species and one new subspecies of Ridleyandra

(Gesneriaceae) from Peninsular Malaysia

R. Kiew

Forest Research Institute Malaysia,

52109 Kepong, Selangor, Malaysia

ruth@frim .gov.my

ABSTRACT. Two new species, Ridleyandra bintangensis Kiew and R. nuangensis Kiew, from

Kedah and Selangor respectively, and one new subspecies, R. kiewii subsp. magnifica Kiew,

from Kelantan and Terengganu, are described from Peninsular Malaysia.

Keywords. Gesneriaceae, Kelantan, Peninsular Malaysia, Ridleyandra bintangensis, R.

nuangensis, R. kiewii subsp. magnifica, Terengganu

Introduction

One of the aims of the Flora of Peninsular Malaysia project is to explore areas that

are unknown or poorly known botanically (Kiew & Rafidah, 2007) and this has proved

fruitful in terms of the discovery of new species. Since the establishment and revision

of Ridleyandra (Weber & Burtt, 1998a, 1998b), four new species have been described

from Peninsular Malaysia, R. chuana Kiew (Kiew, 2013), R. iminii Siti-Munirah (Siti-

Munirah, 2012), R. kelantanensis Kiew (Kiew, 2009) and R. padangens is Kiew (Kiew,

2011). Here a further two species and one subspecies are described bringing the total

number of species for Peninsular Malaysia to 2 1 . Conservation assessments for these

species will be included in a forthcoming paper on conservation in the genus as a

whole.

Taxonomy

1. Ridleyandra bintangensis Kiew, sp. nov.

Among Ridleyandra species with leaves with an entire margin, inflorescences with

more than one flower, and long corollas, it most resembles Ridleyandra atropurpurea

(Ridl.) A.Weber but it differs from that species in its short petioles 1.3-2. 5 cm long

(c. 4.5 cm long in R. atropurpurea), its relatively broader oblong leaves less than

three times as long as wide (not falcate and more than three times as long as wide in

R. atropurpurea), c. 9 pairs of lateral veins (15-17 pairs in R. atropurpurea), and a

corolla that is cylindric and 10-13 mm wide at the mouth with very short lobes 2-3

mm long (trumpet-shaped and 14-18 mm wide at the mouth with lobes 5-12 mm

long in R. atropurpurea). While both species have rosy purple corollas with white

126

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

lines on the lower side, the lobes of Ridleyandra bintangensis are black while those of

R. atropurpurea are concolorous with the tube. TYPE: Peninsular Malaysia, Kedah,

Sungai Selim FR (Forest Reserve), Compartment 15, trail to Gunung Bintang, 30

October 2008, Mohd. Hairul FRI 60092 (holotype KEP; isotypes SAN, SAR, SING).

(Fig. lA, 2 ).

Perennial herb. Stem woody, unbranched, erect, to 1 0 cm tall, c. 6 mm diam. Leaves in

more-or-less equal pairs, tightly clustered in a rosette at top of the stem; petioles, leaf

margin and lower surface of midrib and lateral veins densely pubescent, hairs brown,

c. 1 mm long; petioles 1.3-1.7(-2.5) cm long; lamina oblong to slightly oblanceolate,

10-13 X 3.5-5 cm, glossy, slightly bullate, glabrous above; base slightly unequal,

rounded to shortly auriculate, margin entire, wavy towards the apex, apex acute; midrib

and lateral veins flat above, prominent beneath, lateral veins c. 9 pairs. Inflorescences

axillary, (l-) 2 -flowered cyme, peduncle, bracts and calyx glabrous; peduncles deep

purple-brown, (5-)8-9.5 cm long; bracts 3, free, positioned immediately below the

flowers, reddish brown, lanceolate, 10-13 x 4 mm, apex acute; pedicel 4-13 mm

long. Sepals divided to base, reddish brown, narrowly lanceolate, 8-12 x 2-2.5 mm,

apex acute. Corolla cylindric, c. 5.5 cm to tip of lower lip; tube with a white bulbous

base, constricting to 3-A mm diam., then expanded to 10-13 mm, above the base rosy

purple with white lines on lower side, mouth glabrous; lobes 5, dull black, upper lobes

reflexed, c. 2.5 x 6 mm, lower lobes unequal, lateral lobes reflexed, c. 2 x 5.5 mm,

median lobe extended c. 2 x 5.5 mm. Stamens 4 in 2 pairs, attached c. 12 mm above

corolla base, filaments white, lower pair 13-15 mm long, upper pair 8-9 mm long;

anthers pale creamy white, c. 1.5-1 mm, without connective, staminode 1, c. 2 mm

long; nectary a naiTow white ring, c. 1-1 .5 mm high. Ovary and style 2. 7-3. 5 cm long;

stigma white, broadly triangular, c. 2.5 x 3 mm. Capsules unknown.

Distribution. Endemic in Peninsular Malaysia, known only from the type locality.

Habitat. Primary lowland dipterocarp forest at 380 m altitude.

Etymology. It is named for the type locality, Gunung Bintang, Kedah.

Notes. The flower characters that distinguish this species from Ridleyandra

atropurpurea, corolla nan*owly cylindric with black lobes vs. trumpet shaped with

rosy purple lobes, suggest different pollination syndromes but there are as yet no

observations of pollinators in Ridleyandra.

There is another species, Ridleyandra petiolata (Ridl.) A.Weber, also described

from Gunung Inas in the Bintang FR. Flowever, that species is clearly distinct from

Ridleyandra bintangensis in its petioles that are 4-8 cm long with reddish hispid hairs,

broader laminas 5-7.5 cm wide with a crenulate-serrate margin, and long reddish hispid

peduncles 15-25 cm long. According to the key in Ridley (1923) {ym^Qx Didissandra),

the corolla of Ridleyandra petiolata is violet-puiple. It was collected above 1500 m

altitude. This mirrors the Cameron Highlands where the two Ridleyandra species, R.

New Ridleyandra species and subspecies from Peninsular Malaysia

127

Fig. 1. Ridleyandra bintangensis A. Habit. R. kiewii subsp. magnifica. B. Habit. C. Corolla

opened to show stamens. D. Calyx, style and stigma. R. nuangensis E. Habit. F. infloreseence

and flower. (Photos: A, Ong P.T.; B-D, M.Y. Siti-Munirah; E-F, Yao T.L.)

New Ridleyandra species and subspecies from Peninsular Malaysia

129

morgani (Franch.) A. Weber and R. longisepala (Ridl.) A. Weber, are also separated by

altitude.

Weber & Burtt (1998b) drew attention to another specimen collected from the

Gunung Bintang range {Mohd HaniffSFN 21092) that they suggested might be a new

taxon but in its petiole 3. 5^.5 cm long, its leaves more than three times longer than

wide, its 13-15 pairs of lateral veins, and its broader corolla (14-17 mm wide) with

lobes 5-6 mm long, it is clearly similar to Ridleyandra atropurpurea (Ridl.) A. Weber.

2. Ridleyandra kiewii (Kiew) A.Weber, Beitr. Biol. Pflanzen 70: 243 (1998 [‘1997’]).

-Didissandra kiewii Kiew, Malay. Nat. J. 41 : 212 (1989). TYPE: Peninsular Malaysia,

Johor, Selai Valley, Kiew, B.H. SB 35 (holotype KEP ex UPM).

Perennial herb. Stem woody, unbranched to 20 cm long, to 7 mm diam., flowering at

c. 5 cm tall; densely hispid with femigineous hairs 4-5 mm long on the young stem,

petioles, peduncles, bracts and calyx. Leaves crowded at the apex; petioles 6-9 cm

long; lamina broadly elliptic, 10-40 x 6-18.5 cm, base cordate or rounded, sometimes

unequal, margin seiTate, crenate to undulate, apex broadly acute to acuminate, in live

state upper surface glossy dark green above, bullate and wrinkling on drying or flat,

either variegated with a broad light green band c. 2.5 cm wide along midrib or plain

green, reddish or pale green beneath, drying membranous, glabrous above, beneath

midrib shortly hispid and lateral veins minutely pubescent; lateral veins 9-18 pairs,

prominent beneath. Inflorescences axillary, cymose, either 1-3 -flowered or with up to

7 flowers; peduncles purple, 9-24.5 cm long; bracts narrowly lanceolate and 12-15 x

1-1.5 mm or foliose and 11-12 x 7-8 mm; pedicels 4-12 mm long. Calyx 10-16 mm

long, divided almost to the base, lobes 5, ligulate, 4-10 x 3-5 mm. Corolla narrowly

trumpet-shaped, outside deep purple-red or purple or tinged black, inside intensely

black, 3 .5-5 cm long, 0. 3-0.4 mm wide at base, 1-1.5 cm wide at the mouth, lobes broad

and rounded, upper two lobes more-or-less erect, 2-4 x 6-9 mm, lower three lobes 2-5

X 4-8 mm, projecting slightly beyond the upper. Stamens 4, filaments slender, white or

pale purple, lower two 19-20 mm long, upper two c. 12 mm long; anthers coimivent,

reniform, 1 .5-3 x 1-1.5 mm, cream-coloured, contrasting strongly with black corolla.

Ovary narrowly cylindric, 20-34 x 1-2 mm, glabrous, surrounded at base by a fleshy

cylindric nectary, c. 1 mm high; style narrowing to a broadly triangular pale purple

stigma c. 3 x 2.5 mm wide, stigma reaching the same level as the anthers of the shorter

stamens. Capsules glossy, dark red or purple, curved downwards at the apex, splitting

along the upper surface, 5-8 cm long, 2-6 mm wide.

Notes. It is one of the most striking Ridleyandra species with its large, purple-black

flowers and its variegated foliage. It was first discovered in Johor but recent exploration

shows that it also occurs in S Pahang, Terengganu and Kelantan. Compared with most

Ridleyandra species that are montane plants with nan'ow distributions, R. kiewii grows

in the lowlands and is the Ridleyandra species with the widest geographic distribution.

130

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

The new taxon, while it is a larger plant with more serrate laminas, foliose

bracts and more flowers, resembles R. kiewii in its leaf shape, relatively long petioles,

indumentum, corolla size, shape and in its striking purple-black colour. It is treated

at subspecific rank because the two taxa are separated geographically. The species

description above is amended to take account of the new subspecies.

2a. Ridleyandra kiewii subsp. kiewii

Figure: Malayan Naturalist. 40, 2 (1986) front cover.

Lamina (10-)14(-18) x (6-)8(-9) cm, base cordate, sometimes rounded, margin

crenate to undulate, apex broadly acute, in live state upper surface bullate, sometimes

flat, variegated with a broad light green band c. 2.5 cm wide along midrib, reddish

beneath; lateral veins c. 9 pairs. Inflorescence a 1-3-flowered cyme; peduncle 9-18

cm long; bracts narrowly lanceolate, 12-1 5 x 1-1.5 mm; pedicels 4-5 mm long; ovary

c. 20 X 1 mm. Capsules 5-5.5 cm long, 2 mm wide.

Distribution. Peninsular Malaysia: Johor (Gunung Chabang Tiga, Sungai Selai) and S

Pahang (Gunung Lesong).

Habitat. Primary lowland dipterocarp forest to 400 m altitude.

2b. Ridleyandra kiewii subsp. magniflca Kiew, subsp. nov.

Compared with the typical subspecies, Ridleyandra kiewii subsp. magniflca is a

larger plant with larger leaves with more lateral veins and a more serrate margin,

the inflorescences have foliose bracts and in most cases there are more flowers per

inflorescence and the fruits are larger. TYPE: Peninsular Malaysia, Terengganu, Hulu

Terengganu, Tembat FR, Sungai Puah, 4 April 2009, Mohd. Hairul et al. FRI 60959

(holotype KEP; isotypes L, SAN, SAR, SING). (Figs IB-D, 3).

Lamina (12-)22. 5-26. 5(^0) x 11.5-18.5 cm, base rounded, sometimes cordate,

margin serrate, apex acute to acuminate, in live state upper surface flat, sometimes

bullate, most plants not variegated, sometimes variegated, especially in young

plants; lateral veins 11-1 8 pairs. Inflorescence usually a cyme with (2-)5-7 flowers,

sometimes with 1-3-flowers; peduncle (13. 5-)l 9.5-24.5 cm long, branches 1-3.5 cm

long; bracts foliose, broadly ovate, 11-12 x 7-8 mm; pedicels deep purple, 4-12 mm

long; ovary c. 34 x 2 mm. Capsules 6.5-8 cm long, 4-6 mm wide.

Distribution. Peninsular Malaysia: Kelantan (Kuala Aring), Terengganu (Telemong

FR, Tembat FR).

132

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

Habitat. Primary lowland dipterocarp forest, on shaded slopes in valleys above streams,

often locally common, below 450 m altitude. In April 2009 it flowered gregariously

and in July 2006 most plants were observed with fruits suggesting that it flowers

seasonally.

Etymology. With its bunches of large, purple-black flowers, it is a magniflcent species

well worthy of cultivation and, compared with the typical subspecies, it is a larger

plant both in its leaves and fruits.

Additional specimens examined. PENINSULAR MALAYSIA: Kelantan: Kuala Aring FR,

1995, B.H. Kmx KBH 5 (KEP, E, K). Terengganu: Hulu Terengganu, Tembat FR, Sg. Puah,

1 April 2009, MoJid Hairiil et al. FRJ 60932 (KEP, SAN); ibidem, 4 April 2009, Kamarul-

Hisham et al. FBI 67096 (KEP, A, K, L, SAN, SING); Tembat FR, Sg. Tembat, 3 June 2010,

Ong et al. FRI 71064 (KEP, SING); Hulu Terengganu, Ulu Telomong, Ulu Sungai Telemong,

July 2006, R. Kiew RK 5343 (KEP, E, K, L, SAN, SAR, SING).

3. Ridleyandra nuangensis Kiew, sp. nov.

In its narrowly oblanceolate leaves and its white flowers with purple lines, it resembles

Ridleyandra wrayi (Ridl.) A. Weber, However, it is distinct from that species in its entire

leaves (dentate in Ridleyandra wrayi), its long peduncled, 2-3 -flowered inflorescences

(single flowered with peduncles to 12 cm long in R. wrayi) and the bracts that are

distant from the calyx (appressed to and enclosing the calyx in R. wrayi). TYPE:

Peninsular Malaysia, Selangor, Hulu Langat, Gunung Nuang, 21 Feb 2001, Kiew RK

5186 (holotype SING; isotypes E, KEP). (Figs lE-F, 4).

Perennial herb. Stems woody, unbranched, rarely two-branched, 30-75 cm tall, c. 5

mm diam., with a thin corky ‘bark’. Leaves in opposite pairs in a tuft at top of the

stem, below to c, 5 mm apart; petioles 1 .5-4.3 cm long; lamina oblanceolate, in life

glossy green above, whitish green beneath, glabrous, robustly succulent, 12-20 x 3.2-

6 cm, narrowed to base, margin entire, apex shortly acuminate, acumen to 5-7 mm

long; in life midrib slightly raised above, beneath scarcely prominent, lateral veins

11-13 pairs, slightly prominent beneath, midrib and veins drying dark brown beneath.

Inflorescences axillary, 2-3-flowered cymes with the flowers held high above the

leaves on peduncles 11.5-22.5 cm long; bracts and bracteoles asyimnetrically ovate,

7-10 X 3-6 mm, c. 9 mm distant 6*0111 the calyx; pedicels 0.9-2. 5 cm; flowers nodding.

Calyx pale green, 13-15 x 4-5 mm, connate for 2-3 mm, lobes lanceolate, outside

keeled, apex acute, margins shallowly toothed in the upper half, inside and out with

scattered short glandular hairs. Corolla trumpet-shaped, waxy white with a purple

line running down the centre of each lobe with the addition of fine lines in base of

throat, two white raised ridges (nectar guides) and scattered glandular hairs in throat,

minutely densely pubescent with glandular hairs outside, 4.2-6 cm to tip of lower lip;

134

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

tube 3. 5-4.5 cm long, 3-7 mm diam. at base dilating to 1 1-12 mm across the mouth;

upper 2 lobes erect, 9-12 x c. 7 mm, lower 3 lobes projecthig beyond the upper, 6-10

X 6-7 mm. Stamens 4, filaments white, lower pair 1 3.5-24 mm long, upper pair 1 7-27

mm long; anthers brown, 2-2.5 x c. 2.2 mm long, joined in pairs. Nectaty annular, c.

2 mm high. Ovary and style glabrous, 17-20 mm; stigma white, broadly triangular,

4^.5 X 2-3 mm. Fruit not known.

Additional specimens examined. PENINSULAR MALAYSIA: Selangor: Hulu Langat,

Gunung Nuang, 12 Nov 2013, Yao et al. FRI 7732 9 (KEP, SAN).

Distribution. Endemic in Peninsular Malaysia, Selangor (Gunung Nuang), known

only from the type locality.

Habitat. In upper montane forest, in deep shade on slope below the summit at 1434 m

altitude.

Etymology. It is named for its type locality, Gunung Nuang, Selangor.

Notes. This species is unusual for the genus in several respects: in its tall stem (it is the

tallest species), its corky bark and its long peduncles that hold the flowers well above

the foliage.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: This study is part of the research carried out for the Flora of

Peninsular Malaysia Project under ‘Safeguarding the Forest Plant Diversity of Peninsular

Malaysia’ Project No. 01-04-01-000 Khas 2 funded by the Ministry of Science, Technology

and Innovation through the National Council for Scientific Research and Development and

under ‘Dokumentasi and Inventori Flora Malaysia’ Project funded by the 10^“^ Malaysia Plan

Development Project at Forest Reseai'ch Institute Malaysia (FRIM). The project team is

grateful to the State Forestry Departments and the Department of Wildlife and National Parks,

Malaysia, for permission to make botanical collections; to the FRIM field and herbarium staff

for their assistance; to Zainal Mustafa for the botanical drawings; to Ong Poh Teck, M.Y. Siti-

Munirah and T.L. Yao for pemiission to use tlieir photographs; to Dr Gemma Bramley (K) for

providing images of Ridleyandra petiolata type specimen; to Curators of the BM, K, KLU,

SING and UKMB herbaria for permission to examine specimens in their care.

References

Kiew, R. (2009). Tliree new species of Gesneriaceae from Kelantan, Malaysia. Gard. Bull.

Singapore 61: 73-79.

Kiew, R. (2011). Two new species of Gesneriaceae from Gunung Padang, Terengganu,

Malaysia. Malayan Nat. J. 63: 661-666.

New Ridleyandra species and subspecies from Peninsular Malaysia

135

Kiew, R. (2013). Ridleyandra chuana (Gesneriaceae), a new species from Peninsular Malaysia.

PhytoKeys, 25: 15-19.

Kiew, R. & Rafidah, A.R. (2007). The Flora of Peninsular Malaysia. Conservation Malaysia.

5: 1^.

Siti-Munirah, M.Y. (2012). Ridleyandra iminii (Gesneriaceae), a new species from Peninsular

Malaysia. PhytoKeys 19: 67-70.

Ridley, H.N. (1923). Gesneriaceae. The Flora of the Malay Peninsula 2: 495-547. London: L.

Reeve & Co.

Weber, A., Burtt, B.L. (1998a [‘1997’]). Didissandra: redefinition and partition of an artificial

genus of Gesneriaceae. Beitr Biol. Pflanzen 70: 153-177.

Weber, A. & B.L. Burtt (1998b [‘1997’]). Revision of the genus Ridleyandra (Gesneriaceae).

Beitr. Biol. Pflanzen 70: 225-273.

Gardens’ Bulletin Singapore 66(2): 137-143. 2014

137

Two new white-flowered Codonoboea species

(Gesneriaceae) from Peninsular Malaysia

R. Kiew

Forest Research Institute Malaysia,

52109 Kepong, Selangor, Malaysia

ruth@frim.gov.my

ABSTRACT. Two new white-flowered Codonoboea species, C mentigiensis Kiew and C.

tembatensis Kiew (Gesneriaceae), are described from Peninsular Malaysia. Following the

lUCN Criteria and Categories, C tembatensis is Critically Endangered by clear-felling of forest

prior to the ai'ea being flooded for an extension to a hydroelectric dam, while C. mentigiensis,

that grows in lower montane forest within Pennanent Protection Forest, is of Least Concern.

Keywords. Codonoboea mentigiensis, Codonoboea tembatensis, conservation status,

Gesneriaceae, new species. Peninsular Malaysia

Introduction

Currently, 77 named species of Codonoboea are recorded for Peninsular Malaysia

(Kiew & Lim, 2011; Kiew, 2011; Kiew & Sam, 20 1 2; Lim et al., 20 1 3) and new species

continue to be discovered. The first one described below was discovered at Cameron

Highlands, Pahang, one of the best-collected localities in Peninsular Malaysia. It is

unusual among Codonoboea species in its corolla being completely white; usually

white-flowered species have contrastingly coloured (usually yellow) nectar guides.

The second species was discovered during a botanical survey of an area in Hulu

Terengganu designated for an extension to the Kenyir Hydroelectric Dam that will

be clear-felled prior to flooding. This latter species is quite unlike other Codonoboea

species, which have narrowly cylindric fruits c. 1-1 .5 mm wide, in its fruit being 3.5-5

mm thick and almost humped at the base and tapers to the tip.

Taxonomy

Codonoboea mentigiensis Kiew, sp. nov.

Codonoboea mentigiensis is similar to C. albomarginata (Hemsl.) Kiew in its few-

flowered pedunculate inflorescences and small flowers but it is different from C.

albomarginata in its larger leaves, 10-14 x 5-8 cm, that are less than twice as long

as wide (7.5-10 x 6.5 cm and 2.5-3 times longer than wide in C. albomarginata) and

in its completely white flowers 18-19 mm long (those of C. albomarginata are 12

mm long, white with a pinkish tinge due to rosy purple hairs on the outer surface, the

138

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

corolla lobes are yellow and the nectar guides are orange-brown), and in its longer

fruit (3 cm not 2 cm as in C. albomarginatd). Nor does Codonoboea mentigiensis

have the purple stems, peduncles and rosy purple calyces of C albomarginata. TYPE:

Peninsular Malaysia, Pahang, Cameron Highlands, Mentigi Forest Reserve (FR), 4°

31' 48.40" N, lOR 22' 21.80" E, 18 November 2009, K. Imin FRI 68496 (holotype

KEP; isotypes K, L, SING). (Fig. 1).

Small herb. Stems 8.5-15 cm tall, 9 mm thick, semi-woody at base, pale green, with

densely appressed hairs, intemodes 2-3.5 cm long; frequently with axillary shoots.

Leaves in distant equal pairs; petioles slender, pale gi'een with downy white hairs,

3.5- 5 cm long, 3-4 mm thick, grooved above; laminas soft, pale green with a dense

velvety layer of whitish non-glandular hairs, densely softly hirsute above and beneath

especially on the midrib, margin and lower surface of veins, ovate to broadly oval,

10-14.5 X 5-8 cm, cuneate, margin entire, apex acute, lateral veins 8-11 pairs, slightly

impressed above and slightly prominent and paler beneath, intercostal veins obscure.

Inflorescences axillary, erect with a pair-flowered cyme held horizontally, peduncle

4. 5- 6. 5 cm, pale green, silky with dense glandular hairs c. 0.75 mm long; bracts

lanceolate, c. 4 x l mm. Flowers with pedicels 1.5-2 mm long; calyx mid-gi*een and

hispid with long non-glandular hairs, 5-lobed, divided almost to base, lobes naiTowly

acute, 3^(-7) x 1 - 1.2 mm long, apex slightly recurved; corolla white, 18-19 mm

long, with no markings in the throat, outside with dense long glandular translucent

hairs, tube c. 13 mm long, glabrous inside, constricted at base and c. 3 mm wide,

dilating to 5-7 mm wide at the mouth, upper lobes erect, oblong, c. 4 x 3 mm, side

lobes rounded c. 4 x 4 mm, and the lower lobe rounded c. 5 x 4 mm; the side and

lower lobes projecting 5 mm beyond the upper, with scattered minute uniseriate hairs,

stamens and stigma positioned within the mouth; stamens 2, filaments c. 3 mm long,

glabrous, straight, attached c. half-way up the corolla tube; anthers white, small, c.

1.2 mm long, joined side by side, staminodes 0; nectaiy annular, c. 0.5 mm high, rim

slightly wavy; ovary white, c. 4 mm long, ovary and style densely hispid; style white,

c. 8 mm long; stigma large, peltate, c. 1 mm across, white (not conspicuous). Fruits

horizontal, short-stalked, stalk thickened, 5-7 mm long, capsules cylindric, c. 30 mm

long, c. 2 mm wide at base, slightly upcurved, splitting only along the top, brown when

ripe.

Distribution. Peninsular Malaysia, endemic in Pahang, Cameron Highlands, Mentigi

FR.

Ecology. Lower montane forest at c. 1800-2100 m, on shaded earth banks, common

in places.

Etymology. It is named for its location, the Mentigi FR.

New Codonoboea species from Peninsular Malaysia

139

Fig. 1. Codonoboea mengtigiensis Kiew. A. Habit. B. Flower showing position of stamens

and pistil inside. C. Corolla opened to show position of stamens. D. Corolla cut lengthwise to

show stamens and pistil. E. Stamens showing coherence of anthers. (Drawn from FRI 68496

by Zainal Mustafa).

140

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

Conset^ation Assessment. Least Concern (LC). Following the lUCN Criteria &

Categories (lUCN, 2001), although it is known from a single locality, the Mentigi FR

at Cameron Highlands, and has an AGO less 20 Ian-, it is considered to be of Least

Concern because it is lies within a Permanent Protection Forest, being a steep upland

area above 1000 m altitude and with no known threats.

Other specimens examined. PENINSULAR MALAYSIA: Pahang: Cameron Highlands,

Mentigi FR, 4 Dec 1983, Kiew RK 1263 (KEP); ibidem, 3 1 Aug 1990, RK 3119 (KEP); ibidem,

7 July 1 999, RK 4730 (KEP).

Codonoboea tembatensis Kiew, sp. nov.

Unique among Peninsular Malaysian species of Codonoboea by a combination of

its subsessile inflorescences with 1-3 flowers and short capsules (15-18 imn long)

that are unusually thick (3.5-5 mm thick) at the base. TYPE: Peninsular Malaysia,

Terengganu, Hulu Terengganu, Tembat FR, 5°12.36' N, 102° 37.10' E, 31 July 2009,

Kamarul et al. FRI 67142 (holotype KEP; isotype SAN). (Fig. 2).

Unbranched, erect herb or branching at base and forming clumps. Stems 20-45 cm

tall, 2-4 mm thick, purple with soft white glandular hairs, intemodes 1.5-3. 5 cm

long, swollen and constricted at nodes. Leaves in distant pairs; petioles slender,

lower petioles longer, 3-5.5 cm long, with soft white glandular hairs; laminas soft,

narrowly to broadly lanceolate, 9-11 x 3. 5-5. 5 cm, softly hairy (hairs not glandular),

dark green above, paler or white-green beneath, base rounded, slightly unequal and

with an additional vein on the longer side, margin shallowly crenate especially in

the upper half, apex attenuate, lateral veins (8-)9 pairs, slightly impressed above and

prominent beneath. Inflorescences axillary, a subsessile cyme with 1-3 flowers; bracts

lanceolate, 8-10 x 2-3 mm, apex rounded, midrib distinct, densely hairy. Flowers

with pale green pedicels and calyx, pedicels (2-)3^ mm long; calyx 5-lobed, 3-4(-7)

mm long, divided almost to base, lobes narrowly acute, with long hairs; corolla white,

c. 3 cm long, tube c. 20 nun long, c. 3 nun wide in the basal c. 4 nun, dilating to 13

mm wide at the mouth, upper lobes erect to reflexed, c. 7 x 9 mm, the side lobes c. 9

X 8 mm and lower lobe c. 9 x 7 mm; projecting beyond the upper, stamens and stigma

positioned within the mouth, nectar guides in the lower part of the throat consisting of

2 rows of minute, lemon-yellow, glandular hairs; stamens 2, filaments c. 10 mm long,

bowed, covered in minute, white glandular hairs, lower half of the filaments yellow,

upper half of filaments and anthers white, anthers small, c. 1 .5 mm long, joined side

by side, staminodes 0; nectaiy large, white, annular, c. 0.75 mm high; ovary white or

purple, narrowly ovoid, glabrous at base, c. 4 mm long, as long as calyx, style white

with fine, long hairs, 1 3-1 5 mm long; stigma large, peltate, c. 1 mm across, white (not

conspicuous). Fruits horizontal, short-stalked, stalk thickened, 5-7 mm long, capsules

thick at base (= humped on the upper side), 15-18 mm long, 3.5-5 mm thick at base,

tapered to apex, dull puiple becoming brown.

Fig. 2. Codonoboea tembatensis Kiew. A. Habit. B. Flo\

position of stamens and pistil. D. Calyx. E. Corolla cut ler

F. Fruit. (Drawn from FRl 67142 by Zainal Mustafa),

142

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

Distribution. Peninsular Malaysia, endemic in Terengganu, Hulu Terengganu, Tembat

FR.

Ecology. In lowland to hill mixed dipterocarp forest, in valleys on shaded slopes above

streams or rivers at 200-815 m altitude. It grows as individual plants or fonns clumps

by branching at the base.

Etymology. It is named for its location, the Tembat FR.

Consen’ation Assessment. Critically Endangered, CR A3(c), Blab(i,iii,iv,v). Following

the lUCN Criteria & Categories (lUCN, 2001), this species is Critically Endangered

being at extremely high risk of extinction in the wild as its habitat lies within the area

that has been clear-felled prior to the area being flooded by the northern extension to

the Kenyir hydroelectric dam. It apparently has a restricted occurrence (less 50 km^) as

it has not been found in adjacent forests, such as the Telemong FR and the Chichir FR.

Other specimens examined. PENINSULAR MALAYSIA: Terengganu: Hulu Terengganu,

Tembat FR — Gunung Tembat, 694 m, shady valley, 10 Apr 2008 [flower], Kiew et al. FRl

57034 (KEP); Ulu Sungai Terengganu Mati, 3 Apr 2009 [fruit], Siti Munirah et al. FRI 67904

(KEP, K, L, SAN, SING); Cultivated in Forest Research Institute Malaysia’s nursery 15 Oct

2009 [flower], FRI 65159 (KEP, flowers in spirit).

Notes. The flower of Codonoboea tembatensis is unusual among Malaysian Codonoboea

in that the two nectar guides in the throat of the corolla are composed of erect, lemon-

yellow hairs (not plastids in the corolla tissues as is usual in other species). In addition,

the lower part of the filament has the same lemon-yellow colour as the nectar guides.

In most Codonoboea species the filament is uniformly white.

The fruit of Codonoboea tembatensis is relatively short (less than 2 cm long)

and is especially thick (3.5-5 mm wide) for Codonoboea species. It sometimes appears

humped at the base. Other species with fruits less than 2 cm long, like Codonoboea

floribimda (M.R.Hend.) C.L.Lim and C. reptans (Jack) C.L.Lim, have fruits 1-1.5 mm

at the base. Only Codonoboea malayana (Hook.f ) Kiew has fruits 2-3.5 mm wide but

they are longer (2.5-5 cm long). However, this latter species is not at all similar to the

new species because it has long peduncles, many-flowered inflorescences and much

longer corollas (35-40 mm long).

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. This study was carried out as part of the Flora of Peninsular

Malaysia Project funded by the Ministiy of Science, Technology and Innovation through the

National Council for Scientific Research and Development under Project No. 01-04-01-000

Khas 2 entitled “Safeguarding the Forest Plant Diversity of Peninsular Malaysia” and the 10'*'

Malaysia Plan Development Project entitled “Dokumentasi dan Inventor! Flora Malaysia”.

Thanks are due to the KEP herbarium staff for their support in the field, to A.R. Unnnul-Nazrah

and M.Y. Siti-Munirah for organizing the expedition to the Tembat area, to Zainal Mustafa

New Codonoboea species from Peninsular Malaysia

143

(KLU) for the preparations of the botanieal plates, and to the curators and staff of the BM, E,

K, KLU, L and SING herbaria for permission to examine specimens in their care.

References

lUCN (2001). Red List Categories and Criteria, version 3.1. Switzerland, Gland & UK,

Cambridge: lUCN Species Survival Commission, lUCN.

Kiew, R. (2011). Two new species of Gesneriaceae from Gunung Padang, Terengganu,

Malaysia. Malayan Nat. J. 63: 661-666.

Kiew, R. & Sam, Y.Y. (2012). Codonoboea personatiflora (Gesneriaceae) a new species from

Peninsular Malaysia. PhytoKeys 18: 61-66.

Kiew, R. & Lim, C.L. (2011). Names and new combinations for Peninsular Malaysian species

of Codonoboea Ridl. (Gesneriaceae). Card. Bull. Singapore 62: 253-275.

Lim, C.L., Kiew, R. & Haron, N.W. (2013). Codonoboea oreophila (Gesneriaceae), a new

species from Peninsular Malaysia. Blumea 58: 68-70.

Gardens’ Bulletin Singapore 66(2): 145-151. 2014

145

A new lectotypification of Zingiber gracile var. elatius

(Zingiberaceae)

J. Leong-Skomickova

Herbarium, Singapore Botanic Gardens,

National Parks Board, 1 Cluny Road, Singapore 259569

jana_skoraickova@nparks.gov.sg

ABSTRACT. The previous lectotypification of Zingiber gracile Jack, var. elatius Ridl. is

deemed ineffective and a new lectotypification is here proposed. The original varietal epithet

'elatior\ later also used at specific rank, is corrected here to 'elatius', to agree grammatically

with the generic name.

Keywords. H.N. Ridley, lectotypification, Penang Hill, Zingiber elatior, Z. elatius, Z. gracile

Introduction

During my recent work on Zingiber singapurense Skomick., a new species from

Singapore (Leong-Skomickova et al., 20 1 4), all of the relevant literature on the Zingiber

gracile complex was studied, including the protologues and existing revisions, along

with an examination of the type specimens.

Zingiber elatius (Ridl.) Theilade was originally published and repeated in

subsequent works with an incorrect grammatical Latin termination as Zingiber gracile

var. elatior! Zingiber elatior^ but is coiTected here to 'elatius' following Arts 23.5, 24.2

and 32.2 of the ICN (McNeill et al., 2012). When discussing earlier work 1 use the

spelling ‘elatius’, even when the authors of those earlier works used ‘elatior’, unless

I am quoting directly. It is currently recognised at specific rank, a conclusion with

which I ftilly concur, but I discovered that there is nomenclatural confusion around

this name. My initial failure to locate the specimen at SING that had been designated

by Theilade (1998) as the lectotype of 'Zingiber elatior Ridl.’ (= Zingiber gracile

Jack var. elatius Ridl.) led not only to the realisation that Ridley never recognised this

name at specific rank, but also to a number of bibliographic mistakes in Theilade ’s

entry under this taxon and lectotype designation. The lectotype she designated

is not an actual specimen but rather a mixture of data (locality, date and collection

number) from two unrelated specimens representing two different taxa. Tlie history

of the basionym. Zingiber gracile var. elatius, the original material connected to it,

and previous comments on this issue are chronologically reviewed in this paper. The

reasons why previous lectotypification have to be deemed ineffective are explained,

and the new lectotypification is proposed.

146

Card. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

Ridley’s brief entry (1899) on Zingiber gracile var. elatius reads [verbatim,

including the spelling and formatting]:

Var. elatior

A very much taller slenderer plant with stems about five

feet tall, leaves narrow linear lanceolate acuminate 10 inches by

1, peduncle 18 inches and spike 7 or 8.

Hills at 2000 feet or upwards. Penang Hill. Perak, Max-

well’s Hill.

King No. 7954. Possibly a distinct species.

Ridley cited material from tliree locations, (1) Penang Hill, (2) Perak, Maxwell’s Hill,

and (3) King No. 7954 [collected from Perak], albeit with a remark that it is possibly

a distinct species. Although Furtado noted (7 September 1931, handwritten note on

one of the two sheets of King 7954 in SING with an almost identical note also on

the duplicate at K) “T take that Ridley used the words ‘possibly a distinct species’ to

qualify his var elatior and all the specimens quoted under it, not this specimen only”,

it is possible (as suggested by the fomiatting) that Ridley’s remark belongs exclusively

to the last element (3) King 7954 which, unlike the elements (1) and (2), occurs in the

lowlands (300-500 ft as per details on the specimens). In fact, when comparing Ridley’s

eligible original material from these three locations it is possible that three taxa are

involved. Element (1) [single sheet at K, K000255246] from Penang Hill is certainly

a different taxon from elements (2) [single sheet at SING, SINGO 176950] and (3) [2

sheets at SING, SING0176448, SINGOl 76449; 1 sheet at K, K000255245]. Elements

(2) and (3), although somewhat more similar to each other than to element ( 1 ), are also

likely to be two different taxa based on inflorescence shape and proportions. Ridley’s

brief description of his Zingiber gracile var. elatius is a fusion of leaf measurements

from element ( 1 ) and inflorescence measurements from element (2), while element (3)

does not match the description in both leaves and inflorescence dimensions.

Holttum (1950) upheld this taxon at varietal level but did not select or indicate a

preference for any of the original material as a type. Holttum ( 1 950) accepted Furtado ’s

interpretation of Ridley’s entry, i.e. that Zingiber gracile var. elatius is possibly a

distinct species, a view that was later shared by Theilade (1998) who went further, and

incorrectly, interpreted this statement as Ridley’s definitive acceptance of this taxon at

specific level.

Theilade (1998), while revising Zingiber for Peninsular Malaysia, recognised

all four varieties of Zingiber gracile listed by Holttum {Zingiber gracile var. gracile,

Z. gracile var. aurantiacum Holttum, Z. gracile var. elatius Ridl. and Z. gracile var.

petiolatum Holttum) at specific rank. For two of these, Zingiber aurantiacum (Holttum)

Theilade and Zingiber petiolatum (Holttum) Theilade, she was quite explicit about

raising the taxa to the rank of species and also designated lectotypes.

Theilade (1998) indicated Ridley as the author for Zingiber elatius even though

Ridley (1899) clearly described this taxon at the varietal level and never published this

A new lectotypification of Zingiber gracile var. elatius

147

name at specific rank. She also selected a lectotype for this name, making it clear she

did not consider herself to be the one effecting the change of rank.

Theilade’s nomenclatiiral section reads [verbatim; discrepancies underlined]:

Zingiber elatior Ridl. 11899k J. Straits Brch. R. Asiat. Soc. 32: 130; (1924)

FI. Mai. Pen. 4: 260. — Z. gracile var. elatior Holttum (1950), Gdns’ Bull.

Singapore 13: 64.

There are two problems with this entry. Firstly, Ridley never published Zingiber

elatius at specific rank in either of the two works cited by Theilade (i.e., Ridley,

1899, 1924). Secondly, the basionym should be Zingiber gracile Jack. var. elatius

Ridl. but, for unknown reasons, Theilade assigns this name in her citation to Flolttum

(1950). Holttum, however, never claimed this name as his own but clearly assigned

it to Ridley (Holttum, 1950: 64). Theilade’s mistake in assigning the authorship of

Zingiber elatius to Ridley was highlighted by Turner (2000) who suggested that the

con'ect authorship should be Zingiber elatius (Ridl.) Theilade. Turner (2000) noted

that ‘notwithstanding several en'ors in bibliographic citation, the use of elatior is

admissible as the publication of a new combination’. Turner’s approach is in line with

Art 41.6 of the ICN (McNeill et ah, 2012) which states that errors in the citation of a

basionym, including an incorrect author citation, do not preclude valid publication of

a name at a new ranlc.

The designation of the lectotype of Zingiber elatior is equally conflising

(Theilade, 1998) and reads [verbatim; discrepancies underlined]:

Type: Peninsular Malaysia, Penang. Apr. 1896, Ridley 9340 (SING lectotype!,

K isotype!) Lectotype selected here.

The major problem with this statement is that no herbarium specimen exactly matching

the above citation exists in SING or K.

The SING herbarium does not have, and has no record of ever having had, a

specimen of Ridley 9340, contrary to Theilade’s and Turner’s statements of it being in

SING. This has been confinued by a manual search of the entire Zingiber collection as

well as the entire Zingiberaceae type collection. Moreover, the entire general collection

of the Zingiberaceae at SING has been barcoded and databased and Ridley 9340 is not

on record. There was also no sign of a Ridley 9340 specimen in the now discontinued

but still extant card index at SING which contains all of Ridley’s collections in SING.

From the 28 entries in the card index covering Ridley’s collection numbers from 9226

to 9378 (including the closest numbers 9338 and 9342), it is obvious that Ridley

collected in Penang in June 1898. This implies that Ridley 9340 would also have been

collected in June 1 898. This conflicts with Theilade’s information, which dated Ridley

9340 to April 1896. The sheet with the closest information to Theilade’s citation at

SING is a specimen with barcode number SO 176947 (Fig. 1), collected by Ridley

in April 1896 in Penang, but with no collection number and no exact locality given.

cm copyright reserved

148

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

MALAY PENINSULA. ** " /■

>■ ‘''-VAXG. ^ a. -

\itfive Xame ' ^ **

Dotiiuicnl. <w ,.■

/.oi (/ /i/jf iiiPrtV

EtevaUo,,.:,

Fig. 1. Specimen of Zingiber gracile Jack. (SING; SOI 76947) collected by Ridley in Penang,

April 1896. Reproduced with permission of Singapore Botanic Gardens.

A new lectotypification of Zingiber gracile var. elatius

149

There is no mention of Penang Hill - a locality which Ridley cites in his original entry.

Penang Hill (823 m), being the highest point of Penang Island, is a more specific

locality with a distinct flora than a generic Penang which often refers to lowland

locations elsewhere on the island. Moreover this sheet is not a specimen of Zingiber

gracile var. elatius, as outlined by Ridley, but rather Z. gracile var. gracile for which

the type locality is also in Penang (note the ovate to elliptic leaves, long papery ligules

and short peduncle). Holttum (1950), in fact, correctly cited this particular specimen

under the nominal variety of Zingiber gracile in his account. What possibly confused

Theilade is an addition to Ridley's original label in an unknown hand of ‘var. elatius'

and another remark in Furtado’s hand that this sheet is the syntype of the variety (see

Fig 1). Tt should also be noted, however, that there is no annotation by Theilade that

would clearly indicate that this is indeed the specimen she intended to designate as

the lectotype. Nevertheless, this specimen should not be considered to be part of the

original material of Zingiber gracile var. elatius as it is not a good fit to the protologue

in both locality data (as explained above) and morphology (it does not match the

original description in either inflorescence or in leaf dimensions with peduncles c, 4

inches long, spike 4 '4 inch long and largest lamina c. 6 x c.\% inches compared to 18

inches long inflorescence, 7-8 inches long spike and lamina 10x1 inches as stated in

the protologue).

The Kew herbarium has a single sheet of Ridley 9340 [K000255246] in its

holdings (Fig. 2). As expected, based on the search of the SING card index, the collection

date is indeed June 1 898 and the locality is recorded as Penang Hill, Richmond Pool,

2500 ft. This specimen is one of the two sheets on which Ridley based his description.

Moreover, Ridley cited a collection from Penang Hill and this specimen is the only

collection of Zingiber from Penang Hill which fits the original description at least

partly (as explained in the beginning of the introduction) and predates the publication

of the name.

In view of the information given above, Theilade ’s lectotypification has to

be considered ineffective because a particular specimen was not clearly indicated as

a lectotype and is, therefore, contrary to the ICN Art. 7.10 (McNeill et ah, 2012).

The Ridley specimen at SING (barcode SINGOl 76947) is not annotated as Ridley

9340 and does not fit the original description. On the other hand, it seems obvious

that Theilade’s “isotype” is the Ridley 9340 at K (barcode K000255246), even though

this belongs to a different gathering. In the absence of independent evidence, such as

Theilade’s annotations on either of the two specimens, it is impossible to make sense

of Theilade’s type designation and to make any correction under Art. 9.9 (McNeill

et ah, 2012). Ridley 9340 (K) [K000255246] is, therefore, selected below as the new

lectotype of the name Zingiber gracile Jack. var. elatius Ridh

While Turner (2000) spotted discrepancies in the date and locality in Theilade’s

designation of Ridley 9340 as a lectotyj^e, and corrected it in his paper to June 1898,

Penang Hill, he unfortunately did not realise that this collection is not extant at SING.

Turner (2000) also considered the specimen of Zingber gracile var. gracile discussed

above, Ridley s.n. from Penang dated April 1896 (barcode SOI 76947), to be a syntype

of Z gracile var. elatius. Tliis specimen is not, however, part of the original material.

150

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

HERB. HORT, KEW.

rULitU I'EX’A.VG.

Nflih'e XfiBie

[AKaiiiy.^

Ekr^iatlon . , Dale

HERB. HORT, EOT.

,H . ^3>V0

SyMTVI’E

ROYAL BOTANIC QARDENS KEW

llllllliiilili

I K005255246

Fig. 2. Specimen of Zingiber elatius (Ridl.) Theilade (K; K000255246) collected by Ridley in

Penang Hill, in 1 898 and designated here as the lectotype. Reproduced with permission of the

Director and Board of Trustees, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew.

KODAK Color Control Patches

A new lectotypification of Zingiber gracile var. elatius

151

Notes on the identity of Zingiber elatius from the type locality on Penang Hill, along

with a colour plate, can be found in Leong-Skomickova et al. (2014). Confinnation

of the identities of the remaining two elements from Ridley’s protologue are pending

re-collection of flowering material from their respective localities.

New lectotypification

Zingiber elatius (Ridl.) Theilade, Gard. Bull. Singapore 48: 227 (1998 [‘1996’]). -

Zingiber gracile Jack var. elatius Ridl., J. Straits Branch Roy. Asiat. Soc. 32: 130

(1899); Ridley, FL Malay Penins. 4: 260 (1924); Holltum, Gard. Bull. Singapore 13:

64 (1950). TYPE: Peninsular Malaysia, Penang, Penang Hill, Richmond Pool, 2500 ft,

June 1898, Ridley 9340 (lectotype K! [barcode K000255246], designated here).

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. I thank Siti Nur Bazilah Ibrahim (SING) for her help in our

extensive search for Ridley 9340 at SING as well as for scanning the specimen depicted in

Fig. 1; Singapore Botanic Gardens for pennission to reproduce the image of the specimen in

Fig. 1; and the Director and Board of Trustees, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew for pennission

to reproduce the image of the specimen in Fig. 2. I also thank Prof. Karol Marhold and Mr

Otakar Sida for constructive comments on the earlier version of this manuscript. Prof John

McNeill and an anonymous reviewer are thanked for critical feedback suggesting useful

improvements to this paper including bringing to our attention the error on Latin termination of

the specific/varietal epithet. Dr David Middleton is acknowledged for language improvements

and navigating this manuscript through reviews.

References

Holttum, R.E. (1950). The Zingiberaceae of the Malay Peninsula. Gard. Bull Singapore 13:

1-249.

Leong-Skornickova, J., Thame, A. & Chew, P.T. (2014). Notes on Singapore native Zingiberales

1: A new species of Zingiber and notes on the identities of two further Zingiber taxa.

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2): 153—167.

McNeill, J., Barrie, F.R., Buck, W.R., Demoulin, V., Greuter, W., Hawksworth, D.L.,

Herendeen, P.S., Knapp, S., Marhold, K., Prado, J., Pmd‘homme van Reine, W.F., Smith,

G.F., Wiersema, J.H. & Turland, N.J. (2012). International Code of Nomenclature for

algae, fungi and plants (Melbourne Code). Regnum Vegetabile 154. 205 pp. Konigstein:

Koeltz Scientific Books.

Ridley, H.N. (1899). The Scitamineae of the Malay Peninsula. J. Straits Branch Roy. Asiat.

Soc. 32: 85-184.

Ridley, H.N. (1924). Zingiberaceae. In: Ridley, H.N. (ed) The Flora of the Malay Peninsula 4:

233-285. London: L. Reeve & Co.

Theilade, I. (1998 [‘1996’]). Revision of the genus Zingiber in Peninsular Malaysia. Gard.

Bull. Singapore 48: 207-236.

Turner, I. (2000). The plant taxa of H.N. Ridley, 3. The Zingiberales. Asian J. Prop. Biol. 4(1):

1-17.

Gardens’ Bulletin Singapore 66(2): 153-167. 2014

153

Notes on Singapore native Zingiberales I:

A new species of Zingiber and notes on the

identities of two further Zingiber taxa

J. Leong-Skomickoval, A. Thame^ & P.T. Chew^

^Herbarium, Singapore Botanic Gardens,

National Parks Board, 1 Cluny Road, Singapore 259569

j ana_skomicko va@nparks. gov. sg

^Conservation Division, Central Nature Reserve,

National Parks Board, 1 Cluny Road, Singapore 259569

ABSTRACT. A new species of Zingiber singapurense Skomick., is described and illustrated

here. It is compared to other species from the Zingiber gracile {Zingiber sect. Zingiber)

alliance. A key to this group of species in Peninsular Malaysia and Singapore and a key to all

Singapore native and naturalised Zingiber species are provided. The national and international

conservation status of the new species and a conservation strategy for it are discussed. Notes

on the varietal identity of Zingiber ptiberulum and the presence of Z. ottensii, previously

misidentified as Z. zerumbet, in Singapore are given.

Keywords. Central Catchment Nature Reserve, conservation, lUCN, Zingiber gracile, Z.

griffithii, Z. ottensii, Z. puberulum, Z. singapurense, Z. zerumbet, Zingiberaceae

Introduction

A conservation project on Singapore’s native Zingiberales was initiated by the Research

& Conservation Branch of the Singapore Botanic Gardens, National Parks Board,

in January 2011. Although the initial 15 months of funding has expired, the project

continues in various forms with support from a wide network of collaborators within

and outside NParks. Initially, the project mainly involved intensive surveys of forested

areas, marking of all existing populations/mature adult plants of native Zingiberales,

regular monitoring of flowering and seed-set, and ex situ and in vitro propagation

of native material from Singapore stock for re-introduction puiposes. These efforts

continue but, as we progress with the project, we are also realising that there is a need

to clarify various taxonomic issues (correct identitifications, nomenclature). We are

also conducting in-depth studies of reproductive biology and are updating the lUCN

conservation status for all native Zingiberales in Singapore. This paper is the first in

the series entitled ‘Notes on Singapore Native Zingiberales’. This series will include

rediscoveries of taxa presumed to be extinct in Singapore, provide taxonomic and

nomenclature updates, and raise awareness of, and encourage an active approach

towards, the conservation of native Zingiberales and other plants in Singapore.

154

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

Information on Singapore’s geography and vegetation types, and the affinities

of its flora to those of Peninsular Malaysia and Sumatra, have recently been discussed

in detail (e.g. Chong et al., 2011; Ng et al, 2011; Yee et ah, 2011; Low et al., 2014)

and are, therefore, not repeated here. Recently, as interest has increased, numerous

surveys have reported new records for Singapore as well as rediscoveries of presumed

locally extinct species (e.g. Rodda et al., 2012; Yeoh et al., 2013; Low et al., 2014).

As Singapore’s flora is comparatively well known, and forested areas with primary

and mature secondary forests fairly small (accounting for about 3% - Yee et al., 2011),

reports of a new plant taxon from Singapore are infrequent. A Cry’ptocoryne Fisch. ex

Wydler hybrid from Bukit Timah Nature Reserve was reported in 2001 (Bastmeijer

& Kiew, 2001). Nine new species of Thottea Rottb. were also described by Yao

(2013) from Peninsular Malaysia, of which T. praetermissa T.L.Yao is also found in

Singapore. The most recent example is of two Utania G.Don species (Gentianaceae)

occurring in Singapore and the southern part of Peninsular Malaysia (Sugumaran &

Wong, 2014), based on types from Singapore. The presence of the Thottea and the two

Utania species were, however, already recorded in Singapore from the 1890s with

multiple collections for all thi'ee taxa, albeit misidentified. In tins paper, we present a

new ginger species for which no earlier collections are known.

In 2012, two sterile living specimens of a small Zingiber Mill, species were

collected during a regular survey in Singapore’s Central Catchment Nature Reseiwe by

William Ng of the National Parks Board, Singapore. Unfortunately, neither of the plants

survived and the original colleetion locality, said to contain just a few individuals,

could not be re-located. In October 2013 and April 2014, the same species was found

in three different locations within patches of primary and mature secondary forest in

the Central Catchment Nature Reserve. In May 2014, flowering plants were found at

all three locations. These collections could not be matched to any Zingiber species

from Singapore, Peninsular Malaysia, Borneo or Sumatra after careful study of type

material, additional herbarium specimens and the protologues of all related species of

Zingiber sect. Zingiber from the Malesian region by the first author. It was, therefore,

concluded that these new collections belong to a taxon as yet unknown to science which

we here name Zingiber singapurense. The description and measurements are made

from living material from all tliree populations. As previous works by Holttum (1950)

and Theilade (1998) were mainly based on herbarium specimens, the dimensions of

certain parts from dried material are also given to allow direct comparison to their

descriptions and to type material of related taxa.

Taxonomy

Zingiber singapurense Skomick., sp. nov.

Similar to Zingiber aurantiacum (Holttum) Theilade, but differing in the smaller and

more slender habit, inflorescences with distinctly convex fertile bracts (versus tightly

appressed bracts), reduced bracteoles (up to 6 mm long versus c. 25 mm long) and

Singapore native Zingiberales I.

155

lateral staminodes partly free from labellum (versus staminodes almost fidly connate

with labellum). TYPE: Singapore, Central Catchment Nature Reserve, MacRitchie

sector, 7 May 2014, J. Leong-Skornickovd & Aung Thame SNG-178 (holotype SING

(including spirit material); isotypes E, K, KEP). (Fig. 1, 2)

Perennial evergreen rhizomatous herb to 0.8 m tall. Rhizome 7-10 mm in diam.,

branched, internally light yellow, mildly aromatic. Leafy shoots of mature flowering

individuals 0.7-1. 5 m long, strongly arching, with 18-30 leaves; basal Va - Vs leafless,

with 4-5 green glabrous sheathing bracts; leaf sheaths green, glabrous; ligule 1-2 mm

long, almost inconspicuous, bilobed, green, tomentose; petiole reduced to pulvinus,

c. 2-3 mm long, light green, tomentose; lamina to 1 5-22 x 2-A cm (largest leaves

of mature flowering individuals measured; dimensions when dried 14-20 x 1.8-2. 8

cm), narrowly ovate, gradually tapering to a naiTowly attenuate-nan'owly caudate

apex, base obtuse to rounded, above dark glossy green and glabrous, lighter green

and glabrous beneath (except occasional space hairs near the midrib and the basal part

near pulvinus). Inflorescence radical, to 23 cm long, erect; peduncle 5-10(-12) cm

(comprising half of the length of the entire inflorescence); sheathing bracts 4-6, 0.5-3

cm long (basalmost shortest at c. 5 mm, gradually longer towards the spike), tubular

at base (2-10 mm), cream-white to light green (those below the leaf litter layer cream-

coloured, those above ± light green), with orange-reddish tinge in upper bracts, softly

pubescent (hairs appressed); spike 7-1 1x1 .5(-2) cm broad (dimensions when dried 7-1 1

X 1-1.3 cm), narrowly fusiform, consisting of 8-17 bracts (lowermost and uppermost

2 bracts usually sterile); fertile bracts slightly obovate, lower bracts up to 3.6 x 2.3

cm (gradually smaller towards the apex), with broadly acute to obtuse apex, externally

cream- white to light yellow at base, richly tinged orange-red in upper exposed parts,

softly pubescent (hairs appressed), internally light yellow, glossy, glabrous, margin c.

0.5 mm, hyaline, translucent white, enclosing single flower; bracteole much reduced,

to 2-7 mm long, 2-5 mm wide at base, triangular, translucent white, externally with

sparse soft white appressed hairs, internally glabrous. Flower 6-7 cm long; calyx 13-

20 mm long, cylindric in basal third, inflated in apical part, with three inconspicuous

teeth, incised unilaterally 6-10 mm, translucent white, sparsely pubescent towards

the ovary, glabrous in apical half; floral tube 35-42 mm long, cream-white at base,

yellowish towards apex; dorsal corolla lobe ovate-triangular, 26-28 x 9-1 1 mm,

translucent pale yellow, glabrous, apex narrowly acuminate, with indexed margins,

rarely minutely cuculate; lateral corolla lobes narrowly ovate-triangular, 23-25 x

5-7 mm, translucent pale yellow, glabrous, apex narrowly acuminate, with inflexed

margins; labellum 21-23 mm long, 9-1 1 mm wide (18-20 imn wide inclusive of the

lateral staminodes which are connate to the labellum and form a trilobed structure),

pale yellow, glabrous; lateral staminodes 13-14 x 4-5 mm, connate to labellum in

basal Vs, pale yellow, glabrous. Stamen 18-20 mm long (without straightening out

the anther c\:qsX)\ filament 1-1.5 mm long; anther c. 11 x 4 mm (excluding the crest),

connective tissue cream-white, anther crest 11-13 mm long (straightened), exceeding

stigma by 1-3 mm, cream- white to pale yellow at base, slightly darker towards apex;

156

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

Fig. 1. Zingiber singapurense Skomick. A. Habit. B. Inflorescence. C. Rooting plantlet arising

from the apical part of the leafy shoot. D. Detail of ligule. From type SNG-178. (Photos: Jana

Leong- Skomicko va)

Singapore native Zingiberales I.

157

— ^ — —

Fig. 2. Zingiber singapurense Skornick. A. Flower (side view). B. Flower (front view). C.

Flower dissection (from left): Floral tube with ovary, calyx and anther attached, dorsal corolla

lobe, two lateral corolla lobes, labellum with connated lateral staminodes, bracteole, fertile

bract. D. Detail of ovary with epigynous glands, anther (side view) and anther (front view).

From type SNG-178. (Photos: Jana Leong-Skornickova)

anther thecae dehiscing along entire length. Epigynous glands two, c. 3.5 mm long,

c. 0.75 mm in diam., cream-white. Ovary 3^ x 2-3 mm, cream-white, pubescent,

hairs light rusty brown; style white, stigma with round, forward-facing ciliate ostiole.

Fruits not seen.

158

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

Ecology and phenologyK Zingiber singapurense occurs in primary and mature secondary

forest, preferring moist and shady conditions. Flowering in May-June.

Distribution. So far endemic to Singapore.

Etymology. The specific epithet of this small and vulnerable yet resilient species is

derived from Singapore’s name in Malay, ‘Singapura’.

Additional specimens examined. SINGAPORE: Central Catclnnent Nature Reserve, MacRitchie

sector, 21 May 2014, J. Leong-Skornickovd &Aung Thame GRC-l 79 (E, SING); 29 May 2014,

MacRitchie sector, J. Leong-Skornickovd & Aung Thame GRC-l 80 (E, SING);

Provisional lUCN conservation assessment & consei^ation strategy^. So far only three

populations in the Central Catchment Nature Reserve have been discovered with each

population only having 10-25 mature individuals and less than 50 mature individuals in

total. The Extent of Occurrence (EOO) is 0.06 km^. Eligh visitor numbers and proposed

development plans could adversely affect the quality of the habitat. Following the

lUCN criteria (lUCN, 2012) and the criteria for national conservation assessments as

outlined by Davison (2008), Zingiber singapurense should be considered nationally

and globally Critically Endangered (Blab(iii,iv,v); D).

Although the leafy shoots of most Zingiberaceae are pseudostems composed

of leaf sheaths, true stems with buds, capable of producing bulbils or seedlings,

have been reported in some Globba and Zingiber species. The stems of Zingiber

singapurense are arching, a feature more prominent in older stems. The tips eventually

touch the ground and new plantlets grow from the buds (Fig. 1C), This capability to

reproduce vegetatively makes Zingiber singapurense less dependent on the presence

of pollinators and is certainly a reason behind its resilience, Flowever, it does appear

that the populations also reproduce from seeds (assumed from the presence of small

independent plantlets not physically connected to adult individuals). Nothing is

cun'ently known of the genetic diversity in the three existing populations although such

work is planned in the near future. Work on DN A barcoding of all native Zingiberales

is also in progress (Khew et al., unpublished).

The existing populations will continue to be closely monitored for fruit-set

and the numbers of seedlmgs and vegetatively produced offsprings. By selective

harvesting of young plantlets from overcrowded parts of the populations the chances

of survival of the remaining plantlets in the field improves. The harvested plantlets will

be replanted in Singapore Botanic Gardens as stock for ex situ conservation. Currently,

about 15 plants have been successfully established in the ex situ native gingers

geraiplasm collection at the Singapore Botanic Gardens. These are individuals from

all three populations to retain as much of the original genetic variation as possible.

The establishment of cuttings from stem buds and of in vitro propagation to bulk up

the number of plants is also in progress. These should produce enough stock for re-

introductions into suitable habitats as well as for its introduction into the horticulture

trade to lower the risk of illegal harvesting from the wild populations.

Singapore native Zingiberales I.

159

Notes. Zingiber is the largest genus in the sub-family Zingiberoideae with more than

200 names coiTesponding to approximately 100-150 species (Wu & Larsen, 2000;

Kishor & Leong-Skomickova, 2013). The genus is well characterised by lateral

staminodes connate to the labellum, an elongated hom-like anther crest wrapped

around the stigma, and the presence of a pulvinus. Zingiber has been traditionally

divided into four sections based on the position of the inflorescence {Zingiber sect.

Zingiber, sect. Dymczewiczia (Horan.) Benth., sect. Pleuranthesis Benth. and sect.

Cry’ptanthium Horan.). While a recent molecular study based on a single marker and

limited material hints i\\3t Zingiber sect. Dymczewiczia and Zingiber sect. Pleuranthesis

are not well segregated from Zingiber sect. Zingiber (Theerakulpisut et al., 2012), the

old classification remains in use until a new classification is formally proposed.

In its general habit and the position of the inflorescence, Zingiber singapurense

falls clearly into Zingiber sect. Zingiber. In its narrowly fusifonn orange to red

inflorescences and pale yellow flowers, it can be further narrowed to the group of

species in the Zingiber gracile alliance (for a key to Zingiber in Peninsular Malaysia see

Theilade, 1998), The complexity of this group in Peninsular Malaysia was previously

noted by Holttum (1950), who recognised four varieties (Zingiber gracile van gracile,

Z. gracile van aurantiacum Holttum, Z. gracile van elatius Ridl. and Z. gracile van

petiolatum Holttum). Theilade (1998), who revised the genus Zingiber for Peninsular

Malaysia, upgraded all varieties to the specific level (Z. gracile Jack, Z. aurantiacum

(Holttum) Theilade, Z. elatius (Ridl.) Theilade and Z. petiolatum (Holttum) Theilade).

Theilade also described an additional species fi’om this group. Zingiber suphureum

Burkill ex Theilade (Cowley & Theilade, 1995). Lim (2003) added another two species

with nan*owly fusiform inflorescences to this group, Zingiber raja C.K.Lim & Kharuk.

and Z. kelantanense C.K.Lim.

Of the seven species in the Zingiber gracile alliance, four have elliptic to ovate

laminae with an approximate length:width ratio of < 4.5. The large Zingiber raja

(type from Perak, Belum F.R.), with pseudostems to 2.5 m tall and elliptic laminae

(lengthiwidth ratio 3.6-4.23; based on the protologue), can be excluded on account of

its very long inflorescences (peduncles to 62 cm, spikes to 36 cm), markedly distinct

dark maroon labellum, and staminodes with yellow blotches. Zingiber kelantanense

(type from Kelantan, Stong F.R.) is also a large species to 2.5 m in height, with

elliptic, plicate and prominently petiolate laminae (length:width ratio 3^.1; based

on the protologue). The following two species are smaller in habit to 1 m in height.

Zingiber gracile (type from Penang), stands out in this gi'oup due to its long, papery,

thin ligules (up to 1,8 cm in the type herbarium material) and elliptic lamina (to 16 x

4.2 cm, length: width ratio 3.8; based on the lectotype) and well-developed bracteoles

(c. 20-25 mm long). Zingiber sulphureum (type from Taman Negara) differs in its

elliptic to ovate, abaxially hairy lamina (to 15^5 cm, length: width ratio 3; based on

an isotype), sulphur yellow bracts at anthesis, prominently bilobed papery ligules to 6

mm long and completely missuig bracteoles.

Zingiber singapurense has dark green, narrowly ovate to naiTOwly elliptic

laminae (14-20 x 1 .8-2.8 cm, length:width ratio 7. 1-7.8; based on herbarium material

of the holotype and isotypes) and short ligules, therefore in general habit similar to the

160

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

remaining three species. Delimitation of Zingiber singapurense within this group is,

however, straightforward as it is the only species which has much reduced triangular

bracteoles (to 2-7 mm long) and distinctly convex bracts, giving the inflorescence a

bullate appearance (Fig. IB). It is also the smallest and most delicate species in the

group, with leafy shoots to 1.5 m long, but distinctly arching and not exceeding 0.8

m in height. The bracteoles are well developed in Zingiber aurantiacum (c. 25 mm),

Z elatius (25-30 mm) and Z. petiolatum (c. 30 nmi). Zingiber petiolatum (type from

Kedah) is a much larger species, up to 3 m tall, with somewhat petiolate leaves up

to 34/40 X 5.5 cm, and inflorescences up to 86/110 cm long, inclusive of the spike to

34/44 cm long (measured from the lectotype/isolectotype; lamina length: width ratio

6.2/7.2). Zingiber elatius (type from Penang Hill) is clearly distinct in the inflorescence

composed of a long peduncle (to 36 cm; in type material), an ovoid spike composed

of bronze to red-purple bracts (c. 11 x 2.6 cm; in isolectotype), and flowers with a

pale yellow label him ornamented with fine dark purple lines and tinged in the centre.

The lamina length: width ratio is c. 10 (Fig. 3 A, B). Zingiber aurantiacum (type from

Pahang, Fraser’s Hill), is a more robust, montane species up to 2 m tall, with larger

leaves (to 26 x 4.1 cm, length:width ratio c. 6.2; based on the lectotype), reddish leaf-

sheaths in young shoots, larger inflorescences (to 43 cm in type material) with tightly

appressed bright orange fertile bracts at anthesis, and lateral staminodes almost fiilly

connate with the labellum (Fig. 3C, D).

Key to species from the Zingiber gracile alliance

in Peninsular Malaysia and Singapore

la. Lamina elliptic to ovate (length:width ratio < 4.5) 2

lb. Lamina narrowly ovate to narrowly elliptic (length:width ratio >6) 5

2a. Ligules short (c. 2 mm), labellum and staminodes dark maroon with yellow

blotches Z raja

2b. Ligules 4-22 mm, flowers light yellow 3

3a. Plant to 2.5 m tall, lamina petiolate, prominently plicate Z kelantanense

3b. Plant to 1 m tall, lamina ± sessile, smooth or weakly bullate 4

4a. Ligules to 18 mm, fertile bracts orange to pink at anthesis, bracteoles well

developed Z gracile

4b. Ligules 4-6 mm, fertile bracts sulphur yellow at anthesis, bracteoles absent

Z sulphureum

5a. Bracts prominently convex, bracteoles reduced (to 7 mm long)

Z singapurense

5b. Bracts tightly appressed, bracteoles well-developed (25-30 mm) 6

Singapore native Zingiberales I.

161

6a. Spike ovoid, bracts bronze to red-purple at anthesis, labelliim pale yellow

ornamented by fine dark purple lines and tinged in the centre Z. elatius

6b. Spike narrowly fusiform, bracts orange to rose-pink at anthesis, labellum plain

pale yellow 7

7a. Leafy shoots 2-3 m tall, inflorescence to 110 cm long (peduncle to 65 cm long,

spike to 44 cm long) Z. petiolatum

7b. Leafy shoots 1-2 m tall, inflorescence to 56 cm long (peduncle to 40 cm long,

spike to 1 6 cm long) Z. aurantiacum

The genus Zingiber in Singapore

In Singapore only two Zingiber species are cun'ently considered native: Zingiber

griffithii Baker and Zingiber puberulum Ridl. Both are easy to distinguish from

Zingiber singapurense even when sterile (Fig. 4). Zingiber griffithii has leafy shoots

0.5-0. 8 m tall, with 5-8(-10) leaves per shoot, leaf sheaths almost glabrous at base,

with sparse long silky appressed hair at apical part, lamina elliptic, thin, bright green,

slightly plicate, c. 1 2-25 x 5-8 cm, with long silky appressed hairs abaxially. Zingiber

puberulum is a more robust species with leafy shoots up to 2 m tall, with up to 23 leaves

per shoot, leaf sheaths puberulous to pubescent, lamina elliptic, slightly leathei'y, mid

to dark green, sometimes with dull silvery finish, almost flat (plication negligible), c.

20-35 X 5-8 cm, adaxially puberulous. Zingiber singapurense is a delicate plant, not

exceeding 0.8 m in height (though its arching leafy shoots might be up to 1.5 m long),

with 18-26 leaves per shoot, lamina narrowly ovate, slightly leathery, dark glossy

green, flat (not plicate) 15-22 x 2-A cm, glabrous adaxially, lighter green and almost

glabrous abaxially (except occasional space hairs near the midrib and the basal part

near pulvinus). The above measurements given are from living material in Singapore

populations.

The habit of Zingiber singapurense blends very well with other understorey

vegetation and at first glance is reminiscent of young palm fronds or even some

terrestrial orchids (e.g. Bromhaedia finlaysoniana (Lindl.) Miq.). Unless it is flowering

it is fairly hard to spot this rare species, which is likely the reason why it has been

overlooked until now.

Tliree varieties of Zingiber puberulum are currently recognised (Holttum, 1950;

Theilade 1998), Z. puberulum var. puberulum, Z. puberulum var. chryseum (Ridl.)

Holttum and Z. puberulum var. ovoideum (Ridl.) Holttum), of which two are based on

Singapore material. Zingiber puberulum war. puberulum was described from material

collected in Bukit Timah Nature Reserve (Singapore) where it is still present. All

extant Shigapore material of this species belongs to this variety. Zingiber puberulum

var. chryseum was described in 1908 by Ridley (as Z. chryseum) from the woods in the

Stagmount area (Singapore). The forest in this area was cleared shortly thereafter and

no further material of this taxon has ever been collected. It is presumed, therefore, to

162

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

Fig. 3. Zingiber elatius (Ridl.) Theilade, photographed at Penang Hill (type locality). A. Habit

and detail of ligule (inset). B. Inflorescence and detail of flower (inset). Zingiber aurantiacum

(Holttum) Theilade, photographed at Fraser’s Hill (type locality). C. Habit and detail of ligule

(inset). D. Inflorescence and detail of flower (inset). (Photos: Jana Leong-Skomickova)

Singapore native Zingiberales I.

163

Fig. 4. Zingiber griffithii Baker, photographed in Bukit Timah Nature Reserve, Singapore

{SNG-127). A. Habit and detail of ligule (inset). B. Infloreseence shortly after flowering.

Zingiber puberulutm var. puberulum Ridl., photographed in Bukit Timah Nature Reserve,

Singapore (type loeality; SNG-91). C. Habit and detail of ligule (inset). D. Infloreseence (image

rotated 90° counter clock-wise). (Photos: Jana Leong-Skomickova)

164

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

have gone extinct in Singapore. Zingiber ptiberulum van ovoideum was described by

Ridley from material collected in Pahang and so far this taxon has been only reported

from Peninsular Malaysia (Kelantan, Perak and Pahang). Its record for Singapore by

Chong et al. (2009) is an error and should be corrected to Z. puberulum war. ptiberulum.

Zingiber ottensii Valeton (previously recorded as Z zerumbet e.g. by Keng et

al., 1998; Chong et ah, 2009) has been reported growing in gardens and waste ground

(Keng et al., 1998), and later listed as casual (a sub-category of an exotic species) in a

Checklist ofthe total vascular plantflora of Singapore (Chong et al., 2009), As with many

other widely utilised gingers, the exact origin of Zingiber ottensii is unclear, though

it is clearly native to SE Asia. This species is distributed in the evergreen Malesian

region, compared to the closely related Zingiber zerumbet (L.) Sm. which is mostly

confined to South Asia and monsoonal parts of Southeast Asia (Indochinese region).

The two species are indeed very similar when sterile and practically indiscernible in

herbarium material even if an inflorescence is present unless good notes on the flowers

are provided. It is, therefore, not surprising that these are often confused. Zingiber

ottensii when flowering can be readily distinguished from Z. zenimbet by the rusty

purple-brown colour of the bracts (compared to bright green bracts of Z. zerumbet)^

and by the labellum and stammodes, which are tinged by pale purple to violet and have

pale yellow blotches (compared to the pure cream-yellowish labellum and staminodes

of Z. zerumbet) (Fig. 5). So far we have seen numerous populations of Zingiber ottensii

freely growing in several locations in Singapore but have not observed any populations

of Zingiber zerumbet.

Key to native and naturalised Zingiber species in Singapore

la. Spike ovoid, bracts rusty purple brown at anthesis, peduncle equal or more than

double the length of spike (> 15 cm long), labellum and staminodes tinged by

light purple to violet, with light yellow blotches Z. ottensii

lb. Spike fusifonn, bracts pink, orange or red at anthesis, peduncle as long or shorter

than spike (< 15 cm), labellum and staminodes unifonnly pale yellow 2

2a. Plant less than 1.5 m tall, bracteole less than 6 mm or absent 3

2b. Plant over 1.5 m tall, bracteole more than 10 mm Z. puberulum

3a. Lamina elliptic, bright green, thin, weakly plicate, beneath with long silky

appressed hair, bracteoles absent Z. griffithii

3b. Lamina narrowly ovate, dark green, slightly leathery, flat (not plicate), glossy,

glabrous beneath, bracteoles reduced (2-7 mm long) Z. singapurense

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. We sincerely thank Matti Niissalo (National University of

Singapore) and Boo Chih Min (Uvaria Tide). Each brought to our attention one additional

population of Zingiber singapurense. We thank the National Parks Board, Singapore, for the

Singapore native Zingiberales I.

165

Fig. 5. Zingiber zerumbet (L.) Sm., photographed in southern Vietnam. A. Infloreseenee.

B. Flower (front view). Zingiber ottensii Valeton, photographed in Singapore, outskirts of

Bukit Timah Nature Reserve. C. Infloreseenee. D. Flower (front view). (Photos: Jana Leong-

Skomickova)

166

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

generous funding of our project ‘Enhancement of Biodiversity Research for Gingers’ (January

2011 - March 2012) through the Urban Ecology RF programme. This enabled extensive

surveys across Singapore leading to this and other exciting discoveries, as well as mass

propagation of material of various native Zingiberales for re-introductions. Our sincere thanks

are due to nmnerous NParks statT and volunteers, who continuously supported us in the field

during plant collections and regular monitoring, in particular: Mishak Sunari (Sungei Buloh

Wetland Reserve), Derek Liew, Chung Yi Fei, William Ng and Ngon Soon Kong (all Central

Catchment Nature Reserve), Tran Hun Dang (ex staff of Singapore Botanic Gardens), Sunia

Teo (Singapore Botanic Gai'dens), Michael Leong (volunteer, Singapore Botanic Gardens).

We also thank Adelle Wang (Bukit Batok Nature Park), Desmond Lee (Sungei Buloh Wetland

Reserve) for their active approach in re-introduction programmes, and Koh Teng Seah and Dr

Gillian Khew (both Singapore Botanic Gardens) for supporting in vitiv propagation of native

gingers at Singapore Botanic Gardens. We also thank Dr Axel Poulsen and an anonymous

reviewer for critical comments and suggested improvements to this manuscript. Dr David

Middleton, Editor of Gardens’ Bulletin Singapore, for language improvements and navigating

the paper through the review process, and the curators of KEP and SING herbaria for allowing

us to examme relevant herbarium material.

References

Bastmeijer, J.D. & Kiew, R. (2001). A new Oyptocoryne hybrid (Araceae) from the Bukit

Timah Nature Reserve, Singapore. Gard. Bull. Singapore 53: 9-17.

Chong, K.Y., Tan, H.T.W. & Corlett, R.T. (2009). A checklist of the total vascidar plant flora

of Singapore: native, naturalised and cultivated species. Singapore: Raffles Museum of

Biodiversity research, National Llniversity of Singapore.

Chong, K.Y., Tan, H.T.W. & Corlett, R.T. (2011). A summary of the total vascular plant flora

of Singapore. In: Wong, K.M., Leong-Skomickova, J., Lee, S. & Low, YW. (eds)

Proceedings of the 8th Flora Malesiana Symposium. Gard. Bull. Singapore 63: 197-204.

Cowley, J. & Theilade, I, (1995). 267. Zingiber sulphureum, Zingiberaceae. Bot. Mag. 12:

73-77.

Davison, G.W.H. (2008). The Red List categories. In: Davison, G.W.H., Ng, P.K.L. & Ho, H.C.

(eds) The Singapore Red Data Book: Threatened plants and animals of Singapore, 2nd

ed. Pp. 1-4. Singapore: The Nature Society (Singapore).

Holttum, R.E. (1950). The Zingiberaceae of the Malay Peninsula. Gard. Bull. Singapore 13:1-

249.

lUCN (2012). lUCN Red List Categories and Criteria: Version 3.1. Second edition. Switzerland,

Gland and UK, Cambridge: lUCN.

Kishor, R. & Leong-Skomickova, J. (2013). Zingiber kangleipakense (Zingiberaceae): Anew

species from Manipur, India. Gard. Bull. Singapore 65(1): 39-46.

Keng, H., Chin, S.C. & Tan H.T.W (1998). The Concise Flora of Singapore, volume II:

Monocotyledons. Singapore University Press.

Lim, C.K. (2003). Zingiber aurantiacum (Holtt.) Theilade, Z petiolatum (Holtt.) Theilade and

two related new taxa from Peninsular Malaysia and Thailand. Folia Malaysiana 4(2):

65-76.

Low, Y.W., Leong, P.K.F., Tee, S.P., Rajesh Singh, Tay, M.L.C. & Wong, K.M. (2014).

Margaritaria (Phyllanthaceae), a new generic record for the Singapore flora. Gard. Bull.

Singapore 66(1): 47-56.

Singapore native Zingiberales I.

167

Ng, P.K.L., Corlett, R.T. & Tan, H.T.W. (2011). Singapore Biodiversity. An Encyclopaedia

of the Natural Environment and Sustainable Development. Editions Didier Millet in

association with the Raffles Museum of Biodiversity Research.

Rodda, M., Tran, H.D., Chiew, P.T., Liew, D. & Leong-Skomickova, J. (2012). The rediscovery

of Dischidia hirsuta (Apocynaceae, Asclepiadoideae) in Singapore. Card. Bull.

Singapore 64(2): 293—299.

Sugumaran, M. & Wong, K.M. (2014). Studies in Malesian Gentianaceae, VI. A revision of

Utania in the Malay Peninsula with two new species. PI. Ecol Evol. 147(2): 213-223.

Theerakulpisut, R, Triboun, P. Mahakham, W, Maensiri, D., Khampila, J. & Chantharanothai,

R (2012). Phylogeny of the genus Zingiber (Zingiberaceae) based on nuclear ITS

sequence data, 5w//. 67: 1-7.

Theilade, I. (1998 [‘1996’]). Revision of the genus Zingiber in Peninsular Malaysia. Gard.

Bull. Singapore 48: 207-236.

Wu, T.L. & Larsen, K. (2000). Zingiberaceae. In: Wu, Z.Y. & Raven, RH. (eds) Flora of China

24: 333-346. Beijing: Science Press.

Yao, T.L. (2013). Nine new species of Thottea (Aristolochiaceae) in Peninsular Malaysia and

Singapore, with two taxa m Peninsular Malaysia redefined and a taxon lectotypified.

Blurnea 58(3): 245—262.

Yee, A.T.K., Corlett, R.T., Liew, S.C. & Tan, H.T.W. (2011). The vegetation of Singapore -

an updated map. In: Wong, K.M., Leong-Skomickova, J., Lee, S. & Low, Y.W. (eds)

Proceedings of the 8th Flora Malesiana Symposium. Gard. Bull. Singapore 63(1 &2):

205-212.

Yeoh, Y.S., Yeo, C.K., Ang, W.F. & Low, Y.W. (2013). Marsdenia maingayi (Apocynaceae,

Asclepiadoideae), a rare rainforest woody climber rediscovered in Singapore. Gard.

Bull. Singapore 65: 241-249.

Gardens’ Bulletin Singapore 66(2): 169-171. 2014

169

Three new combinations in Haplopteris

(Pteridaceae subfam. Vittarioideae)

S. Lindsay^ & C.W. Chen^

'Gardens by the Bay, 18 Marina Gardens Drive,

Singapore 018953

Stuart. 1 i ndsay @garden sby th ebay.com .sg

^Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology,

National Tsing Hua University,

Hsinchu, Taiwan 30013

ABSTRACT. Three new combinations are made here: Haplopteris alternans (Copel.) S. Linds.

& C.W.Chen, Haplopteris humblotii (Hieron.) S.Linds. & C.W.Chen, and Haplopteris

dareicarpa (Hook.) S.Linds. & C.W.Chen. Lectotypes for Vittaria alternans Copel. and Vittaria

humblotii Hieron. are also designated here.

Keywords. Adiantaceae, Haplopteris, Monogramrna, Pteridaceae subfam. Vittarioideae,

Vittaria, Vittariaceae, Vittarioid

Introduction

In 1998 Crane published a revised circumscription of the genera of the fern family

Vittariaceae (now Adiantaceae p.p. or Pteridaceae subfam. Vittarioideae p.p.) based on

a phylogenetic analysis of rbcL gene sequences and supported by micro-morphological

characters. He proposed a number of generic changes and many new combinations but

the most significant change for Asia was the loss of the genus Vittaria Sm. (Vittaria s.s.

was redefined as a small genus of approximately 6 species restricted to the Neotropics

and Africa) and the resurrection of the genus Haplopteris C.Presl to accommodate

the many Asian species formerly placed in Vittaria. Most of the necessary new

combinations in Haplopteris have already been made (see Crane, 1998; Zhang, 2003;

Lindsay, 2010) but a few species such as Vittaria alternans Copel. from the Pliilippines

and Vittaria humblotii Hieron. from the Comoros and Madagascar appear to have been

overlooked. Both of these species have soral paraphyses with funnelfonn apical cells,

a character that they share with all existing species of Haplopteris but which is absent

from Vittaria s.s. In view of this, two new combinations in Haplopteris need to be

made.

Although Crane (1998) clarified the phylogenetic relationship of most genera of

vittarioid ferns his work did not include the two small genera Rheopteris Alston and

Monogramrna Comm, ex Schkuhr s.l. A decade later, Ruhfel et al. (2008) published

the results of another phylogenetic analysis of rhcL sequence data that included these

genera. This analysis included Rheopteris cheesmaniae Alston, the sole member and

170

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

therefore the type of the genus Rheopteris, as well as four species of Monogramma

s.l {Monogramma dareicarpa Hook., M. paradoxa (Fee) Bedd. (as Vaginularia

angustissima (Brack.) Mett.), M, trichoidea J.Sm. ex Hook, and M. acrocarpa

(Holttuni) D.L.Jones) but not, unfortunately, Monogiwnma graminea (Poir.) Schkiihr,

the type of the genus. Despite the absence of Monogramma graminea, this study

clearly showed that M. paradoxa, M. trichoidea and M. acrocarpa form a strongly

supported monophyletic group that is sister to Rheopteris cheesmaniae and that this

clade is sister to the rest of the vittarioid ferns. Monogramma dareicarpa, conversely,

is nested within Haplopteris. Moreover, Monogramma dareicarpa has bilateral spores

and soral paraphyses with fimnelform apical cells, characters that are shared with most

species of Haplopteris, whereas M. paradoxa, M. trichoidea and M. acrocarpa have

trilete spores and soral paraphyses with unspecialised apical cells. On the basis of

these and other differences, and moiphological differences to M. graminea, Ruhfel et

al. (2008) argued that the genus Vaginidaria Fee, a genus rarely recognized in recent

literature but of which Vaginularia {Monogramma) trichoidea is the type, should be

separated from Monogramma s.s. Ruhfel et al. (2008) also discussed the implications

of Monogramma dareicarpa being nested within Haplopteris but were reluctant to

formally transfer it to Haplopteris without knowing the placement of M. graminea.

The main concern was that \ f Monogramma graminea were to be nested \n Haplopteris

then, under the principle of priority, and without conservation, the genus Haplopteris

would become a synonym of Monogramma and the combination in Haplopteris would

be pointless. There are also a number of key morphological differences between

Monogramma graminea and M. dareicarpa that make assumptions of their relationship

to each other problematic. Very recently the phylogenetic position of Monogramma

graminea has been investigated using sequence data from four chloroplast genes (C.W.

Chen, unpublished). Its precise placement in the phylogeny of vittarioid ferns is to be

published separately after broader sampling and further analysis but it is already clear

that Monogramma graminea is (1) not closely related to M. dareicarpa, (2) is not

nested in Haplopteris and (3) is not closely related to any of the sampled Vaginularia

species. These facts support our decision to also transfer Monogramma dareicarpa to

Haplopteris.

New combinations

Haplopteris alternans (Copel.) S.Linds. & C.W. Chen, comb. nov. — Vittaria alternans

Copel., Philipp. J. Sci. 1 (Suppl. 2): 157 (1906). TYPE: Philippines, Mindanao,

Zamboanga, San Ramon, 2600 feet (800 m), 2 May 1905, In tree top in upland forest,

E.B. Copeland 1767 (lectotype MICH [MICHl 191098], designated here; isolectotype

BM (fragment) [BM000008869]).

Haplopteris humblotii (Hieron.) S.Linds. & C.W.Chen, comb. nov. — Vittaria

humblotii Hieron., Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 53(3-5): 427 (1915). TYPE: Comoros, Island of

Three new combinations in Haplopteris

171

Anjouan, January 1887, L. Humblot 1526 (lectotype P [P00149188], designated here;

isolectotypes P (x3) [P00149187, P00149189, P00149190]).

Haplopteris dareicarpa (Hook.) S.Linds. & C.W.Chen, comb. nov. — Monogramma

dareicarpa Hook., Sp. Fil. 5: 121, t.288A (1864). — Pleurofossa dareicarpa (Hook.)

Nakai ex H.Ito., J. Jap. Bot. 12: 408 (1936). TYPE: Borneo, Labiian [Pulau Labuan,

Sabah, Malaysia], s.d.. On the trunks of trees, E.S. Barber [IMotley] s.n. (holotype K)

Note. A letter (dated 16 November 1853) in the archives at Kew from Edmund Scott

Barber, Resident Director of the Eastern Archipelago Company at Labuan, to William

Jackson Hooker reveals that Barber purchased a collection of more than 400 botanical

specimens fi*om James Motley (who he replaced at the Eastern Archipelago Company)

in 1 853 and, soon after, sent these to Hooker. Barber only arrived in Labuan from

England in 1 853 and died the following year so it is possible that many of the Bomean

specimens that are attributed to Barber, including the type of M. dareicarpa, should

be attributed to Motley instead. Motley lived in Labuan from 1849 to 1853 (and then

elsewhere in the region until his death in 1859) and is reported to have been a keen

botanist and collector of natural history specimens.

References

Crane, E.H. (1998 [1997]). A revised eircumseription of the genera of the fern family

Vittariaeeae. Syst. Bot. 22(3): 509-517.

Lindsay, S. (2010). New combinations in Haplopteris (Adiantaceae) for the Flora of Peninsular

Malaysia. Card. Bull. Singapore 62(1): 119-120.

Ruhfel, B., Lindsay, S. & Davis, C.C. (2008). Phylogenetic placement of Rheopteris and the

polyphyly of Monogramma (Pteridaceae s.l.): Evidence from rbcL sequence data. Syst.

Bot. 33(1): 37-43.

Zhang, X-C. (2003). New combinations in Haplopteris (Pteridoph 5 ^a: Vittariaeeae). Ann. Bot.

Fennici 40(6): 459-461.

Gardens’ Bulletin Singapore 66(2): 173-188. 2014

173

Puccinia psidii (Pucciniaceae - Eucalyptus Rust, Guava

Rust, Myrtle Rust) - a threat to biodiversity

in the Indo-Pacific region

R.O. Makinson'’^ & BJ. Conn^

'National Herbarium of New South Wales, Mrs Macquaries Road,

Sydney NSW 2000 Australia

bob.makinson@rbgsyd.nsw.gov.au

barry.conn@rbgsyd.nsw.gov.au

^Australian Network for Plant Conservation Inc.,

GPO Box 1 777, Canberra ACT 2601 Australia

ABSTRACT. A biotype of the South American fimgal rust pathogen Puccinia psidii Winter has

become widely naturalised along the east coast of AusPulia since early 2010, reaching North

Queensland in 2012. This pathogen is known globally as Eucalyptus Rust or Guava Rust, and

in Australia as Myrtle Rust. It is pathogenic on a wide range of plants in the Myrtaceae. This

pathogen constitutes a major threat to myrtaceous plants in natural habitats and in production

systems in moister ai'eas of Australia, and potentially on a wide scale in the Malesian region.

The risk of spread to the Malesian region, from Australia or other sources, is high, and once

naturalised in Myrtaceae-rich biomes, eradication is unlikely.

Keywords. Eucal 5 dpus Rust, Guava Rust, Myrtle Rust, Puccinia psidii, Pucciniaceae

Introduction

In late April 2010, a disease was identified on cultivated specimens of native plants in

the family Myrtaceae near Sydney, initially only in a few commercial plant nurseries.

The disease pathogen was rapidly identified as an exotic rust fungus, either Puccinia

psidii Winter (Pucciniaceae, order Pucciniales), or a close relative. Puccinia psidii,

which is of South American origin and is internationally known as Eucalyptus Rust

or Guava Rust, had been regarded for many years as a major potential threat to native

Australian and Malesian species of the Myrtaceae if it ever arrived in the region. In

Australia, the pathogen was initially regarded as the uredinial morpho-species Uredo

rangelii J.A.Simpson, K.Thomas & C.A.Grgurinovic, a taxon putatively narrowly

distinct from P. psidii (Simpson et al., 2006). The name Uredo rangelii was widely

used for the Australian outbreak during 2010-2011. Subsequent genetic studies have

concluded that tliis pathogen is a biotype of Puccinia psidii (Carnegie & Cooper,

2011; Carnegie et al., 2010; Pegg et al., 2013, 2014) and this is now the scientifically

recognised name for the pathogen that is present in Australia, with Myrtle Rust being

the vernacular name that is in wide use. Much of the electronic and printed material

on the Australian incursion dating from 2010-2012 used the name 'Uredo range IW .

174

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

The change of preferred scientific name does not invalidate that literature in most

other respects, although host-lists and range reports from that period are now greatly

outdated. In this paper, we use the tenn Myrtle Rust for the variant (biotype) present in

Australia, and the composite term Eucalypt/Guava Rust for the total species {Puccinia

psidii) of which it is part. Note that Myrtle Rust is not to be confused with ‘Myrtle

Wilt’; a fungal disease of Myrtle Beech {Nothofagus cunninghamii (Hook.) Oerst.,

Nothofagaceae) caused by the pathogen Chalara australis J.Walker & G.A.Kile

(Smith, 2004).

Myrtle Rust was initially known only from nursery and cut-flower production

facilities, and eradication was attempted (Cannon, 2011; Carnegie & Cooper, 2011),

with infected stock being traced and destroyed. However, by October 2010 there were

many reports along the New South Wales coast, most resulting from human movement

of infected plant material, and the first reports of naturalisation. In late December

2010 the pathogen was deemed to be ineradicable and the emergency response was

discontinued. In 2011, the disease naturalised along the east coast of Australia from

southern New South Wales to south-eastern Queensland, and has since spread north

as far as Cooktown in northern Queensland. Outbreaks have occurred in the southern

State of Victoria since late 2011, mainly in and around Melbourne; the disease is now

regarded as endemic in that State but, to June 2014, occurrences there remain confined

to plants in open cultivation and to plant production and distribution facilities and it has

not naturalised in natural vegetation (D. Smith, Victorian Department of Environment

and Primary Industries, pers, comm. June 2014).

This paper briefly reviews the biology, ecology and global spread of this

pathogen, its host range, field recognition and symptoms, effects on individual hosts,

implications for conservation, and the available management guidelines, information

and training resources.

Potential scale of the problem

In the early stages of contingency planning for Puccinia psidii a national scoping

document (Commonwealth of Australia, 2006) rated it as “one of the most serious

threats to Australian production forests and natural ecosystems ... It has a potential to

cause direct mortality in the estimated 1 0% of all Australian native forest plant species

(and the great majority of dominant species) that belong to the family Myrtaceae, and

with indirect effects that may include habitat loss for native fauna and flora, retarded

regeneration and recruitment of younger trees and successional species, greater

impact of fire, and abiotic effects as a result of canopy decline including erosion,

reduced water quality, reduced water retention in soil and vegetation and potentially

large losses through lost production to the forestry industry.” In the later National

Contuigency Plans (Plant Health Australia, 2008, 2009), the pathogen was assessed

as having a high potential for entry into Australia, a high establishment potential, a

high-to-extreme spread potential, a high environmental impact, and a high-to-extreme

economic impact. It was stated that “The climate in Indonesia and Papua New Guinea

Eucaljq^tus Rust in Indo-Pacific

175

is expected to be very hospitable for P. psidiP (Plant Health Australia, 2009, p. 73

& Fig. 4), based on the predictive map of Magarey et al. (2007) which used broad

climatic factors (temperature and rainfall) to indicate that most of New Guinea and

Indonesia are potentially suitable for the establishment of Puccinia psidii.

Most pre- and post-amval impact assessment and plaiming for Australia has

been by primary industries organisations (Cannon, 2011; Nursery & Garden Industry

Australia, 2012; Plant Health Australia, 2009; Tommerup et ah, 2003), with an

emphasis on horticultural and forestry systems. Planning and assessment for natural

biodiversity has lagged behind badly, although given some attention by Glen et al.

(2007), NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (201 1); NSW Scientific Committee

(2011); Pegg et al. (2013). Plamiing and impact assessment has been hampered by

inadequate taxonomic and epidemiological knowledge for the several to many variants

of Puccinia psidii, and by an unavoidable early reliance on mainly South American

data regarding host range and climatic tolerances.

Global spread of Eucalypt/Guava Rust {Puccinia psidii)

The presumed origin and centre of diversity of Puccinia psidii is in Brazil and Uruguay

(South America). In this region, the effects are usually mild on native host species (Glen

et al., 2007; Perez et al., 2011). The pathogen came to notice through its sometimes

severe effects on crop species of Myrtaceae that are not native to the region, including

species of Psidium L. (Guava) and Eucalyptus L’Her. sens. lat.

In the first half of the twentieth century Puccinia psidii spread to the Caribbean,

where the allspice industry {Pimenta dioica (L.) Merr.) was severely damaged. In

1977, a variant arrived in Florida (U.S.A.), where among other hosts it attacked the

Australian species Melaleuca quinquenervia (Cav.) S.T.Blake, a naturalised woody

weed of the Everglades.

In 2005 a variant arrived in Hawaii, and within a year had spread to nearly all

the Hawaiian Islands, where it is now known as Ohia Rust. Its effects have been severe

on one native Hawaiian species, the already endangered Eugenia koolauensis O.Deg.,

with “a very high proportion” of plants killed (Cannon et al., 2010, p. 47). It has

affected some naturalised non-Hawaiian Myrtaceae, especially Rose Apple, Syzygium

jambos (L.) Alston (Loope, 2010).

In 2007 Eucalypt/Guava Rust was reported from Japan (Kawanisihi et al., 2009),

where it may have since been eradicated, in 20 1 1 from Hainan, China (Zhuang & Wei,

2011), and in 2013 Ifom New Caledonia (Giblin, 2013) and South Africa (Roux et al.,

2013).

In Indonesia, Hardiyanto & Tridasa (2000) report a 'Puccinia sp.’ rust disease

on sapling eucalypts in 1998 during forestry trials in Kalimantan and Sumatra. The

host eucalypts were hybrids developed in China but involvmg parent stock from

Brazil. The disease seems to have died out at these sites and has apparently not been

confiiiTied as Puccinia psidii.

176

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

The mode of arrival in Australia is not known, and the plant nursery sites where

it was first reported seem not to have been arrival sites.

On the Myrtaceae

The Myrtaceae has its centre of diversity in the Australasian region, where it is

structurally and floristically dominant in many ecosystems, and ecologically significant

in many more.

Australia has about 2,253 native species of the family Myrtaceae in 88 genera

(B. Lepschi, Australian National Herbarium, pers. comm., Aug. 2010). Myrtaceae

comprise about 10% of Australia’s native flora. Roughly half the Australian species

occur m the climatic zones likely to be most conducive to Eucalypt/Guava Rust.

The Malesian region has a less speciose and less generically diverse myitaceous

flora than Australia, but the family is still very well -represented. Comprehensive data

are lacking, but exemplar numbers are available for some areas. New Guinea and the

Solomon Islands have about 300 species in 28 genera (Hoft, 1992). A similar number

of myitaceous species, in about 30 genera, occur in Indonesia (Craven et al., 2003),

with 26 species, in 6 genera in Central Kalimantan (Campbell, 1999). 216 tree species,

in 9 genera are recorded for Peninsular Malaysia (Kochummen, 1978), and more than

205 species, in 14 genera in Sabah and Sarawak (Malaysia) (Ashton, 2011).

The Indo-Pacific region as a whole is very depauperate in rust fimgi that

parasitise Myrtaceae (Walker, 1 983). In this region, nearly all rusts on Myrtaceae are,

or are likely to be, of introduced (non-native) origin. Only two rusts on myitaceous

plants are known to occur naturally in Australia and both are rare (Simpson et al.,

2006). Walker (1983, pp. 116 & 117) reports “two unconfirmed records from India of

Melampsora ... on two introduced Australian species of Eucalyptus''. As a result of

the near-total isolation from myitaceous rusts, the Myrtaceae of the region are thought

to be epidemiologically ‘naive’ to these pathogens, with no co-evolved defences.

However, resistance of various sorts may exist through autochthonous traits.

Biology and ecology of Puccinia psidii

Taxonomic and pathotypic knowledge of Puccinia psidii is still incomplete, but there

appear to be several biotypes, all of which infect only plants of the Myrtaceae. These

biotypes may differ in host preferences, severity on different hosts, and environmental

tolerances.

The life cycle of Puccinia psidii is described in Glen et al. (2007), and, with

some new information, in Morin et al. (2014). In brief, Puccinia psidii is functionally

autoecious (it can complete its life cycle on a single host plant), and hemicyclic (no

spemiogonia and aecia ever observed - Glen et al. (2007), but see Morin et al. (2014)

for qualifications). The asexual uredinial life cycle can be completed an indefinite

number of times and produces infective urediniospores in great numbers (e.g. Uchida

Eucaljq^tus Rust in Indo-Pacific

111

& Loope, 2009). The iiredinial cycle may take as little as 10 days from infection to

sporulation under suitable conditions. Urediniospores disperse readily by wind, by

animal vectors, and through human movement of infected material. At least some

variants, including the one in Australia, also produce sexual teliospores, which are

fewer, larger, and less mobile, but may allow adaptive variation (Glen et al., 2007),

although their functionality in the life cycle of the Australian variant is uncertain

(Morin et al., 2014).

Both the geimination and pustule growth stages of the pathogen require

susceptible host species, suitable tissues (typically new leaves and very young stems),

and favourable ambient conditions. The spore germination stage requires wet leaf

surfaces at night within a suitable temperature range. Both germination and pustule

fonnation require moderate temperatures, usually cited (e.g. Glen et al., 2007) as

13-22 (-2 5 )°C based on South American data. However, there are indications that,

in the Myrtle Rust variant, pustules may still form at lower temperatures (albeit at

lower frequency), with early winter overnight minima as low as of 8°C (G. Guymer,

Queensland Herbarium, pers, comm. 2011) or even 2-5°C (D. Smith, Victorian

Department of Primary Industries, pers. comm. June 2012).

Tn Hawaii, Puccinia psidii “has been found statewide ... attacking Myrtaceae

from near sea level to elevations of about 1200 m in areas with rainfall ranging from

750-5000 mm” (Loope, 2010, pp 1 & 6). In Australia, occurrences of sporulating

Myrtle Rust from higher elevations have been recorded at 600 m (Canberra, latitude

35°S); 1 000 m (Mount Tomah, NSW, 33”S); 700 m (Toowoomba, Queensland, 27.5°S),

and c. 1 000 m (Mt Hypipamee National Park, Queensland, 17.4°S).

Urediniospores are very light and very mobile in the air column. There is a

noticeably high incidence of infections starting on the lower surface of leaves, only

later penetrating to the upper surface. Nursery inspection strategies need to take

account of this.

Some South American data (Zauza et al., 2010b) suggest a gradient of infection

frequency with height in plantations of eucalypt saplings, attributed to higher spore

loads lower in the air column, and to the upper canopy being drier at night compared to

lower leaves and hence less conducive to spore germination. Several South American

studies suggest lower levels of infection in mature eucalypts, even on seasonal new

growth, as opposed to juvenile (sapling stage) plants.

The hyphae of genninating spores penetrate the plant though the waxy cuticle,

not through the stomates as with some other rusts (K. Old in Cannon et al., 2010; Hunt,

1968). Initial symptoms can appear within 5-7 days of infection. The whole uredinial

reproductive cycle can occur in 10-12 days in warmer months, and depending on

the initial number of infection sites a massive outbreak of pustules with a very high

new spore load can develop very quickly. The cycle slows or stalls in cold months at

temperate latitudes.

Spore longevity is generally cited (often following Glen et al., 2007) as 90

days for reduction to low levels of viability, but probably varies greatly with ambient

conditions. Lower longevity occurs at temperatures >30‘'C. Salustiano et al. (2008)

report the survival levels of spores under various storage conditions, noting that spores

178

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

in deep-freeze and liquid nitrogen storage maintained significant levels of viability at

150 days. Although timber and pulp production facilities were likely to receive spores

in “very low numbers, the adverse environmental conditions encountered in these areas

and during overseas transport do not favour spore survival. Thus, the risk of spread

of this pathogen into new areas in the absence of infected host plants is considered

extremely low to inexistent” (Lana et al., 2012, p. 1). This finding is inconsistent with

the report of Grgurinovic et al. (2006) that viable spores were detected on a wood

shipment to Australia from South America. Further study of longevity is required

to enable general and specific risk assessments, including for seed-banks handling

potentially contaminated seed-lots. Long-distance transmission to new areas via spore

loads on human clothing and equipment (e.g. hats, rucksacks, tents) is distinctly

possible (Tommerup et ah, 2003).

Phylogeny and taxonomy of the pathogen

Separate lines of DNA investigation confirm that Pticcinia psidii is phylogenetically

misplaced in genus Puccinia and the family Pucciniaceae (van der Merwe et al. 2008;

Pegg et ah, 2013; Tan et ah, 2014; E. Liew et al. unpublished data, pers. comm. June

2014). Its affinities within the order Pucciniales are as yet unresolved.

Host species taxonomic range

Since the arrival of Puccinia psidii in Australia, over 300 native taxa (>10% of the

total Austi*alian Myrtaceae) have been recorded as hosts of the pathogen, either in field

situations (wild or cultivated), or under laboratory test conditions (for Australian State

host lists, see below; Carnegie & Lidbetter, 2011; Morin et ah, 2012). The number

of hosts is expected to increase further. Based on field studies, almost 45% of the

Australian myrtaceous genera (51 out of 88, see Appendix) have one or more species

known to be susceptible, affecting almost all Myrtaceae tribes represented in Australia

(14 tribes out of 17).

Separate but overlapping lists of Australian hosts have been maintained by the

Australian States in which Myrtle Rust currently oceurs, and are accessible via links

from Plant ffealth Australia (2012); these lists are however not fully up to date as

at June 2014. Consolidated and up to date global and Australian host lists are now

(October 2014) available on-line (Giblin & Carnegie 2014a, b).

There is no clear phylogenetic pattern of host susceptibility, with wide variation

in apparent susceptibility of species within genera, and sometimes within species.

Susceptibility may vary with host genetic factors (resistance of a species or individual

plant), host physiological and stress factors, growth stage, and environmental factors

including host density, local spore load, and suitability of conditions for spore

germination and pustule growth. Severity ratings are as yet tentative and, to date, are

Eucaljq^tus Rust in Indo-Pacific

179

only being gathered and published by the Queensland Department of Agriculture,

Fisheries and Forestry.

Syzygium jamhos is very susceptible in both Australia and Hawaii, with young

leaves, flower buds and petioles all prone to conspicuous levels of pustule formation

(Fig. 1). This makes it an excellent indicator species, but also a prime source of local

spore load if not dealt with promptly.

It is likely that several of the Austiulian native host species will undergo severe

decline over time as a result of repeated cycles of infection by Puccinia psidii, and that

some species not cuiTently regarded as threatened with extinction will become so -

this is already evident for the hitherto common mesic shrubs Rhodomyrtus psidioides

(G.Don) Benth. and Rhodamnia rubescejis (Benth.) Miq. (A. Camegie & G. Pegg,

unpublished data, pers. comm. March-May 2014). Some of the more susceptible

species are important floristic elements in native ecological communities, and their

decline may have a pronounced effect on those communities. The high susceptibility

of new growth on A4elaleuca quinquenervia (Cav.) S.T.Blake, M leucadendm (L.) L.

and M. viridiflora Sol. ex Gaertn. is of great concern, given the extensive floodplain

and riparian associations in which they occur in northern Australia.

The potential long-term effects on eucalypts are unclear. Some 80 eucalypt

taxa, not counting hybrids, are recorded as susceptible - 69 taxa in Eucalyptus, eight

in Cofymbia, and three in Angophora (A. Camegie, G. Pegg, F. Giblin unpublished

data, pers. comm. March 2014; Morin et al., 2012). However, in Eucalyptus itself

a majority of these records are from experimental laboratory trials, including on

non-eastern Australian species, and only a minority have infection confinued in the

natural environment. No eucalypts are regarded as highly susceptible at this point,

but there is a lack of observations for nearly all species on the critical life stages of

seedlings and coppice growth (e.g. post-fire epiconnic shoots). Infection of cotyledons

in cultivated seedlings of Eucalyptus planchoniana F.Muell. resulted in death of the

whole batch (Pegg et al., 2013). This suggests a potential for high mortality during the

seedling phase of susceptible eucalypts subjected to high mst spore loads in conditions

favourable for spore germination.

Field recognition of Puccinia psidii

Puccinia psidii is not known to utilise as host any plants other than members of the

Myrtaceae (including Heteropyxidaceae). Suspected occurrences of Puccinia psidii

should be reported as soon as possible to national and local biosecurity authorities and

lead conservation agencies. The initial report should be accompanied, if possible, by

digital photographs of the symptoms and of the host plant, the latter showing enough

features to enable identification. Australian diagnostic services may be able to assist

(biosecurity@industry.nsw.gov.au or www.daff.qld.gov.au/4790_20842.htm - for

phytosanitary reasons, send photographs only, not samples). Laboratory confirmation

of the pathogen may be needed.

180

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

For images of the various stages of Puccinia psidii infection on a variety of

host species and tissues, refer to Plant Health Australia (2012) for links to websites

maintained by the Australian State governments of New South Wales, Queensland and

Victoria. Early symptoms of infection, small purplish or brown-grey lesions, are not

obvious and are difficult to distinguish from other minor damage; they typically occur

on new stem and leaf tissue, but also on soft fruits and parts of inflorescences in some

hosts. Leaf infections often start on the lower surface, penetrating to the upper surface

in 2-4 days. Within a few more days sporulating pustules develop.

The sporulation (pustule) stage is the easiest to recognise. By the time this stage

is obvious, spores are ready to disperse - handling and disposal of plants at this stage

can easily spread the spores unless strict protocols are followed. The most prolific

form is the uredinial pustule, typically bright yellow or yellow-orange (Fig. 1, 2). Less

common are light- to mid-brown telial pustules, producing sexual teliospores.

After the spore masses have dispersed, the effects on the plant may remain

obvious (e.g. dead shoots, defoliated new stems, distorted new stem structure and

overall habit) but are not easy to attribute definitely to being a Puccinia psidii infection

in the absence of pustules.

Effects of infection

The effects of severe infection may include a loss of new seasonal or regenerative

growth, some loss of photosynthetic capability, loss of some or all reproductive capacity

if fiowers or fruits (soft-fruited species) are infected or if flowering can only occur

on new growth, exhaustion of growth potential, and death or retardation of seedlings

and juveniles. Whole plant death is known in plantations of some eucalypt and other

species in South America after repeated infection cycles. Whole-plant mortality in

Australia has, so far, mainly been seen in some seedlings, nursery stock, and new bush

regeneration plantings, but is now increasingly seen in naturally occurring plants of the

highly susceptible Rhodamnia rubescens and Rhodomyrtus psidioides.

Repeated infection cycles on highly susceptible hosts may cause decline in

population size or density, with effects on pollination systems and gene flow. Animals

dependent on myrtaceous species may be affected. Regional or total extinction of very

susceptible species is possible, as are stRictural and ecological changes in vegetation

communities and faunal assemblages.

Climatic & geographic prediction modelling

Predictive modelling has been limited, and largely dependent on matching South

American climatic, microclimatic and epidemiological data (often from plantation

conditions and of uncertain Puccinia psidii biotypes) to Australian and Melanesian

bioclimatic profiles.

Eucal3q3tus Rust in Indo-Pacific

181

Fig. 1. Uredinial pustules of Puccinia psidii on new growth of eultivated Syzygium jambos

(Rose Apple), Brisbane, Queensland, Sept. 2011. (Photo: R.O. Makinson)

Booth et al. (2000) produced a preliminary assessment of high risk areas for

the Northern Territory, Queensland and New South Wales. A revised continental

risk-predictive map by Booth & Jovanovic appeared in Glen et al. (2007) (as a pers.

comm.; refer Booth et al., 2000, and Booth & Jovanovic, 2012 for the methodology

used to develop map) and was reproduced in Plant Health Australia (2009). The latter

publication also featured an alternative map (p. 14) by R. Magarey that includes

182

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

Fig. 2. Uredinial pustules of Puccinia psidii on hypanthium and ovary summit of Rhodomyrtus

psidioides (Native Guava), Wamberal Nature Reserve, New South Wales, Dee. 2010. (Photo:

R.O. Makinson)

Australia, New Guinea and most of Indonesia, taken from a global risk analysis (based

on distributions in South and Central America) later published as Magarey et al.

(2007). The Malesian zones on this map are assessed as having a very high likelihood

of permanent Eucalypt/Guava Rust establishment. Elith et al. (2012) developed a

model for investigating the differences in distribution of artificially grouped locations

in Australia that they deemed represented different strains of the rust.

The most recent modelling, of relative climate suitability for Puccinia psidii

at global and Australian scales, is that of Kriticos et al. (2013). This shows most of

Malesia and parts of mainland South-east Asia as having moderately to highly suitable

climatic parameters for the permanent establishment of Puccinia psidii, assuming

favourable local climatic regimes and the presence of susceptible host species.

Impact assessment and management guides for production systems

The most comprehensive management guide available for the horticultural sector is

the Australian Nursery Industry Myrtle Rust Management Plan (Nursery & Garden

Industry Australia, 2012). This contains detailed monitoring, biosanitation, and

fungicide treatment protocols for production and wholesale/retail ‘greenlife’ facilities.

This Plan is also applicable to forest nurseries and to some plantation situations.

Eucaljq^tus Rust in Indo-Pacific

183

Short management guidelines for various situations in the Australian context,

including domestic and rural properties, and for industries based on the myrtaceous

oils and foodstuffs, are available via the Queensland and New South Wales primary

industries department websites (Plant Health Australia, 2012). The New South Wales

Road Transport Authority Biodiversity Guidelines provide model procedures for

reducing the risk of spread by utilities providers and contractors (NSW Roads and

Maritime Services, 2011).

A broad assessment of the potential impact of this disease on the Australian

commercial forestry sector is provided by Cannon (2011), who comments that

long-term effects will depend partly on whether other strains of Eucalypt/Guava

Rust are introduced. Camegie et al. (2010) and Pegg et al. (2014) provide details of

methods used for rapid screening of (eucalypt) forestry species for susceptibility.

Some recent research projects funded by the Australian Government have a bearing

on resistance in the production context (publications pending by; B. Thumma et al.,

CSIRO Plant Industry, resistance genes in eucalypts; C. Kulheim et ah, Australian

National University, genetic markers for resistance in non-eucalypt Myrtaceae, and

metabonomic responses to infection; K. Sandhu & R.F. Park, University of Sydney,

genetic basis of pathogenicity; M. Horwood, University of Sydney, chemical control).

A considerable literature, mostly from South America, exists for the eucalypt

plantation forestry sector, including research on pathotypes, resistance genetics, and

resistance breeding - key recent papers, with more or less extensive reference lists,

are da Silva et al. (2014), Gra9a et al. (2011), Mamani et al. (2010), Martins et al.

(2011) and Zauza et al. (2010a). A consolidated interim global bibliography for R

psidii (Makinson 2014) is now available on-line, although still incomplete for South

America.

Prescriptions for the assessment of impact and the management of Puccinia

psidii in forestry and in the wild are at an early stage of development in Australia. The

impacts of the pathogen, and the (limited) options for its management, are gradually

becoming apparent. There is a time-limited opportunity, especially in those susceptible

areas not yet infected by Myrtle Rust, to gather baseline data and to establish long-

term monitoring. In the absence of any likely biological control, effective management

in extensive Myrtaceae-rich systems of a multi-vector disease with such a wide host

range is inherently problematic.

Impact assessment and management guides for wild biodiversity

Impact assessment for Australian native {in situ) biodiversity has been slow in

developing, and only sparse, mostly qualitative data are available. One early

assessment with some national applicability, is for the state of New South Wales (NSW

Scientific Committee 2011). Work in progress by G. Pegg (Queensland Department of

Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries) and A. Camegie (New South Wales Department

of Primary Industries) on a few wild species represents the main organised research

on the impacts on natural species to date. They report (pers. comm. May 2014) severe

184

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

declines in seasonal growth, reproductive capacity and recruitment in the mesic shrubs

Rhodomyrtus psidioides and Rhodamnia rubescens.

There are no ‘good’ management solutions for Myrtle Rust infection in natural

vegetation. Fungicidal treatments are rarely possible on the scale needed and have

unwanted effects on other biodiversity. Physical removal of susceptible species is

usually ineffective and too expensive except in small areas, and may be incompatible

with conservation management objectives. However, such a strategy may have value

(e.g. along high-use tracks) in reducing spore load on visitors likely to then ti'avel to

rust-free zones. Fire is unlikely to be an effective control given the potential for re-

infection and the preference of the rust for new growth.

The likely behaviour of Myrtle Rust in relation to local floristic composition

and recmitment, microclimate, disturbance (especially fire), and regeneration is not

known. In climatically marginal areas, or where highly susceptible host species are

lacking (or die out), infections in natural vegetation may be transitory or seasonal.

Some frrst-generation bushland policy/management documents are now

available, including NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (2011). Summary

adviee for minimising arrival risk and impact on natural plant communities, including

hygiene protocols, is available as brochures and webpages (refer the Australian

government primary industries sites of affected States: Plant Health Australia 2012).

Conclusion

Puccinia psidii poses a signifrcant threat to the Myrtaceae flora of the Malesian and

Australasian regions, and to at least some ecological communities. It is understood

that some level of regional infonnation exchange has been developed through primary

industries and quarantine agencies. It is highly desirable that this be formalised and

expanded to include environmental organisations (govenunent and non-government),

and other stakeholders.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. We thank Angus Carnegie (New South Wales Department of

Primary Industries), Fiona Giblin (University of the Sunshine Coast), .lonathan Lidbetter

(New South Wales Department of Primary Industries), Geoff Pegg (Queensland Department

of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries), David Smith (Victorian Department of Environment

and Primary Industries), Gordon Guymer (Queensland Herbarium), and Edward Liew (Royal

Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust, Sydney) for providing unpublished infonnation that has

been incorporated into this paper. Saw Leng Guan (Forest Research Institute Malaysia) kindly

assisted us to develop an estimate of the species of Myrtaceae in Malaysia.

References

Ashton, P.S. (2011). Myrtaceae. In: Soepadmo, E., Saw, L.G., Chung, R.C.K. & Kiew, R. (eds)

Tree Flora of Sabah and Sarawak 7: 1^50. Kuala Lumpur: Forest Research Institute

Malaysia.

Eucaljq^tus Rust in Indo-Pacific

185

Booth, T.H. & Jovanovic, T. (2012). Assessing vulnerable areas for Puccinia psidii (Eucalyptus

Rust) in Australia. Austral PL Pathol 41: 425^29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/sl3313-

012-0130-x

Booth, T.H., Old, K.M. & Jovanovic, T. (2000). A preliminary assessment of high risk areas

for Puccinia psidii (Eucalyptus Rust) in the neotropics and Australia. Agric. Ecosyst.

Environm. 82: 295-301.

Campbell, E.J.F. (1999). Myrtaceae. In: Argent, G., Saridan, A., Campbell, E.J.F., Wilkie, R,

Fairweather, G., Hadiah, J.T., Middleton, D.J., Pendry, C., Pinard, M., Warwick, M. &

Yulita, K.S. (eds) Manual of the Larger and More Important Non Dipterocarp Trees

of Central Kalimantan, Indonesia 2: 463-A75. Indonesia, Samarinda: Forest Research

Institute , & UK, Edinburgh: Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh.

Cannon, A.M. (2011). Myrtle Rust. Forest & Wood Products Australia Ltd. http://www.fwpa.

com.au/resources (accessed Jun. 2014).

Cannon, P.G., Alfenas, A.C., Graca, R.N., Kim, M.-S., Peever, T.L. & Klopfenstein, N.B.

(201 0). Detemiining if there are lines of Guava Rust {Puccinia psidii) that could seriously

impact Ohia {Metrosideros polymorpha), in Hawaii. In Adams, J. (ed) Proceedings of

the 57th Western International Forest Disease Work Conference, 20-24 July 2009.

USA, Colorado, Durango: Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team.

Carnegie, A.J. & Cooper, K. (2011). Emergency response to the incursion of an exotic

myrtaceoLis rust in Australia PI Pathol 40: 346-359. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/

S13313-011-0066-6

Carnegie, A.J. & Lidbetter, J.R. (2011). Rapidly expanding host range for Puccinia psidii

sensti lato in Australia. Austral PI. Pathol. 41: 13-29. www.springerlink.com/content/

w8538mu25rh72870/

Carnegie, A.J., Glen, M. & Mohammed, C. (2010). Rapid screening of commercial forestry

species to Uredo rangelii (myrtle rust) and distinguishing U. rangelii Lor Puccinia psidii

(guava mst). Forest & Wood Products Australia Ltd. http://www.fpwa.com.au

Commonwealth of Australia (2006). Contingency planning for Eucalyptus Rust. Pp. 100-104.

http://www.mincos.gov.au/communiques/archived_resolutions2 (accessed Jun. 2014).

Craven, L.A., Sunarti, S., Mudiana, D., Yulistiami, T. & Wardani, M’a, (2003). Identification

key to the indigenous Indonesian genera of Myrtaceae. Florihunda 2: 89-94.

da Silva, A.C., Teixerra de Andrade, P.M., Alfenas, A.C., Graga, R.N., Cannon, R, Hauff, R.,

Fen*eira, D.C. & Mori, S. (2014). Vimlence and impact of Brazilian strains of Puccinia

psidii on Hawaiian ‘Ohi’a {Metrosideros polymorpha). Pacific Sci. 68: 47-56. http://

dx.doi.org/1 0.2984/68. 1.4

Elith, J., Smipson, J., Hnsch, M. & Burgman, M.A. (2012). Taxonomic uncertainty and decision

making for biosecurity: spatial models for myrtle/guava rust. Austral. PI. Pathol. 42:

43-51. http://dx.doi.Org/10.1007/sl3313-012-0178-7

Giblin, F.R. (2013). Myrtle rust report: New Caledonia. Assessment of myrtle rust situation in

New Caledonia, 13-17 May 2013. Australia, Maroochydore: University of the Sunshine

Coast, [unpublished report]

Giblin, F. & Carnegie, A.J. (2014a). Puccinia psidii (Myrtle Rust) - Global host list, http://

www.anpc.asn.au/resources/Myrtle_Rust.html

Giblin, F. & Carnegie, A.J. (2014b). Puccinia psidii (Myrtle Rust) - Australian host list, http://

www.anpc.asn.au/resources/Myrtle_Rust.hmil

Glen, M., Alfenas, A.C., Zauza, E.A.V., Wingfield, M.J. & Mohammed, C. (2007). Puccinia

psidii: a threat to the Australian environment and economy - a review. Austral PI

Pathol 36: 1—16.

186

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

Gra9a, R.N., Aun, C.P., Guiimiaraes, L.M.S., Rodrigues, B.V.A., Zauza, E.A.V. & Alfenas,

A.C. (201 1). Anew race of Puccinia psidii defeats rust resistance in eucalypt. Australas.

PL Pathol 40: 422-447. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/sl3313-011-0056-8

Grgurinovic, C.A., Walsh, D. & Macbeth, F. (2006). Eucalyptus rust caused by Puccinia psidii

and the threat it poses to Australia. EPPO Bull 36: 486-489.

Hardiyanto, E.B. & Tridasa, A.M. (2000). Early performance E’z/ca/vp/wx urophylla x E. grandis

hybrid on several sites in Indonesia. In; Dungey,. H.S., Dieters, M.J. & Nikles, D.G.

(eds) Hybrid Breeding and Genetics of Forest Trees, Proceedings of QFRI/CRC-SPF

Symposium, 9-14 April 2000. Australia, Queensland, Noosa: Department of Primary

Industries, Brisbane.

Hoft, R. (1992). Plants of New Guinea and the Solomon Islands: dictionaiy of genera and

families of flowering plants. Papua New Guinea: Wau Ecological Institute.

Hunt, P. (1968). Cuticular penetration by genninating uredospores. Trans. Brit. Mycol. Soc.

51:103-112.

Kawanisihi, T., Uematsu, S., Kakishima, M., Mamamoto, H,, Morie, H. & Namba, S. (2009).

First report of rust disease on ohia and the causal fungus, Puccinia psidii, in Japan. J.

Gener PI. Pathol. 75: 428-431. www.springerlink.com/content/4578039767457128/

Kochuimiien, K.M. (1978). Myrtaceae. In: Ng, F.S.P. (ed) Tree Flora of Malaya 3: 169-254.

Kuala Lumpur: Longman Malaysia.

Kriticos, D.J., Morin, L., Leriche, A., Anderson, R.C. & Caley, P. (2013). Combining a climatic

niche model of an invasive fungus with its host species distributions to identify risks to

natural assets: Puccinia psidii 5ensu lato in Australia. PLoS ONE 8(5): e64479. http://

dx.doi.org/1 0. 1 371 /journal .pone.0064479

Lana, V.M., Mafia, R.G., Feri'eira, M.A., Sartorio, R.C., Zauza, E.A.V., Mounteer, A.H. &

Alfenas, A.C. (2012). Survival and dispersal of Puccinia psidii spores in eucalypt wood

products. Austral. PI. Pathol. 41: 229-238. http://dx.doi.org/doi: 10.1 007/sl331 3-011-

0112-4

Loope, L. (2010). A summary of information on the rust Puccinia psidii Winter (guava rust)

with emphasis on means to prevent introduction of additional strains to Hawaii, http://

pubs.usgs.gOv/of/2010/1082/ (accessed Jun. 2014).

Magarey, R.D., Fowler, G.A., Borchert, D.M., Sutton, T.B., Colunga-Garcia, M. & Simpson,

J.A. (2007). NAPPFAST: An internet system for the weather-based mapping of plant

pathogens. PI. Dis. 91: 336-345. http://dx.doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-91-4-0336

Makinson, R.O. (2014). Resource directory and bibliography for Puccinia psidii (Myrtle Rust,

Eucalyptus/Guava Rust). http://www.anpc.asn.au/resources/Myrtle_Rust.html

Mamani, E.M.C., Bueno, N.W., Fai'ia, D.A., Guimaraes, L.M.S., Lau, D., Alfenas, A.C. &

Grattapaglia, D. (2010). Positioning of the major locus of Piiccina psidii mst resistance

(Pprl) on the Eucalyptus reference map and its validation across unrelated pedigrees.

Tree Genet. Genomes 6: 953-962. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/sll295-010-0304-z

Martins, M.V.V., Silveira, S.F., Maffia, L.A., Rocabado, J.M.A. & Mussi-Dias, V. (2011).

Chemical control of guava rust {Puccinia psidii) in the Northern region of Rio de

Janeiro State, Brazil. Austral PI. Pathol. 40: 48—54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/sl3313-

01 0-001 2-z

Morin, L., Aveyard, R., Lidbetter, J.R. & Wilson, P.G. (2012). Investigating the host-range of

the mst fungus Puccinia psidii sensu lato across tribes of the family Myrtaceae present

in Australia. PLos ONE 7(4): e35434 (1-7). http://dx.doi.org/dx.doi.org/10.1371/

joumal.pone. 0035434

Eucaljq^tus Rust in Indo-Pacific

187

Morin, L., Talbot, M.J. & Glen, M. (2014). Quest to elucidate the life cycle of Puccinia psidii

senu lato. Fungal Biol. 118: 253-263. http://dx.doi.Org/10.1016/j.fLinbio.2013.12.004

NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (2011). Management Plan for Myrtle Rust on the

National Parks Estate. Office of Environment and Heritage: Sydney, New South Wales.

www.environment.nsw.gov.au/pestsweeds/201 10683myrtlerustmp.htm (accessed Jun.

2014).

NSW Roads and Marithne Services (2011). Biodiversity Guidelines: Protecting and Managing

Biodiversity on RTA Projects. September 201 1 Edn. NSW Roads and Maritime Services:

Sydney, New South Wales, www.ita.nsw.gov.au/enviromnent/downloads/biodiversity_

guidelines.pdf (accessed .lun. 2014).

NSW Scientific Committee (2011). Introduction and Establishment of Exotic Rust Fimgi of the

order Pucciniales Pathogenic on Plants of the family Myrtaceae. Office of Environment

and Heritage: Sydney, New South Wales, www.enviromnent.nsw.gov.au/cotmnittee/

FinalDetenninations.htm (accessed Jun. 2014).

Nursery & Garden Industry Australia (2012). Australian Nursery Industry Myrtle Rust (Uredo

rangelii) Management Plan. Nursery & Garden hidustry Australia, www.ngia.com.au

(accessed Jmi. 2014).

Pegg, G.S., Brawner, J.T. & Lee, D.J. (2014). Screening Cotyrnbia populations for resistance to

Puccinia psidii. PL Pathol. 63: 425-436. http://dx.doi.org/10.llll/ppa.12097

Pegg, G.S., Giblin, F.R., McTaggart, A.R., Guymer, G.P., Taylor, H,, Ireland, K.B., Shivas,

R.G. & PeiTy, S. (2013). Puccinia psidii in Queensland, Australia: disease symptoms,

distribution and impact. PI. Pathol. 63: 425-436. http://dx.doi. 0 rg/lO.l 1 ll/ppa.l2173

Perez, C.A., Wingfield, M.J., Altier, N.A., Sinieto, S. & Blanchette, R.A. (2011). Puccinia

psidii infecting cultivated Eucalyptus and native myrtaceae in Umguay Mycol. Progr.

10: 273-282. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/sll557-010-0698-x

Plant Health Australia (2008) National Nursery and Garden Industry Biosecurity Plan. Version

2 (March 2008). edn. Plant Health Australia: Deakin, Australian CapitalTerritory. http://

www.ngia.com.au (accessed August 2014).

Plant Health Australia (2009). Threat Specific Contingency Plan - Guava (Eucalyptus) rust

Puccinia psidii. Plant Health Australia . http://www.planthealthaustralia.com.au/pidd-

docs/200%20-%20Guava%20rust%20CP%20-%202009.pdf (accessed Aug. 2014).

Plant Health Australia (2012). Myille Rust Transition to Management Program, http://

myrtlerust.net.au (accessed Jun. 2014).

Roux, J., Greyling, I., Coutinho, T.A., Verleur, M. & Wingfield, M.J. (2013). The Myrtle rust

pathogen, Puccinia psidii, discovered in Africa. IMA Fungus 4: 155-159. http://dx.doi.

org/ 1 0.5598/imafungus. 201 3.04.01 . 1 4

Salustiano, M.E., Pozza, E.A., Ferraz Filho, A.C. & Castro, H.A. (2008). Viability of Puccinia

psidii urediniospores stored in different enviromnents. Trop. PI. Pathol. 33: 313-316.

www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S198256762008000400009&script=sci_arttext&tlng=es

Simpson, J.A., Thomas, K. & Grgurinovic, C.A. (2006). Uredinales species pathogenic on

species of Myrtaceae. PL Pathol. 35: 549-562.

Smith, I.W. (2004). ‘Mjntle Wilt: a disease of Myrtle Beech.’. Department of Sustainability

and Environment, Melbourne. http://soln.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/

myrtlewiltfactsheet-2005.pdf and http://soer.justice.tas.gov.au/2009/copy/49/index.php

Tan, M.-K., Collins, D., Chen, Z., Englezou, A. & WiUdns, M.R. (2014). A brief overview of

the size and composition of the myrtle rust genome and its taxonomic status. Mycol. 5:

52-63. http://dx.doi.Org/10.1080/21501203.2014.919967

188

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

Tommerup, I.C., Alfenas, A.C. & Old, K.M. (2003). Guava rust in Brazil - a threat to Eucalyptus

and other Myrtaceae. New Zealand J. Forest. Sci. 33: 420-428.

Uchida, J.Y. & Loope, L.L. (2009). A recurrent epiphytotic of Guava Rust on Rose Apple,

Syzygium jamhos, in Hawaii. PI. Dis. 93: 429. http://dx.doi.org/10.1094/PDlS-93-4-

0429B

van der Merwe, M.M., Walker, J., Ericson, L., & Burdon, .l.J. (2008). Coevolution with higher

taxonomic host groups within the Puccima/Uromyces rust lineage obscured by host

jumps. A/vco/. Res. 112: 1387-1408. http://dx.doi.Org/10.1016/j.mycres.2008.06.027

Walker, J.B. (1983). Pacific mycogeography: deficiencies and regularities in the distribution

of plant parasitic fungi. Austral. J. Bot., Suppl. Ser. 10: 89-136.

Wilson, P.G., O’Brien, M.M., Heslewood, M.M. & Quinn, C.J. (2005). Relationships within

Myrtaceae sensu lato based on a matK phytogeny. PI. Syst, Evol. 251: 3-19. http://

dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00606-040-0162-y

Zauza, E.A.V., Alfenas, A.C., Old, K., Couto, M.M.F., Gra 9 a, R.N. & Maffia, L.A. (2010a).

Myrtaceae species resistance to rust casued by Puccinia psidii. Austral PI. Pathol. 39:

406-41 1 . http://dx.d 0 i. 0 rg/l 0. 1 071 /API 0077

Zauza, E.A.V., Couto, M.M.F., Lana, V.M. & Maffia, L.A. (2010b). Vertical spread of Puccinia

psidii urediniospores and development of eucalyptus rust at different heights. Austral.

PL Pathol. 39: 141-145.

Zhuang, J.-Y. & Wei, S.-X. (2011). Additional materials for the rust flora of Hainan Province,

China. Mycosystema 30: 853-860.

Appendix. Host genera of Myrtle Rust (Puccinia psidii) in Australia, to 22 June 2014.

Legend: Bold = one or more species of genus infected in wild or in cultivation; underlined =

infectivity in one or more species of genus by artificial inoculation under laboratory conditions

only (Morin et ah, 2012); * = genera enthely exotic to Australia; f = genera native to Malesia.

Generic recognition follows Wilson et al. (2005) note that some other published lists follow

differing lists of recognised genera. Unpublished data courtesy of J. Lidbetter and A. Carnegie

(New South Wales Department of Primary Industries), F. Giblin (University of the Sunshine

Coast), and G. Pegg (Queensland Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries). Note that

susceptibility of a species in a genus does not necessarily imply susceptibility of all congeners.

Acmena, Acmenosperma^ Agonis^ Allosvncarpia. Anetholea, Angophora^ 'fAsteromyrtus,

Austromyrtus, Backhousia, f Baeckea, Barongia, Beaufortia. Callistemon, Calothamnus,

Calvtrix ., Chamelaucium, Choricarpia^ Corymbia, Darwinia^ '\Decaspenniim, '\Eucalyptus,

■fEugenia^ fCossia, *Heteropyxis, Homoranthus, Hypocalymma^ KunzecL Lenwebbia,

"^Leptospennum, "fLindsayomyrtus, Lithomyrtus, Lophomyrtus^ fLophostemon,

^Melaleuca, ^Metrosideros, Mitrantia, "^^Myrciaria, "^Myrtus, ^Osbornia, Pilidiostigma^

* Pimenta . Plinia, *f Psidium . Re^elia. ^Rhodamnia, fRhodomyrtus, Ristantia, Sphaerantia,

Stockwellia^ Syncarpia, 'fSyzygiiim^ Thi'vptomene . Tristania^ t Tristanionsis . *Ugni,

•fUromyrtus, Verticordia . Waterhousea, Xanthostemon.

Gardens’ Bulletin Singapore 66(2): 189-194. 2014

189

A new species of Billolivia (Gesneriaceae) from Vietnam

DJ. Middleton^, J, Leong-Skomickova^ & Q.B. Nguyen^

'Herbarium, Singapore Botanic Gardens,

National Parks Board, 1 Cluny Road, Singapore 259569

david_middleton@nparks ,gov. sg

-Vietnam National Museum of Nature,

Vietnam Academy of Science and Teclmology,

1 8 Hoang Quoc Viet Street, Cau Giay, Hanoi, Vietnam

ABSTRACT. The new species Billolivia moelleri D.J.Middleton fromNui Chua National Park

in Niiih Thuan Province in Vietnam is described. A provisional lUCN conservation assessment

and a new key to the species of Billolivia are provided.

Keywords. Billolivia, Gesneriaceae, new species, Vietnam

Introduction

The genus Billolivia D.J.Middleton, containing five species new to science, was only

recently described (Middleton et al., 2014). These five species are known from a

relatively small area in the southern Annamite mountains in the provinces of Binli

Phuoc and Lam Dong in Vietnam. Although one of the collections was made in 1933,

all of the other material from which these species were described was collected within

the last 20 years and most of it within the last 10 years. However, the collecting density

in the region remains fairly low. As the known species of Billolivia are all quite locally

endemic the likelihood that new species in the genus will be discovered as forested

areas in the region are better explored is high. A collection made in November 2013

in Nui Chua National Park in Ninli Thuan province has already proven to be a new

species in the genus and is here described. A provisional lUCN conservation assessment

following the guidelines in lUCN (2012) is suggested.

Billolivia moelleri D.J.Middleton sp. nov.

Similar to Billolivia violacea D.J.Middleton & H.J.Atkins in the violet corolla lobe

tips and the presence of a calyx tube but differing in the leaf margins being more

coarsely dentate, in the dark purple lines in the corolla, and in the corolla being smaller

overall. It also shows similarities to Billolivia vietnamensis D.J.Middleton & Luu in

the overall corolla size and in the purple lines in the corolla but that species has the

calyx divided to the base and the corolla lobes are white.

TYPE: Vietnam, Ninh Thuan Prov., Ninh Hai Dist., VTnh Hai Commune, Nui Chua

National Park, trek from Kien Kien village to Nui Chua peak, 758 m, 11°44’27.4”N

190

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

109°07’41.9”E, 2 November 2013, Jana Leong-Skornickovd, Nguyen Quoc Binh,

Aung Thame & Edward Ong JLS-2623 (holotype SING [including flowers and fruits

in spirit]; isotypes E, K, MO, P, VNMN). (Fig. 1 , 2)

Caulescent herb to 30 cm tall; stems with long brown hairs to 4.5 mm long. Leaves

alternate, intemodes up to 2.9 cm long but generally around 1 cm long; petioles 6.5-

1 1 .2 cm long, densely covered in a mixture of long brown spreading hairs to 6 mm long

and shorter appressed brown hairs; lamina elliptic to obovate, 7.6-14.5 x 3. 1-6.2 cm,

2.1-3 times as long as wide, base cuneate to somewhat truncate, apex short acuminate,

margin dentate to crenate, more coarsely so towards apex, secondary venation 8-12

veins on each side of midrib with weaker intersecondaries between, tertiary venation

alternate percurrent, adaxial lamina with sparse long hairs throughout, margin ciliate,

abaxial lamina with shorter hairs to 1 mm long between the veins and both short

and long hairs to 4.5 mru long on midrib and venation. Inflorescences subsessile,

c. 8-flowered; bracts at base, narrowly triangular, 0.6-1 x 1.5-1 .7 mm, apex acute;

pedicels 28-33 mm long, densely long pubescent. Calyx 14-15 mm long, of a short

tube and 5 lobes, somewhat 2-lipped with the three upper lobes close and parallel and

the two lower lobes diverging, outside densely covered in long eglandular hairs to 5

mm long, inside glabrous except for few minute papillae; tube 4-5.5 mm long; lobes

deltoid, apices acute, 9-10 x l .5-2 mm. Corolla c. 25 mm long, composed of a nan'ow

tube which slightly curves downwards in lower half and slightly flares towards mouth,

and a 2-lipped limb, white with purple lines from inside tube and onto lobes, ventral

surface of throat and tube with 2 yellow stripes in line with lobe sinuses, upper halves

of lobes violet; tube c. 15 mm long; upper lip 2-lobed, c. 11 mm long, sinus between

lobes c. 4 mm, lobes 4x6 mm; lower lip 3-lobed, c. 13 mm long, lobes obovate, apices

rounded, lateral lobes c. 9 x 7 mm, medial lobe c. 10x9 mm; corolla outside glabrous

at base of tube, with short hairs on tube above this and then with short and long hairs on

upper part of tube and outside of lobes, inside glabrous in tube and with short glandular

hairs on inside of lobes. Stamens inserted at c. 9 mm from corolla base; filaments c.

7 mm long, narrow at base, widening around middle and curved and twisting at this

point, with short stalked glands in upper half; 2 fertile anthers c. 2 x 1.8 mm, thecae

± parallel, 2 anthers fused by tips; lateral staminodes c, 2 mm long; medial staminode

c. 1 miu long. Disc aimular, 0.2 mm high. Ovary c. 5 mm long, glabrous at base of

ovary and glandular pubescent in upper half; style c. 1 1 mm long, glandular pubescent

throughout with hairs of widely vai 7 ing lengths; stigma 2-lobed, lobes c. 1. 1 mm long.

Fruit an ellipsoid berry, pale green or with a pink tinge, 10-12.5 mm long, 4-6 mm

wide, pubescent distally. Seeds numerous, unappendaged, c. 0.6 x 0.4 mm.

Distribution. Vietnam. Only known from the type collection from Nui Chiia National

Park.

Habitat. Understorey of lower montane broadleaved evergreen forest, usually growing

on steep slopes and in moist gulleys.

New Billolivia from Vietnam

191

Fig. 1. Billolivia moelleri D.J.Middleton. A. Habit. B. Flowers, ^xom Leong-Skornickovd et al.

JLS-2623. (Photos: Jana Leong-Skornickova)

192

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

Fig. 2. Billolivia moelleri D. J.Middleton. A. Detail of flower (side view). B. Detail of flower

(front view). C. Stem with fruits and leaves, adaxial view. D. Detail of fruits. From Leong-

Skornickovd et al. JLS-2623. (Photos: Jana Leong- Skornickova)

New Billolivia from Vietnam

193

Etymology. The species is named in honour of Dr Michael Mdller of the Royal Botanic

Garden Edinburgh for his contribution to our understanding of the Gesneriaceae in

Asia, including as a co-author on the paper in which the genus BiUolivia was first

described.

Provisional lUCN Conservation Assessment. Vulnerable VU D2. This species is only

known from the type locality where the plant is not commonly encountered. It is

difficult to estimate the population size or the exact Area of Occupancy but it is likely

to be around 20 km^ as the altitude at which the species is found restricts the available

vegetation in the National Park. Within the Park itself though there are no immediately

discernible tlireats to qualify it as threatened under the B category.

Key to Billolivia species

la. Calyx divided into 5 lobes almost to base; corolla lobes white or white with

purple veining at base with tips white, corolla tube 8-18 mm long (unknown in B.

poilaneiy, leaf laminas minutely dentate or crenate, often appearing entire 2

lb. Calyx connate into a tube at base for at least 4 mm, margin 5-lobed; corolla lobes

white at base, tips brightly coloured pink, red or violet, corolla tube 15-28 mm

long; leaf laminas minutely or conspicuously dentate 4

2a. Calyx lobes > 4 mm wide B. poilanei

2b. Calyx lobes < 2.5 mm wide 3

3a. Leaf abaxially with hairs only on veins or with only occasional hairs on lamina;

corolla 12-15 mm long; unfertilised ovary glabrous B. minutiflora

3b. Leaf abaxially with pubescence tlu'oughout; corolla 18-25 mm long; unfertilised

ovary pubescent at apex B. vietnamensis

4a. Corolla tube c. 15 mm long, inside of throat white with purple lines in tube and

onto lobes B. moelleri

4b. Corolla tube 20-28 mm long, inside of throat white with no coloured lines 5

5a. Calyx fused into a tube for 7-9 mm; corolla lobe tips pink or red; leaf lamina

margins coarsely dentate; petioles 9-18 cm long B. longipetiolata

5b. Calyx flised into a tube for 4-6 mm; corolla lobe tips violet; leaf margins minutely

dentate or appearing entire; petioles 6-12.5 cm long B. violacea

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. The research of the first and second authors is funded by the

National Parks Board, Singapore. We would like to thank the People’s Committee and the

Agriculture and Rural Development Department of Ninh Thuan Province, Mr Dang Kim

194

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

> r

Cuong, the Director of Nui Chua NP, and Mr Tran Van Tiep, the Head of the Department of

Science (Nui Chiia NP), for issuing permits and for giving various logistical and personnel

support for our fieldwork. We thank Assoc. Prof Dr Nguyen Trung Minh, Dr Vu Van Lien

and Prof Lim Dam Cu from the Vietnam National Museum of Nature for their support of our

collaborative research. We thank Mr Aung Thame and Mr Edward Ong from Singapore Botanic

Gardens for their assistance in the field.

References

lUCN (2012). lUCN Red List Categories and Criteria: Version 3.1. Second edition. Switzerland,

Gland and UK, Cambridge: lUCN.

Middleton, D.J., Atkins, H., Luu, H.T., Nishii, K. & Moller, M. (2014). Billolivia, a new genus

of Gesneriaceae from Vietnam with five new species. Phytotaxa 161: 241-269.

Gardens’ Bulletin Singapore 66(2): 195-205. 2014

195

A new genus of Gesneriaceae in China and the transfer of

Briggsia species to other genera

M. Moller' ^ W.-H. Chen'-^, Y.-M. Shui', H. Atkins^ & D.J. Middleton'*

^Key Laboratoiy of Plant Diversity and Biogeography of East Asia,

Kunming Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences,

132 Lanhei Road, Kunming 650201, Yunnan, China

^Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh, 20A Inverleith Row,

Edinburgh EH3 5LR. Scotland, UK

m.moeller@rbge.ac.uk.

^University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences,

Beijing 100049, China

"^Herbarium, Singapore Botanic Gardens,

National Parks Board, 1 Cluny Road, Singapore 259569

ABSTRACT. Since the transfer of several species of Briggsia to Oreocharis, including the type

species Briggsia longifolia, the remaining 16 species of Briggsia have been in taxonomic limbo.

We address this unsatisfactory situation by transferring 1 0 further species into Oreocharis on

morphological grounds and by raising a new genus, with two species, based on previously

published molecular data and their morphological distinction from other genera. This leaves

only four species for which, at present, no satisfactoiy solution is available but, for pragmatic

reasons until further research can be done, we place them in Loxostigma to which they are

moiphologically most similar and in which one already has a combination. Several names are

lectotyprfied.

Keywords. Briggsia, Didymocarpinae, Gesneriaceae, Glabrella, lectotypification, Loxostigma,

new combinations, Oreocharis

Introduction

Species placed in the now synonyniised genus Briggsia Craib in the Gesneriaceae,

subtribe Didymocarpinae (Weber et ah, 2013), have a complex taxonomic history,

being moved in and out of a number of genera as taxonomic concepts changed, e.g.

Roettlera Vahl, Didymocarpus Wall., Chirita Buch.-Ham. ex D.Don, Didissandra

C.B.Clarke dind Loxostigma C.B. Clarke. These numerous changes did not necessarily

indicate a progressively better understanding of these taxa but rather the difficulties

of placing species displaying conflicting characteristics in genera that were narrowly

defined primarily on floral characteristics.

The genus Briggsia was established by Craib (1919a) with three new species.

In a separate paper, but which was published in the same issue (Craib, 1919b), he

transfeiTed 1 1 species from Didissandra to Briggsia and defined Briggsia as having

196

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

species with a large, distinctly bilabiate ventricose corolla with gradually inarching

filaments and four anthers cohering in pairs, irrespective of other characters such as

growth habit as both caulescent and acaulescent species were included.

Of the tliree new species in Craib (1919a), Briggsia longifolia Craib was later

designated as the lectotype (Burtt, 1954). Craib (1919b) described an additional

variety along with the transfers from Didissandm. His concept of Briggsia included

two truly caulescent species, i.e., B. amabilis (Diels) C.B.Clarke (later synonymised

into B. kurzii (C.B.Clarke) W.E.Evans) and B. cavaleriei (H.Lev. & Vaniot) Craib

(later transferred to Loxostigma as L. cavaleriei (H.Lev. & Vaniot) B.L. Burtt). It also

contained Briggsia longipes Craib that can produce short stems up to six cm, with

the remaining 11 species being acaulescent and rosette-forming. Chun (1946) later

added two more rosette species, Burtt (1955) described a further rosette species, and

Burtt (1958) transfeiTed the rosette species Briggsia rosthornii (Diels) B.L.Burtt from

Didissandra. In Pan (1988) one species was synonymised (Briggsia fritschii = B.

mihieri) and six new species and three varieties were added to the genus, including two

further caulescent species, B. longicaulis W.T.Wang & K.Y.Pan and B. dongxingensis

Chun ex K.Y.Pan, with stems 20 to 60 cm long. In Wang et al. (1990), Pan reduced

Briggsia crenulata Hand.-Mazz. to a variety of B. rosthornii (B. rosthornii var.

crenulata (Hand.-Mazz.) K.Y.Pan). Lastly, a further truly caulescent species, Briggsia

damingshanensis L.Wu & B.Pan was recently described (Wu et al., 2012), bringing

the total to 22 species and four varieties. Briggsia dulongensis H.Li is an invalid name

without a Latin description (Li, 1993).

The advent of molecular phylogenetic methods has enabled us to examine

problematic species’ placement with new suites of characters. These techniques have

already proven useful for delimiting other problematic Gesneriaceae genera (Weber et

al., 2011a, 201 lb, 201 Ic; Middleton & Moller, 2012; Middleton et al., 2013) and have

also led to the descriptions of new genera (Wei et al., 2010; Middleton & Moller, 2012;

Middleton et al., 2014, submitted). Moller et al. (2011b) used the results of molecular

phylogenetic studies to greatly enlarge the genus Oreocharis Benth. to include all

species of nine other genera (Ancylostemon Craib, Bournea Oliv., Dayaoshania

W.T.Wang, Deinocheilos W.T.Wang, Isometrum Craib, Opithandra B.L.Burtt,.

Paraisometiwn W.T.Wang, Thamnocharis W.T.Wang and Tremacron Craib), and

part of Briggsia. In Moller et al. (2011b) five species and four varieties of Briggsia

were transfeiTed to Oreocharis, including the type species B. longifolia, leaving the

remaining species in a taxonomic limbo. On the basis of additional molecular studies

on the enlarged genus Oreocharis, a ftirther species, Briggsia speciosa Craib, is in the

process of being transferred to Oreocharis by Chen et al. (2014). All Briggsia species

transferred to Oreocharis thus far have been rosette-forming plants. This leaves

16 species unplaced, including the caulescent species. The molecular phylogenetic

studies conducted so far indicate that these caulescent species are not closely related to

the acaulescent species now placed in Oreocharis (Moller et al., 2011a). Furthermore,

the truly caulescent Briggsia dongxingensis and B. kurzii do not form a clade. They

Anew Gesneriaceae genus and the transfer oiBriggsia species

197

appear in two different positions in the phylogenetic trees so far published and are in

unsupported positions with respect to clades containing Petrocosmea Oliv., Loxostigma

and Pseudochirita W.T.Wang species, inteimixed with Raphiocarpus Chun species.

For Briggsia damingshanensis no molecular data are available, but the species differs

only marginally from B. dongxingensis from the same region in Guangxi province

(Wu et al, 2012). The (indirect) link of the tmly caulescent species to Loxostigma is

interesting since in the Flora of China (Wang et al., 1 998), their generic placement in

Briggsia was questioned by Weitzman and Skog who suggested that B. dongxingensis

and B. longicaulis probably belong to Loxostigma. Vitek et al. (2000) placed Briggsia

kurzii in Loxostigma but acknowledged that this has not been followed by other

authors. However, though phylogenetically close, a case for the placement of these

truly caulescent species in Loxostigma is not easily made since Loxostigma is closely

related to Pseudochirita. Loxostigma Pseudochirita share the presence of rhizomes

and mainly differ in the former having four stamens and appendaged seeds, the latter

two stamens and unappendaged seeds. Rhizomes, diandry and appendaged seeds are

unknown in the truly caulescent Briggsia species. Because of these morphological

differences and their uncertain phylogenetic position a taxonomic placement of these

species is, at present, difficult to predict. However, given their current nomenclaturally

unacceptable position we include them in Loxostigma where Briggsia kurzii already

has a combination. We are well aware, however, that more work is needed here and

their status may change in the future.

Briggsia longipes and B. mihieri form a strongly supported sister clade. Their

phylogenetic position is isolated from the other former Briggsia species and all

other didymocaipoid genera (Mdller et al., 2011a) and a new genus is necessary to

satisfactorily place these species. The two species can be clearly differentiated from

other species fonnerly placed in Briggsia by their glabrous petiole and leaf blade (only

puberulous when young), combined with their short, 5-6 cm, stems. The remaining

ten unplaced Briggsia species are truly stemless and possess a dense pubescence on

the petioles and adaxial and abaxial leaf surfaces. These are characteristics they share

with most members of the expanded Oreocharis and the transfers are, therefore, made

here. This is preferred to the alternative of withholding their transfer until leaf material

for DNA analysis eventually becomes available. This might be years since some

species are rare and have not recently been collected and thus the herbarium material

is also unsuitable for DNA extraction. The traditional taxonomic approach using

moiphological data was undertaken in the case of the dismantling of Chirita (Weber et

al., 2011a) for those species that were not included in the molecular analyses, and for

the recently described Somrania D.J.Middleton which was established on the basis of

moiphology alone (Middleton & Triboun, 2012; see also Puglisi, 2014).

We have designated a number of lectotypes below. In each case we have

chosen the most complete specimen showing the range of characters from amongst

the available candidates. An appendix is attached listing all Briggsia names and their

current status.

198

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

Taxonomic Treatments

Glabrella Mich.Moller & W.H.Chen, gen. nov.

Differs from other Chinese genera of Gesneriaceae by the combination of indistinct

short stem, 5-6 cm long; glabrous petiole and leaf blade, leaf base cuneate or narrowly

peltate; fertile stamens 4, cohering in pairs at apex; capsule straight in relation to

the pedicel, not twisted; and seeds unappendaged. TYPE: Glabrella mihieri (Franch.)

Mich.Moller & W.H.Chen

Plants stemless or stems to 5-6 cm tall, glabrous. Leaves basal or crowded at apex of

short stem; petiole glabrous; leaf blade narrowly obovate to elliptic, glabrous, apex

rounded to acute; lateral veins 3 to 5 on each side of midrib. Cymes few-flowered;

peduncle (5-)8-23 cm; bracts 2, linear to narrowly triangular or lanceolate, 1-4 x

0.5- 1.5 mm, glabrous, margin entire. Calyx segments lanceolate to narrowly ovate to

narrowly triangular, margin entire. Corolla blue-purple or pale purple to pale yellow,

inside usually spotted, (3.2-)4-6 cm, outside glabrous to sparsely glandular pubescent

or pubemlent, inside pubemlent; tube 2.1-4 x l.l-L8(-2.6) cm; adaxial lip 5-9 mm,

lobes semiorbicular, 3-7 x 6-9 mm, apex rounded; abaxial lip 1-1.4 cm, lobes oblong

to semiorbicular, 6-7 x 4-8 mm, apex obtuse to rounded. Adaxial stamens adnate to

corolla 8-9 mm above base, abaxial ones adnate to corolla 8-1.2 cm above base, 1.2-

1.7 cm long; filaments glabrous or sparsely glandular pubescent; anthers ovoid, thecae

not confluent; staminode 0.8-1 mm. Pistil 2.5-3 cm; ovary pubescent; style 0.7-2 mm,

glabrous to sparsely pubescent. Capsule 3.4-7 cm, glabrescent, straight in relation to

the pedicel, not twisted. Seeds numerous, unappendaged, FI. Sept-Oct, fr. Nov-Dec.

Distribution. Two species, endemic to China.

Etymology. After the distinctly hairless leaves.

Key to Glabrella

la. Leaf blade base cuneate, margin crenate-serrate; calyx segments 4-7 x 1.5-3

mm; peduncle glabrous to glabrescent G. mihieri

lb. Leaf blade base peltate or rounded to nearly cuneate, margin entire to shallowly

serrate; calyx segments 8-11 x 2-5 mm; peduncle sparsely brownish villous,

rarely glabrescent G. longipes

Glabrella longipes (Hemsl. ex Oliv.) Mich.Moller & W.H.Chen, comb. nov. —

Didissandra longipes Hemsl. ex Oliv., Hooker’s Icon. PI. 24: pi. 2379 (1895); Hemsl.,

Bull. Misc. Inform. Kew 1895: 114 (1895). — Briggsia longipes (Hemsl. ex Oliv.)

Craib, Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 11: 262 (1919). TYPE: China, Yunnan

province, Mengtze, Dec 1843, W. Hancock 50 (holotype K! [K000858088]).

Anew Gesneriaceae genus and the transfer oiBriggsia species

199

Distribution. China: Chongqing (Hechuan Xian), Guangxi (Longlin Xian, Tianlin

Xian), SE Yunnan.

Glabrella mihieri (Franch.) Mich.Moller & W.H.Chen, comb. nov. — Didissandra

mihieri Franch., Bull. Mens. Soc. Linn. Paris 1: 450 (1885). — Didymocarpus

mihieri (Franch.) H.Lev., Compt. Rend. Assoc. Frang. 34: 427 (1906), nom. inval. —

Briggsia mihieri (Franch.) Craib, Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 11: 262 (1919).

TYPE: China, Kouy-Tcheou (Guizhou) province, 1858, RH. Ferny s.n. (holotype P!

[P03511310]).

Didissandra fritschii H.Lev. & Vaniot, Compt. Rend. Assoc. Frang. 34: 425 (1906).

— Didymocarpus fritschii (H.Lev, & Vaniot) H.Lev., Compt. Rend. Assoc. Fran9. 34:

428 (1906), nom. inval. — Briggsia fritschii (H.Lev. & Vaniot) Craib, Notes Roy. Bot.

Gard. Edinburgh 11: 262 (1919). TYPE: China, Guizhou, Tsin-gay, Montagues du

Lion, 24 Oct 1898, Laborde & Bodinier 2464 (holotype E! [E00387546]).

Distribution. China: Guangxi (Longlin Xian), Guizhou, S Sichuan.

Loxostigma C.B. Clarke

Loxostigma damingshanensis (L.Wu & B.Pan) Mich.Moller & H.Atkins, comb. nov.

— Briggsia damingshanensis L.Wu & B.Pan, Ann. Bot. Fenn. 49(1-2): 79 (2012).

TYPE: China, Guangxi, Nanning, Damingshan Natural Reserve, 23 28 ’N, 108 25 ’E,

alt. 1250 m, 5 Aug 2010, Lei Wu & Rihong Jiang D0320 (holotype IBK!; isotypes

IBK!, PE).

Distribution. China: Guangxi (Nanning).

Loxostigma dongxingensis (Chun ex K.Y.Pan) Mich.Moller & Y.M.Shui, comb. nov.

— Briggsia dongxingensis Chun ex K.Y.Pan, Acta Phytotax. Sin. 26: 451 (1988).

TYPE: China, Guangxi, Dongxing, Shiwandashan, X.R.Liang 70078 (holotype IBSC

[0649548], image seen; isotype A [A00353708], image seen).

Distribution. China: Guangxi (Dongxing Xian); N Vietnam.

Loxostigma kurzii (C.B. Clarke) B.L.Burtt, Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 34:

104 (1975). — Didymocarpus kurzii C.B. Clarke, Commelyn. Cyrtandr. Bengal, t. 66

(1874). — Chirita Ixurzii (C.B.Clarke) C.B. Clarke, J. Linn. Soc. 15: 145 (1876). -

Roettlera kurzii (C.B.Clarke) Kuntze, Rev. Gen. PI. 2: 476 (1891). — Briggsia kurzii

(C.B.Clarke) W.E.Evans, Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 16: 133 (1928). TYPE:

India, Sikkim, Kursiong, Kurz s.n. (holotype CAL n.v.).

200

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

Didissandra amabilis Diels, Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 5 : 224 (1912). — Briggsia

amabHis (Diels) Craib, Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 1 1 : 263 (191 9). TYPE: China,

Yunnan, Tali Range [now Dali Range], Forrest 2689 (lectotype E! [E00387561],

designated by Vitek et al. (1998); isolectotypes E! [E00387559, E00387560]).

Briggsia amabilis var. taliensis Craib, Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 1 1 : 263 (1919).

TYPE: China, Yunnan, eastern flank of the Tali Range [now Dali Range], Lat. 25° 40’

N, alt. 9,000-1 0,000 ft., fl. Jul-Aug 1 906, G. Forrest 4385 (lectotype E! [E00387582],

designated here; isolectotype IBSC [1BSC0004824], image seen).

Distribution. China: SW Sichuan, NW Yunnan; NE India: Sikkim; Nepal; Bhutan;

Myanmar [Burma]

Loxostigma longicaule (W.T.Wang & K.Y.Pan) Mich.Moller & Y.M.Shui, comb. nov.

— Briggsia longicaulis W.T.Wang & K.Y.Pan, Acta Phytotax, Sin. 26: 450 (1988).

TYPE: China, Sichuan, alt. 2500 m, 24 Aug 1959, Exped. PL Econ. Liangshan 5836

(holotype PE [PE00030680], image seen; isotype PE [PE00030681], image seen).

Distribution. China: Sichuan (Butuo Xian, Dechang Xian, Kangding Xian).

Oreocharis Benth.

Oreocharis acutiloba (K.Y.Pan) Mich.Moller & W.H.Chen, comb. nov. — Briggsia

acutiloba K.Y.Pan, Acta Phytotax. Sin. 26: 455 (1988). TYPE: China, Yunnan, Yuxi,

alt. 2250 m, 23 Sept 1958, S.K. Wu 61 (holotype KUN! [KUN484366]).

Distribution. China: Yunnan (Yuxi Xian).

Oreocharis agnesiae (Forrest ex W.W.Sm.) Mich.Moller & W.H.Chen, comb. nov.

— Didissandra agnesiae Forrest ex W.W.Sm., Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 8:

334 (1915). — Briggsia agnesiae (Forrest ex W.W.Sm.) Craib, Notes Roy. Bot. Gard.

Edinburgh 1 1 : 263 (191 9). TYPE: China, Yunnan, Mountains of the Yung Peh, Lat. 26°

40’ N, alt. 9,000-10,000 ft, fl. Jul 1914, G. Forrest 12,829 (lectotype E! [E00135143],

designated here; isolectotypes E! [E00135142, E00135144], K! [K000858909], IBSC

[IBSC0004823], image seen).

Distribution. China: Sichuan (Muli Xian), Yunnan (Yongsheng Xian).

Oreocharis billburttii Mich.Moller & W.H.Chen, nom. nov. — Briggsia aurantiaca

B.L.Burtt, Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 21: 237 (1955). TYPE: China, Xizang,

Anew Gesneriaceae genus and the transfer oiBriggsia species

201

Kongbo, Molo, Lilung Chu, 3050 m, 26 Jun 1938, Ludlow, G. Sherriff & G. Taylor

5670 (holotype BM [BM000041735], image seen).

Distribution. China: S Gansu, N Sichuan, W Yunnan, Xizang; N Myamnar.

Etymology^ To commemorate B.L. Burtt’s contribution to the taxonomy of the genus

Oreocharis.

Oreocharis elegantissima (H.Lev. & Vaniot) Mich.Moller & W.H.Chen, comb. nov.

— Didissandra elegantissima H.Lev. & Vaniot, Compt. Rend. Assoc. Fran^. Avancem.

Sci. 34: 425 ( 1 906). — Didymocarpus elegantissimus (H.Lev. & Vaniot) H.Lev., Compt.

Rend. Assoc. Fran?. 34: 428 (1906), nom. inval. — Briggsia elegantissima (H.Lev. &

Vaniot) Craib, Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 1 1 : 265 (1919). TYPE: China, Kouy-

Tcheou [Guizhou], Pin-Fa, J. Cavalerie 239[h] (lectotype E! [E00387550], designated

here; PE [PE00030663] n.v.].

Distribution. China: Guizhou (Pingfa Xian, Dushan Xian).

Oreocharis latisepala (Chun ex K.Y.Pan) Mich.Moller & W.H.Chen, comb. nov.

— Briggsia latisepala Chun ex K.Y.Pan, Acta Phytotax. Sin. 26: 454 (1988). TYPE:

China, Zhejiang, Yunhe, 10 Oct 1932, S. Chen 837 (holotype IBSC [IBSC0649550],

image seen).

Distribution. China: Zhejiang (Yunhe Xian).

Oreocharis parva Mich.Moller & W.H.Chen, nom. nov. — Briggsia humilis K.Y.Pan,

Acta Phytotax. Sin. 26: 453 (1988). TYPE: China, Hubei, Lichuan, alt. 1300 m, 27

Aug 1975. G.R. Huang 3535 (holotype HMDB, n.v.; isotypes PE [PE00030685, image

seen], HIB [HIB0087078] n.v.).

Distribution. China: W Hubei.

Etymology. Named to reflect its small size.

Oreocharis parvifolia (K.Y.Pan) Mich.Moller & W.H.Chen, comb. nov. — Briggsia

paiwifolia K.Y.Pan, Acta Phytotax. Sin. 26: 457 (1988). TYPE: China, Guizhou, sine

loco,/. Cavalerie 3122 (holotype K! [K00085 8099]; isotype E! [E00135151]).

Distribution. China: Guizhou.

202

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

Oreocharis pinfaensis (H.Lev.) Mich.Moller & W.H.Chen, comb. nov. — Didissandra

pinfaensis H.Lev., Repert. Spec. Nov. Regni Veg. 9: 328 (1911 ). — Briggsia pinfaensis

(H.Lev.) Craib, Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 11: 264 (1919). TYPE: China, Kouy-

Tcheou [Guizhou], Pin-Fa, moist rocks, J. Cavalerie 3315 (lectotype E! [E00265025],

designated here; isolectotype K! [K000858091]).

Distribution. China: Guizhou (Pingfa Xian).

Oreocharis shweliensis Mich.Moller & W.H.Chen, nom. nov. — Briggsia forrestii

Craib, Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 11: 237 (1919). TYPE: China, Yunnan,

Shweli-Salwin divide, alt. 8-9,000 ft., fl. & fr. Jun 1918, G. Forrest 17,552 (lectotype

E! [E00096870], designated here; isolectotypes Kn.v., PE [PE00030661] n.v.).

Distribution. China: Yunnan (Ruili Xian).

Etymology. Named after a collection locality, the Shweli valley.

Oreocharis tongtchouanensis Mich.Moller & W.H.Chen, nom. nov. — Briggsia

mairei Craib, Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 1 1: 239 (1919). TYPE: China, Yunnan,

Tong-tchouan [Dongchuan], alt. 2700 m, fl. Sept, E.E. Maire 213 (lectotype E!

[E00396440], designated here; IBSC [IBSC0004831], image seen).

Distribution. China: Yunnan (Dongchuan Xian).

Etymology. Named after the old spelling of the collection locality, Dongchuan.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. We are grateful to John McNeill for advice on nomenclatural

issues; Robert Mill for checking the Latin names; and Larry Skog and Goro Kokubugata for

their comments on the manuscript. We greatly acknowledge support by the National Natural

Science Foundation of China (grant nos. 31000258 and 31470306), the Open Project of the

Key Laboratory for Plant Diversity and Biogeography of East Asia, Kumning Institute of

Botany (grant no. KLBB201304), and the Chinese Academy of Sciences Visiting Professorship

Scheme. The Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh is supported by the Rural and Environment

Science and Analytical Services division (RESAS) in the Scottish Government.

References

Burtt, B.L. (1954). Studies in the Gesneriaceae of the New World II. Types and lectotypes of

certain genera and groups of lower rank. Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 2\: 193-208.

Burtt, B.L. (1955). Studies in the Gesneriaceae of the Old World VIII. Briggsia inuscicola and

a new allied species. Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 21: 234-238.

Anew Gesneriaceae genus and the transfer oiBriggsia species

203

Burtt, B.L. (1958). Studies in the Gesneriaceae of the Old World XIII, Miscellaneous transfers

and reductions. Notes Roy. Bot. Card. Edinburgh 22: 305-314.

Chen, W.H., Shui, Y.M, & Moller, M. (2014). Two new combinations in Oreocharis Benth.

(Gesneriaceae) from China. Candollea 69(2): 179-182

Chun, W.Y. (1946). Gesneriacearum plantae nova Sinicarum. Sunyatsenia 6: 271-304, pi.

44^7.

Craib. W.G. (1919a). Gesneracearum novitates. Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 11: 233-254.

Craib, W.G. (1919b). Didissandra and allied genera in China and N. India. Notes Roy. Bot.

Gard. Edinburgh 11: 255-268.

Li, H. (1993). Gesneriaceae. In: Li, H. {ed)Flora ofDulongjian Region. Pp. 299-302. Kunming:

Yunnan Science and Technology Press.

Middleton, D.J. & Moller, M, (2012). Tribounia, a new genus of Gesneriaceae from Thailand.

Taxon 61: 1286-1295.

Middleton, D.J. & Triboun, P. (2012). Sornrania, a new genus of Gesneriaceae from Thailand.

Thai Foj’est Bull., Bot. 40: 9-13.

Middleton, D.J., Weber, A., Yao, YT., Sontag, S. & Moller, M. (2013). The cuirent status of the

species hitherto assigned to Henckelia (Gesneriaceae). Edinburgh J. Bot. 70: 385-404,

Middleton, D.J., Atkins, H., Truong, L.H., Nishii, K. & Moller, M. (2014). Billolivia, a new

genus of Gesneriaceae from Vietnam with five new species. Phytotaxa 161 (4): 241-

269.

Middleton, D.J., Nishii, K., & Moller, M. (submitted). Chayamaritia (Gesneriaceae:

Didymocarpoideae), a new genus fi'om Southeast Asia. Plant Syst. Evol.

Moller, M., Fon'est, A., Wei, YG. & Weber, A. (2011a). A molecular phylogenetic assessment

of the advanced Asiatic and Malesian Didymocarpoid Gesneriaceae with focus on non-

monophyletic and monotypic genera. Plant Syst. Evol. 292: 223-248.

Moller, M., Middleton, D., Nishii, K., Wei, Y.-G. Sontag, S. & Weber, A. (2011b). A new

delineation for Oreocharis incorporating an additional ten genera of Chinese

Gesneriaceae. P/zy/otoxa 23: 1-36.

Pan, K.Y (1988). New taxa of Briggsia Craib (Gesneriaceae) from China. Acta Phytotax. Sm.

26: 450^57.

Puglisi, C. (2014). Systematic studies in the Boea group. Unpublished PhD thesis. University

of Edinburgh.

Vitek, E., Weber, A. & Burtt, B.L. (1998). Generic position of the species hitherto referred to

Didissandt^a. Beitr. Biol. Pflanzen 70: 275-291.

Vitek, E., Weber, A. & Burtt, B.L. (2000). Names, types, and current placement of the species

hitherto referred to Didymocarpus, Loxocarpus, Codonoboea, Platyadenia and

Henckelia (Gesneriaceae). Amr. NatuiEist. Mas. Wien, B 102: 477-530.

Wang, W.T., Pan, K.Y, Zhang, Z.Y. & Li, Z. Y. (1990). Gesneriaceae. In: Wang, W.T. (ed) Floixi

Reipublicae Popularis Sinicae 69: 125-581. Beijing: Science Press.

Wang, W.T., Pan, K.Y, Li, Z.Y, Weitzman, A.L. & Skog, L.E. (1998). Gesneriaceae. In: Wu,

Z.Y. & Raven, P.H. (eds) Flora of China 18: 244-401. Beijing, China: Science Press

and St. Louis, Missouri, USA: Missouri Botanical Garden Press.

Weber, A., Middleton, D.J., Forrest, A., Kiew, R., Lim, C.L., Rafidah, A.R., Yao, TL. & Moller,

M. (2011a). Molecular systematics and remodeling of Chirita and associated genera

(Gesneriaceae). Taxon 60: 767-790.

Weber, A., Wei, Y.G., Puglisi, C., Wen, F., Mayer, V. & Moller, M. (2011b). A new definition of

the genus Petrocodon (Gesneriaceae). Phytotaxa 23: 49-67.

204

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

Weber, A., Wei, Y.G., Sontag, S. & Moller, M. (2011c). Inclusion of Metabriggsia into

Hemiboea (Gesneriaceae), Phytotaxa 23: 37-48.

Weber, A., Moller, M. & Clark, J.L. (2013). A new formal classification of Gesneriaceae.

Selbyana 3 1 : 68-94.

Wei, Y.G., Wen, F., Chen, W.H., Shui, Y.M. & Moller, M. (2010). Litostignia, a new genus from

China: a morphological link between basal and derived Didymocarpoid Gesneriaceae.

Edinburgh J. Bot. 67(1): 161-184.

Wu, L., Pan, B., Yang, J.C. & Xu, W.B. (2012). Briggsia damingshanensis (Gesneriaceae), a

new species from Guangxi, China. Ann. Bot. Fenn. 49: 79-82.

Appendix. List of Briggsia names with their current status (bold).

Briggsia acutiloba K.Y.Pan = Oreocharis acutiloba (K.Y.Pan) Mich.Moller & W.H.Chen

Briggsia agnesiae (Forrest ex W.W.Sm.) Craib = Oreocharis agnesiae (Forrest ex WWSm.)

Mich.Moller & W.H.Chen

Briggsia amabilis (Diels) Craib = Loxostigma kurzii (C.B. Clarke) B.L.Burtt

Briggsia aurantiaca B.L.Burtt = Oreocharis billburttii (B.L.Burtt) Mich.Moller & W.H.Chen

Briggsia beauverdiana (H.Lev.) Craib = Briggsiopsis delavayi (Franch.) K.Y.Pan

Briggsia cavaleriei (H.Lev. & Vaniot) Craib = Loxostigma cavaleriei (H.Lev. & Vaniot)

B.L.Burtt

Briggsia chienii Chun = Oreocharis chienii (Chun) Mich.Moller & A.Weber

Briggsia crenulata Hand.-Mazz. = Oreocharis rosthornii var. crenulata (Hand.-Mazz.) Mich.

Moller & A.Weber

Briggsia damingshanensis L.Wu & B.Pan = Loxostigma damingshanensis (L.Wu & B.Pan)

Mich.Moller & H. Atkins

Briggsia delavayi (Franch.) Chun = Briggsiopsis delavayi (Franch.) K.Y.Pan

Briggsia dongxingensis Chun ex K.Y.Pan = Loxostigma dongxingensis (Chun ex K.Y.Pan)

Mich.Moller &Y.M.Shui

Briggsia dulongensis H.Li, nom. inval.

Briggsia elegantissima (H.Lev. & Vaniot) Craib = Oreocharis elegantissima (H.Lev. & Vaniot)

Mich.Moller & W.H.Chen

Briggsia forrestii Craib = Oreocharis shweliensis (Craib) Mich.Moller & W.H.Chen

Briggsia f itschii (H.Lev. & Vaniot) Craib = Glabrella mihieri (Franch.) Mich.Moller &

Y.M.Shui

Briggsia hians Chun = Oreocharis rosthornii (Diels) Mich.Moller & A.Weber

Briggsia humilis K.Y.Pan = Oreocharis parva (K.Y.Pan) Mich.Moller & W.H.Chen

Briggsia kurzii (C.B. Clarke) W.E.Evans = Loxostigma kurzii (C.B. Clarke) B.L.Burtt

Briggsia latisepala Chun ex K.Y.Pan = Oreocharis latisepala (Chun ex K.Y.Pan) Mich.Moller

& W.H.Chen

Briggsia longicaulis W.T.Wang & K.Y.Pan = Loxostigma longicaule (W.T.Wang & K.Y.Pan)

Mich.Moller & Y.M.Shui

Briggsia longifolia Craib = Oreocharis longifolia (Craib) Mich.Moller & A.Weber

Briggsia longifolia var. multiflora S.Y.Chen ex K.Y.Pan = Oreocharis longifolia var. multiflora

(S.Y.Chen ex K.Y.Pan) Mich.Moller & A.Weber

Briggsia longipes (Hemsl. ex Oliv.) Craib = Glabrella longipes (Hemsl. ex Oliv.) Mich.Moller

& Y.M.Shui

Anew Gesneriaceae genus and the transfer oiBriggsia species

205

Briggsia mairei Craib = Oreocharis tongtchoiianemis (Craib) Mich.Moller & W.H.Chen

Briggsia mihieri (Franch.) Craib = Glabrella mihieri (Franch.) Mich.Moller & Y.M.Shui

Briggsia muscicola (Diels) Craib = Oreocharis muscicola (Diels) Mich.Moller & A. Weber

Briggsia parvifolia K.Y.Pan = Oreocharis parvifolia (K.Y.Pan) Mich.Moller & W.H.Chen

Briggsia penlopi C.E.C.Fisch. = Oreocharis muscicola (Diels) Mich.Moller & A. Weber

Briggsia pinfaensis (H.Lev.) Craib = Oreocharis pinfaensis (H.Lev.) Mich.Moller & W.H.Chen

Briggsia rosthornii (Diels) B.L.Buitt = Oreocharis rosthornii (Diels) Mich.Moller & A. Weber

Briggsia rosthornii var. crenulata (Hand.-Mazz.) K.Y.Pan = Oreocharis rosthornii var.

crenulata (Hand.-Mazz.) Mich.Moller & A. Weber

Briggsia rosthornii var. wenshanensis K.Y.Pan = Oreocharis rosthornii var. wenshanensis

(K.Y.Pan) Mich.Moller & A.Weber

Briggsia rosthornii var. xingrenensis K.Y.Pan = Oreocharis rosthornii var. xingrenensis

(K.Y.Pan) Mich.Moller & A.Weber

Briggsia speciosa (Hemsl.) Craib = Oreocharis speciosa (Hemsl.) Mich.Moller & W.H.Chen

Briggsia stewardii Chun = Oreocharis stewardii (Chun) Mich.Moller & A.Weber

Gardens’ Bulletin Singapore 66(2): 207-214. 2014

207

A new species and a new record of Boesenbergia

(Zingiberaceae) for Thailand

J.D. Mood^, J.R Veldkamp^ & L.M. Prince^

Ryon Arboretum, University of Hawaii, 3860 Manoa Road,

Honolulu, HI 96822, USA

zi ngiber@ warml ava. com

^Naturalis Biodiversity Center, National Herbarium of The Netherlands,

P.O. Box 9517, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands

Rhe Field Museum, Department of Botany, 1400 S Lake Shore Dr.,

Chicago, IL 60605, USA

ABSTRACT. Boesenbergia purpureorubra Mood & L.M.Prince is described and illustrated.

Boesenbergia longipes (King & Prain ex Ridl.) Schltr. is noted as a new record for Thailand

based on C Maknoi T38 (PSU, QBG).

Keywords. Boesenbergia, Thailand, Zingiberaceae

Introduction

The genus Boesenbergia Kuntze currently includes c. 82 species which are distributed

from SW India eastward to the Philippine Islands and south to the Wallace Line.

Although the majority of species are found within forests, some have adapted to

unusual habitats to include limestone fonnations near the ocean [Boesenbergia

ochroleuca (Ridl.) Schltr,] and sandstone mountain tops at over 1000 m [S. alba

(K.Larsen & R.M.Sm.) Mood & L.M.Prince]. As a consequence, Boesenbergia species

have evolved into a variety of vegetative fonns to adapt to specific environments.

They can be evergreen as are all the wild species in Borneo, or deciduous as are the

majority in Thailand, Plants can range from c. 10 cm tall [Boesenbergia panmla (Wall,

ex Baker) Kuntze] to over 130 cm (B. maxwellii Mood & L.M.Prince), forai single

clumps [B. curtisii (Baker) Schltr.] or develop into large, spreading populations of

connected stems (B. kingii Mood & L.M.Prince). Florally, Boesenbergia has evolved

to accommodate pollinators within each habitat, resulting in several different labellum

forms, from flat to very saccate. These variations aside, most Boesenbergia are easy

to identify by their basipetalous flowering sequence — the first flower opens near the

inflorescence apex and each subsequent flower, closer to the base.

In Thailand there are over 26 species currently recorded (Ridley, 1 899; Sirimgsa,

1987, 1992; Larsen, 1993, 1997; Saensouk & Larsen, 2002; Kharukanant & Tohdam,

2003; Mood et al., 2013, 2014). During preparation for a revision of Boesenbergia

for the Flora of Thailand, the authors compared the available Thai specimens to the

protologues and types of the c. 26 species. Surprisingly, the Thai taxon considered as

208

Card. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

Boesenbergia longipes (King & Prain ex Ridl.) Schltr. (Sirirugsa, 1992) did not match

the type, Wray 4220 (K), the protologue (Ridley, 1899) or the expanded description

of Holttum (1950). To confirm the description of Sirirugsa, c. 10 similar specimens

collected in Thailand and annotated as “-5. longipes'' were examined (AAU, BK, BKF,

QBG), It was evident that the vegetative fonn of the Thai taxon varied considerably

from Wray 4220. Additionally, flowering plants observed in Peninsular Thailand,

near locations as noted on the specimens, did not match Ridley or Holttum ’s floral

descriptions. Since this taxon showed no similarity to any other known Boesenbergia,

it is here considered a new species and is described as Boesenbergia purpureorubra.

During examination of specimens, Maknoi T38 (PSU, QBG), an unidentified

Boesenbergia from Yala Province on the Malaysian border, was found to match the

type and protologue of B. longipes (King & Prain ex Ridl.) Schltr., thus making it a

new record for Thailand.

Taxonomy

Boesenbergia purpureorubra Mood & L.M.Prince, sp. nov.

Boesenbergiae pulcherrimae (Wall.) Kuntze similis, planta minore c. 40 cm alta, caule

breviore c. 6 cm longo pagina corrugatissima atro purpureorubro, petiolis longioribus

c. 3-8 cm longis differt. TYPE: Cultivated in Hawaii, USA, 1 August 2014, Mood

14P19 (holotype BKF; isotype AAU). Originally from Thailand, Ranong Province,

E. of Khao Niwet, 09° 57.506'N 98°39.134'E, 880 m asl, evergreen forest, 24 August

2011, Mood & Vatcharakorn 3106, cultivated as M3 106 (Fig. 1-3)

Boesenbergia longipes auct. non Schltr.: Sirirugsa, Nat. Hist. Bull. Siam Soc. 40: 76

(1992).

Deciduous^ perennial herb up to c. 40 cm tall, forming tight clumps. Rhizome with

multiple elements developing from the base of the previous element, c. 5 cm long, c.

8 mm diam. in a mature plant with five stems, internally and externally white (young),

internally dark puiple (mature); roots many, fleshy, to c. 20 cm long, 3-4 mm diam.,

externally and internally white or pink, covered in short root hairs along the full length,

apex expanded, fusifomi, c. 4-5 cm long, 5-10 mm diam., surface smooth, root hairs

along the full length, few fibrous roots. Stems numerous, increasing in number each

season, to 6 cm long, c. 7 mm diam., light green, glabrous, 1 or 2 leafless sheaths,

5-1 1 X 2.5 cm, deeply corrugate, solid or spotted purple-red, glabrous. Leaves 2 or

3, upper two nearly opposite; leaf sheaths c. 11-14 cm long, light green, sparsely

sericeous, corrugate, covered in part by the leafless sheaths; ligule bilobed, up to 17

mm, lobes oblong to lanceolate, green, few hairs; petiole 3-8 cm long, 2 mm wide,

light green or with purple-red spots, sparsely sericeous; lamina elliptic, sometimes

asymmeti'ic, 18 x 8 cm (lower) to 25 x 8 cm (upper), base attenuate to rounded, often

oblique, apex acuminate, adaxially dark, glossy green, veins prominent, few long hairs.

Anew species and record oi Boesenbergia for Thailand

209

Fig. 1. Boesenbergia purpureorubra Mood & L.M.Prince. Ink line drawing with watercolour

of the type plant. (Drawn by Linda Ann Vorobik).

210

Card. Bull Singapore 66(2) 2014

Fig. 2. Boesenbergia purpureorubra Mood & L.M.Prince. A. Mature plant in flower. B.

Flowers in side and semi-side view. C. Flower in front view. D. Inflorescence (scale in cm).

(Photos: J. Mood of M3 106)

Anew species and record oi Boesenbergia for Thailand

211

Fig. 3. Boesenbergia purpureorubra Mood & L.M.Prince. A. Flower dissection. B.

Inflorescence with bracts spread showing their attachment. C. Anther and stigma (mature). D.

Underground architecture (rhizome, roots, tuberous roots). (Photos: J. Mood of M3 106)

212

Card. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

abaxially purple, dark red or green, sericeous. Inflorescence terminal, basal y4 clasped

between the leaf sheaths, apical % exposed; peduncle c. 1 cm long, 4 mm diam., white,

glabrous; spike fusifoi*m, c. 9-13 cm long, c. 1 cm wide at the middle, c. 7 mm thick,

longitudinally furrowed on the flowering side; bracts 16-24, narrowly ovate, c. 35

X 6 mm, light green, sericeous, compressed together radially on the flowering side,

the rachis exposed on the non-flowering side; bracteole nan'owly ovate, open to the

base, c. 32 X 10 mm, white, glabrous, on the opposite side of the floral tube from the

bract. Flowers c. 3.5 cm long, labellum oriented toward the bract apex, all deflexed

downward; calyx tubular, c. 7 mm long, light green with red dots, few hairs, apex

undulate, with 2-3 lobes; /?ora/ tube 30-35 mm long, 1 .5 mm diam. at the base, white,

glabrous; dorsal corolla lobe c. 1 2 x 5 mm, slightly convex, oblong, white, glabrous,

apex cucullate, lateral corolla lobes c. 15 x 6 nun, oblong, white, glabrous, apex

cucullate; androecial cup c. 4 mm long, c. 4 mm wide, oriented c. 90” to the floral

tube, throat mostly glabrous; labellum deeply saccate, elongate to oval (natural shape),

c. 2.8 X 1 .6 cm, throat glossy dark red with transverse red bars on the sides and red

spots in the centi'e, apical area glossy violet-pink, lighter and slightly transparent on

the margin, internally glabrous, externally with short, glandular hairs, apex rounded,

slightly undulate, deflexed; lateral staminodes obovate, c. 10 x 8 mm, yellowish-

white, externally covered in short, glandular hairs, apex tmncate to rounded. Stamen

c. 10 mm long, filament c. 2 x 1 mm, white; anther c. 8 x 3 nun, connective tissue with

glandular hairs from the base up Ya the length, apical part glabrous, anther thecae c. 7 x

1.5 mm (each), dehiscent tluoughout the full length, white, anther crest absent, pollen

white. Ovfl/jtrilocular, cylindric, c. 3 x 2.5 mm, light green, glabrous; style filiform, c.

3.7 cm long, white; stigma orbicular, white, ostiole circular, ciliate; epigynous glands

linear, two, c. 3 lum long, white. Fruit not seem (Measurements based on living,

cultivated material of M3 106).

Distribution. Peninsular Thailand.

Ecology. This species is found in evergreen forest between 50-300 m on soils derived

from granite or sandstone.

Phenology’. In cultivation in Hawaii, flowering begins in late June and continues

through October. Flowers open in the morning and close early the following day.

Observations in the wild are similar.

Etymology. Named for the purple-red colour of the leafless sheaths and lamina

underside.

Additional specimens examined: THAILAND. Ranong: Kapis, Kampon, 100 m, 20 Nov 1973,

T. Sandsuk 633 (BKF); 10 km south of Khao Khai, 2 Aug 2013, J. Mood & P Vatcharakorn

3376 (AAU); Kampuan, 11 Jul 1999, C. Maknoi 53 (QBG). Surat Thani: Ban Tung Tao, 4

A new species and record of Boesenbergia for Thailand

213

Aug 1927, Klein? 13153 (BK); Khao Sok, 25 Oct 1990, K. Larsen 40887, Phang Nga: 8 km

north of Bang Wan, 2 Aug 2013, J. Mood & P. Vatcharakorn 3380 (AAU); Bangwan Stream,

14 Aug 2006, T. Muadsub 116 (PSU, BKF). Trang: Khao Chong, 200 m., 12 Aug 1975, J.F.

Maxwell 75-797 (BK); Muang Dist., Khao Chong N.P., 14 Jul 1985, P. Sirirugsa 1021 (PSU,

BKF); Khao Chong forest, 150 m, 30 Oct 1984, J.F. Maxwell 84-375 (BKF). Narathiwat:

Waeng, 50 m, 23 Aug 2006, M. Poopath 23 (BKF).

Notes. It is not known how this ginger initially came to be identified as Boesenbergia

longipes, as the species was originally described from Perak, Malaysia (Ridley, 1 899).

The type, Wray 4220 and a similar specimen Corner S.F.N. 31673, cited by Holttum

(1950), are quite distinct from the Thai taxon. Some of the vegetative differences for

the Perak plants are the loose, spreading leaf sheaths with short stem, long petioles and

inflorescence close to the ground. Boesenbergia purpureorubra has short leaf sheaths

tightly clasped, short petioles and an inflorescence at the top of the plant. Ridley

named Wray’s plant “long foot”, noting the “rhizome rather far creeping”. The new

species is a very tightly clumped plant with multiple stems from a short rhizome. A

noticeable character of the new taxon is its deeply corrugated, dark purple-red leafless

sheaths. The underside of the lamina is also the same colour even when mature. These

characters are quite noticeable on the Thai specimens such as Maxwell 75-797 (BKF).

Ridley described the flower of Boesenbergia longipes has having an oblong,

crisped and thickened labellum, a rounded apex and a thick, central bar. Colour notes

were not included. Flolttum (1950) broadened the description and provided colour

notes based on a flower in alcohol from Corner S.F.N. 31673, collected near the type

locality. Flolttum mentions that since the Comer flower was larger than the type (which

was only a broken portion) he was not sure if “one or two species exist.” It is the

experience of the first author that flower size can be quite variable based on the vigour,

age of the plant and population variation. More important is that both Wray’s type and

Corner’s specimen closely match in overall morphology.

Recently, by request of the authors, the type locality was visited by Lim Chong

Keat (Penang, Malaysia) in order to ascertain whether Boesenbergia longipes was

still extant in this area. The species was found and the plants matched the vegetative

morphology of the descriptions and specimens, while the floral stmcture and colours

were exactly as Flolttum described. With this added validation it is quite clear that

Boesenbergia longipes is strikingly different from the Thai taxon described here as B.

purpureorubra (Table 1).

True Boesenbergia longipes has, however, once been collected in Thailand as

recently discovered by the first author. The specimen, C. Maknoi T38 (QBG, PSU),

annotated as Boesenbergia sp., was collected near the Malaysian border in Yala

Province, Betong, Ban Chulapom Pattana 10, 5 August 1999. The forest is evergreen,

similar to the type locality in Perak. The collector noted, “Lip white with yellow

median band and red lines on either side from base to half of length” matching Floltum

(1950). This specimen constitutes a new record for Thailand.

214

Card. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

Table 1. Comparison of Boesenbergia purpureorubra and 5. longipes

Character

B. purpureorubra (M3 106)

B. longipes (M3 106)

Plant height

40 cm

c. 60 cm

Petiole length

3-8 cm

to 23 cm

Lamina

18-25 X 8 cm

30 X 10 cm

Inflorescence

9-13 cm long

5 cm long

Floral tube

3-3.5 cm

4.5 cm

Labellum

2.8 cm long, oval,

2 cm long, obovate.

saccate

non saccate

Labellum colour

white, red, violet-pink

white, red, yellow median band

Filament

2 mm

4 mm

Anther

7 mm

4 mm

Anther crest

none

oblong, rounded, fleshy

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. We thank the staff at BK, BKF and QBG for assistance; The

Field Museum, Chicago, USA (F) for use of laboratoty facilities; Lim Chong Keat (Penang,

Malaysia) for photography; and Linda Ann Vorobik (Berkeley, USA) for the watercolour.

References

Holttum, R.E. (1950). The Zingiberaceae of the Malay Peninsula. Gard. Bull. Singapore 13(1):

1-249.

Kharukanant, B. & Tohdam, S. (2003). Anew ^^Qcio^of Boesenbergia O. Kuntze (Zingiberaceae)

from Peninsular Thailand. Folia Malaysiana 4: 19-24.

Kuntze, O. (1891). Scitaminaceae. Revisio Generum Plantarum 2; 682-698. Leipzig: Felix.

Larsen, K. (1993). Boesenbergia tenuispicata (Zingiberaceae): a new species from Thailand.

Nord, J. Bot. 13: 281-283.

Larsen, K. (1997). Further studies in the genus Boesenbergia. Nord. J. Bot. 17: 361-366.

Mood, J.D., Prince, L.M., Veldkamp, J.F. & Dey, S. (2013). The history and identity of

Boesenbergia longijiora (Zingiberaceae) and descriptions of five related new taxa.

Gard. Bull. Singapore 65: 47-95.

Mood, J.D., Veldkamp, J.F., Dey, S. & Prince, L.M. (2014). Nomenclatural changes in

Zingiberaceae: Caulokaempferia is a superfluous name for Monolophus mdJirawongsea

is reduced to Boesenbergia. Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2): 215-231.

Ridley, H.N. (1899). The Scitamineae of the Malay Peninsula, J. Straits Branch Roy. Asiat.

Soc. 43: 85-184.

Saensouk, S. & Larsen, K. (2002). Boesenbergia baimaii, a new species of Zingiberaceae from

Thailand. Nord. J. Bot. 21: 595-597.

Sirirugsa, P. (1987). Three new species and one new combination in Boesenbergia

(Zingiberaceae) from Thailand. Nord. J. Bot. 7: 421-425.

Sirirugsa, P. (1992). A revision of the genus Boesenbergia Kuntze (Zingiberaceae) in Thailand.

Nat. Hist. Bull. Siam Soc. 40: 67-90.

Gardens’ Bulletin Singapore 66(2): 215-231. 2014

215

Nomenclatural changes in Zingiber aceae:

Caulokaempferia is a superfluous name for Monolophus

and Jirawongsea is reduced to Boesenbergia

J.D. Mood^, J.R Veldkamp^, S. Dey^ & L.M. Prince^

'Lyon Arboretum, University of Hawaii, 3860 Manoa Road,

Honolulu, HI 96822, USA

zmgiber@ wamilava. com

^Naturalis Biodiversity Center, National Herbarium of The Netherlands,

P.O. Box 9517, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands

-^Department of Botany, Nagaland University, Lumami 798627,

Zunheboto, Nagaland, India

Rhe Field Museum, Department of Botany, 1400 S Lake Shore Dr.,

Chicago, IL 60605, USA

ABSTRACT. Wallich published Monolophus Wall. (Zingiberaceae) in 1832 for two taxa he

had described previously in 1820 as Kaeinpferia linearis Wall, and K. secunda Wall. He also

mentioned M. ? elegans Wall., but the “?” indicates that he was not certain that this species

belonged to this new genus. Consequently, elegans., while validly published, cannot

be the lectot^pe of the generic name. In 1 964 Larsen argued against accepting Monolophus and

established the alternative Caulokaempferia K.Larsen, Caulokaempferia, typified by the name

C. linearis (Wall.) K.Larsen, is, however, supeiRuous. Monolophus is hereby reinstated with

22 new combinations. Its phylogenetic position is shown in relation to other genera. Based

on comparative nuclear and chloroplast DNA sequence data analyses, Jirawongsea Picheans.

(previously Caulokaempferia, pro parte) is reduced to Boesenbergia Kuntze with five new

combinations.

Keywords. Kaempferia, molecular phylogeny, nomenclature, taxonomy

Introduction

Over the past several years the authors have been collecting molecular data from both

the nuclear ITS and the chloroplast trnK intron to produce a phylogeny of the genus

Boesenbergia Kuntze. In the process, other Zingiberaceae genera have been included as

outgroups. Caulokaempferia K.Larsen is one of these genera. Until recently, this genus

consisted of 29 species described from the Lao P.D.R., Northeast India and Thailand.

In 2007, a molecular phylogeny of Caulokaempferia using samples of 23 taxa from

Thailand and the Lao P.D.R. was completed (Chaiyoot, 2007). The results showed the

genus to be polyphyletic with two distantly related clades. Since a sample of the type

species, Caulokaempferia linearis, was not included, no definitive conclusion was

216

Card. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

possible as to which clade should retain the name Caulokaempferia. Picheansoonthon

et al. (2008) used these results in combination with the morphological characters of

flower colour and capsule type (Larsen, 2003) to detemiine that the largest clade (18

species) represented tme Caulokaempferia, while the smaller clade (five species) was

better treated as a new genus, which was called Jirawongsea Picheans., despite the

samples clustering within the Boesenbergia clade. Also, a morphological comparison

of Jirawongsea to Boesenbergia was not included.

When conducting a brief historical review of Caulokaempferia as part of this

study it was discovered that an earlier name, Monolophus Wallich (1832) appeared

to have been validly published with two species, one of which is the type of

Caulokaempferia. This intriguing infonnation triggered an in-depth nomenclatural

study to understand why Monolophus had not been used in lieu of Caulokaempferia.

This paper provides new insights into the nomenclature, phytogeny and

morphology of Caulokaempferia and Jirawongsea.

While all four authors made significant contributions to the manuscript, JDM

is the key investigator and general manager of this paper, JFV provided the historical

research as a basis for nomenclatural decisions, SD was instrumental in making field

observations, and LMP provided supporting molecular phylogenetic research.

Nomenclature

Wallich (1820) described two new species of Kaempferia L. (Zingiberaceae): K.

linearis Wall, and K. secunda Wall. At the time he thought them to be atypical for

this genus and gave a brief diagnosis for this “group”, but not a rank, nor a name:

“Caulescent, with an entire cresf ’.

In 1829 he added Kaempferia elegans Wall, and stated, “[it] belongs to the

section which 1 have long ago [1820] indicated ... All three ought perhaps to be

removed from Kaempferia, and fonned into a distinct genus for which 1 would propose

the name Monolophus [single, entire crest].” Monolophus is here a provisional name

for both the section and the genus and is, therefore, invalid (McNeill et al., 2012 - Art.

36.1b) although there is, yet again, a diagnosis: “caulescent habit, absence of tubers

and entire crest”.

The nomenclatural articles cited here are according to the International Code of

Nomenclature (TCN) (McNeill et al. 2012).

Wallich (1 832) p\xh\is\{Q& Monolophus and included three species with references

to earlier publications. Although Monolophus as a genus is not separately mentioned.

Art. 35.1 and Ex. 1 on Suaeda Forssk. do not apply because the name of the genus and

its three species are validly published through direct reference to previous diagnoses

and descriptions (Art. 38.1). Monolophus linearis andM secunda are clearly syntypes

while M. elegans is not, as it was cited with a query and was not part of the original

concept in 1820.

Nomenclatural changes in Zingiberaceae

217

As Wallich (1829) so beautifully illustrated Kaempferia elegans it became the

best known species of the assemblage, thus causing later problems in lectotypification

(e.g. supposedly by Endlicher (1837)).

Monoloplms was recognised by Endlicher (1837), followed by Steudel

(1841), Horaninov (1862), Pfeiffer (1874), and more recently by Wu & Chen (1978).

Endlicher ’s citation of Kaempferia elegans is not to be regarded as a lectotypification,

but as a representative of the genus. As Kaempferia elegans is not a syntype this cannot

be a lectotype, yet it was eiToneously accepted by Larsen (1964: 165), followed by

Buitt & Smith (1972: 216), Wu & Chen (1981), and Newman et al. (2004: 118), and

thus apparently by the Index Nominum Genericorum (Farr, 2013).

Horaninov (1862) is sometimes cited as the validating author of Monolophus

but from the text it is clear that he was not, as he refers to Endlicher (1837), Roxburgh

(1820) and Wallich (1832).

Bentham (1883) regarded Monolophus as connecting Kaempferia L. sections

Stachyanthesis Benth. and Soncorus Rumph. ex Horan. The latter is an invalid name for

Kaempferia sect. Kaempferia as an autonym is required. He included only Kaempferia

linearis and K secunda and did not mention K elegans.

Baker (1892) accepted Monolophus as a subgenus of Kaempferia and included

seven species, some of which are now placed elsewhere, e.g. in Boesenbergia Kuntze,

Camptandra Ridl., Kaempferia and Stahlianthus Kuntze. He was more or less followed

by Schumann (1904: 73) who created a later isonym, as he eiToneously thought that

Baker had regarded it as a section.

Larsen (1964) transfQrrQd Kaempferia linearis andK. secunda to a new genus,

Caulokaempferia with C. linearis as the type. This transfer was supported by then new

morphological findings and cytological data.

As was argued above, Larsen (1964) was incorrect in regarding Kaempferia

elegans as the type of Monolophus, which he saw as more related to K galanga L., the

lectotype of Kaempferia. He, therefore, XQ]QciQd Monolophus because 1 ) the type species

would be a Kaempferia and 2) “the name refers to a character widely distributed also

in neighbouring genera”. The first argument is to be rejected as Kaempferia elegans is

not a candidate for lectotypification. Tlie second is a taxonomic, not a nomenclatural,

argument and also contravenes Art. 51.1 (a name is not to be rejected because it would

be inappropriate).

Because Kaempferia linearis and K. secunda are the syntypes of Monolophus,

Larsen (1964) created a supeiTluous name. The fact that, in 1964, Monolophus had not

yet been lectotypified is irrelevant (Art. 52.2a). Monolophus linearis Wall, was later

designated as the lectotype by Wu & Chen (1978: 28).

Even though Wu & Chen (1978) recognised the validity of Monolophus they

later (Wu & Chen, 1981) changed their opinion on the validity of Monolophus and

reverted to the name Caulokaempferia which has been in general usage to the present

day.

Here we reinstate Monolophus as the valid name for this genus and provide 22

new combinations (Appendix 1).

218

Card. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

Materials and Methods

Molecular phylogeny. Caulokaempferia and Jirawongsea leaf tissue samples were

obtained from living plants (where available) and dried in silica gel. Supplemental

ingroup data were obtained from GenBank, as were additional sequences which

provided the scaffold for the taxa sampled here. A complete list of samples and

GenBank accession numbers are provided in Appendix 4. The Caulokaempferia

nucleotide data produced by Chaiyoot (2007) have not yet been deposited into any

of the four international sequence repositories BOLD, DDBJ, EMBL, GenBank, thus

they could not be included here.

DNA extraction follows Kress et al. (2002) while amplifr cation and analytical

methods follow Mood et al. (2013). Only minimal detail is provided here. The nuclear

ribosomal ITS (nrlTS) region was amplifred using the 18S-F and 26S-R primers

(Prince, 2010), The plastid trnK region was amplifred in two parts, the first using IF

and 1235R primers and the second using mlF and 2R. Data were collected on an

ABI Genetic Analyzer and sequences of each specimen were edited and a consensus

sequence was generated in Sequencher v4.9 (Gene Codes Corporation, Ann Arbor,

Michigan, USA). Sequences were aligned manually in Se-al (Rambaut, 1996) and

areas of ambiguous aligmnent identified. Data were analysed under parsimony criteria

by genomic data partition, frrstly independently and later in combination. Data were

also analysed including and excluding ambiguously aligned regions to determine if this

altered the resulting tree topologies. Maximum parsimony analyses were conducted in

PAUP* (version 4.0b 10; Swofford, 2002). Heuristic search methods were conducted in

each case with 1000 random addition replicates. Branch support was estimated using

parsimony bootstrap (BS) in PAUP*.

Results

Both the individual and combined data analyses agreed in topology. All trees from

all analyses agreed (or did not conflict) with a monophyletic Caulokaempferia

(Monolophus) and Boesenbergia. Additionally, both phytogenies placed all samples of

Jirawongsea within Boesenbergia, For brevity, only the results of the combined data

analyses are shown and discussed below. The combined ITS and trnK data analysis

(ambiguously aligned regions excluded) produced 64 shortest parsimony trees, one

of which is shown in Figure 1. All samples of Jirawongsea (labelled Boesenbergia

in Fig. 1) are part of a strongly supported (BS=100%) clade that includes B. rotunda

(L.) Mansf and B. curtisii (Baker) Schltr., which is nested within a monophyletic

Boesenbergia (BS=56%). These findings are consistent, whether ambiguously aligned

data are included or excluded from the analyses. Analyses of just the trnK or the ITS data

partitions recover similar tree topologies. The only differences in topology generally

involve minor ehanges in sister taxon relationships (with low support) among genera

of Zingibereae. Branch support is generally lower in the separate analyses.

Nomenclatural changes in Zingiberaceae

219

Boesenbei-gia alba M3253*

Boesenbergia alba M 1 2C30*

Boesenbergia violacea *

Boesenbergia thailandica

Boesenbergia burttii*

Boesenbergia rouinaa

Boesenbergia cnnisii*

Boesenbergia plieata lurida

Boesenbe rgia pulcherrirna'^

Boesenbergia hamUtonii

Comukaempferia aurantiflora

Zingiber graniineum

DisticlwchJamys rub ro striata

Kaempferia rotunda

Haniffia albiflora

Pomtnereschea lackneri

Rbynchanthiis beesianus

Roscoea purpurea

Hitchenia glauca

Ryrgophyllum ytinnanense

Camptandra parvida

Hedychiuin botdeloniannm

Ilemtorchis rhodorrhachis

100

Monolopluis coenobialis

Monoloplius saxicola *

Monulopinis limianus*

Monoloplius linearis

Monoloplius sikkiinensis*

Globha curtisii

Hornsiedtia hainanensis

Siliquamomum tonkinense

Tamijia flagellaris

Siphonocitilus kirkii

10 changes

Fig. 1. Phylogram of 1 of the 64 shortest maximum parsmiony trees for Boesenbergia and

Monoloplius (Zingiberaceae) based on an analysis of combined ITS and trnK sequence data.

^ indicates the type species for the genus. * indicates sequences generated for this study.

Numbers above branches are bootstrap support values. Bold branches were recovered in the

strict consensus tree.

Discussion

Larsen (1964) described Caulokaempferia with eight species that he considered to be

yellow-flowered. Larsen & Smith ( 1 972) added Caulokaempferia alba (white-flowered)

and the yellow-flowered, C. yunnanensis (Gagnep.) R.M.Sm. (See Appendix 2). The

inclusion of these taxa was problematic, as they were quite different from each other

and the type. The authors discussed the diversity of Caulokaempferia and Boesenbei^ia

and suggested, on balance, that these species belonged in Caulokaempferia but

conceded that characters such as the “large concave bracts ... [with a] lamina-like

extension of the apex.” in C. yunnanensis were more complex and required extending

the generic limits. Recent sampling of this taxon in molecular studies by Kress et al.

(2002), Zaveska et al. (2012) and here (Fig. 1), has shown it to have close affinity

to Curcuma L., but we maintain it in Pyrgophyllum (Gagnep.) T.L.Wu & Z.Y.Chen.

Larsen & Smith (1972) considered the flower of Caulokaempferia alba to be similar

in appearance to other species in Caulokaempferia, but its vegetative form, trilocular

capsule and flowering sequence required considerable accommodation. In this species

the flowers open sequentially, top to bottom, whereas in the type species, they open

bottom to top. Obviously, this was a disconcerting fact, as Larsen & Smith ( 1 972) stated

220

Card. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

“Such a mode of flowering has not been previously observed m Caulokaempferia, and

the possibility of affinity to at least some Boesenbergia cannot be discarded.”

Based on the first author’s study of Boesenbergia across their range, it

appears that all of the species presently described can be distinguished from all other

Zingibereae (except Haplochorema K.Schum.) by their basipetalous flowering. This

is defined here as a flowering sequence where the first flower to open is at or near the

apex and subsequent flowers open sequentially down the rachis from single-flowered

bracts. In contrast, Caulokaempferia species are acropetalous with the flower-opening

sequence irom bottom to top. It should be noted that some Caulokaempferia have

circinni of 2^ flowers per bract, and in this case, the flowering sequence in the circinni

in relation to the overall sequence is undocumented.

Larsen & Smith (1972) mentioned several characters in Caulokaempferia alba

which they thought were atypical of Boesenbergia — a non-saccate labellum, a crested

anther and no [androecial] tube at the base of the labellum. In fact, these three characters

have been documented in Boesenbergia descriptions (Valeton, 1918; Holttum, 1950).

For example, Boesenbergia rotunda (Fig. 3C), a well-known ginger of ethnobotanical

importance, and B. curtisii (Fig. 3D) have these “atypical” characters. Perhaps Larsen

& Smith were referring to Boesenbergia species similar to the type, B. pulcherrima

(Wall.) Kuntze, which have a saccate labellum, an uncrested anther and an androecial

tube (Holttum, 1950).

Wallich (1820) did not note flower colour in the original description of

Kaempferia linearis and nor is a colour shown in the drawing received by Kew (K) on

October 1 7, 1 828 (annotated as “Wallich 1 828 East Ind. Co. #25”). The first mention of

the flower colour was by Baker (1892) who noted “flowers white ... tinged with yellow

at the tliroat”, but it is unknown where this information origmated. Contrary to Baker’s

colour description, Parryi 281 (K) from Assam ( 1 927) was annotated “flowers yellow”.

Larsen (1964) cited this specimen as representative of Caulokaempferia linearis, but

in its description he stated “ [flower] tinged with yellow at the throat”.

By 2003, five more Caulokaempferia species had been published by Larsen

(1973,2003). Two of these, Caulokaempferia thailandica and C. had characters

very similar to C. alba. It became apparent to Larsen that the accommodation of these

latter taxa [and Caulokaempferia alba] within Caulokaempferia was becoming more

problematic. To preclude moving these species to another genus, he taxonomically

grouped them into either yellow-flowered with unilocular capsules (to include the

type) or into “the whitish- to violet-flowered species” with trilocular capsules. He

further stated, “Until the relationships between these groups have been satisfactorily

elucidated thi*ough molecular studies, [1 have] chosen to keep the two groups united in

the genus Caulokaempferia'' (Larsen, 2003).

The first phylogenetic study to sample Caulokaempferia was by Kress et al.

(2002). Only three species from the yellow-flowered group were included. The results

showed affinity to Hanijfia albiflora K.Larsen & Mood. Ngamriabsakul et al. (2004)

and Thong-a-ram et al. (2005) sampled Caulokaempferia violacea, showing it to be

closely allied to Boesenbergia. Chaiyoot (2007) sampled both Caulokaempferia colour

groups, but without the type, C. linearis. His results showed the genus to be comprised of

Nomenclatural changes in Zingiberaceae

221

Fig. 3. A. Monolophus petelotii (K.Larsen) Veldk. & Mood. B. Boesenbergia alba (K.Larsen

& R.M. Smith) Mood & L.M.Prince. C. Boesenbergia rotunda (L.) Mansf. D. Boesenbergia

curtisii (Baker) Schltr. (Photos: A, J. Leong-Skomickova; B-D, J. Mood)

two unrelated clades. The five taxa of Larsen’s white-fiowered group clustered within a

strongly supported monophyletic Boesenbergia (BS=100%). This finding brought full

circle the observation of Larsen & Smith (1972) concerning the flowering sequence of

Caulokaempferia alba being the same as in Boesenbergia. Picheansoonthon et al. (2008)

proposed that these five taxa represented a new genus and named them Jirawongsea,

despite the findings of the molecular data analyses. Since the type, Caulokaempferia

222

Card. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

linearis had not been included by Chaiyoot (2007), no direct detennination could

be made as to which clade actually represented Caulokaempferia. In lieu of this,

Picheansoonthon et al. (2008) followed the floral colour grouping of Larsen (2003) and

selected the yellow-flowered group as representative of Caulokaempferia. To support

their generic proposal, the taxonomic discussion was confined to the morphological

dissimilarities between Caulokaempferia and Jirawongsea with no mention of the

morphological similarities or phylogenetic affinity of the latter to Boesenbergia.

Figure 1 shows that Caulokaempferia linearis (as Monolophtis linearis) does

indeed group with the other species of Monolophus which are predominantly yellow-

flowered. Surprisingly, as can be seen from a photograph of Monolophus linearis

taken near the type locality in Meghalaya, India, the flower is not yellow, but white

(Fig. 2B) as was stated by Baker (1892). In fact, none of the Indian species are yellow-

flowered: Caulokaempferia secunda flowers are dark pink to violet (Fig. 2D) and

those of C. sikkimensis are white. Consequently, taxonomic grouping by flower colour

was an imperfect fit.

Based on phylogenetic and taxonomic investigations, Jirawongsea is reduced

to Boesenbergia with five new combinations (Appendix 3).

Since the most recent circumscription of Caulokaempferia (Larsen & Smith,

1972) included characters of taxa that are no longer in this genus, an updated

description of the genus is provided here under the name Monolophus.

Monolophus Wall., PI. Asiat. Rar. 1 : 24, t. 27 (1829), nom. prov. inval.; Wall., Numer.

List 6591-6593 (1832), validation; Wall, ex Endl., Gen. PI, 225 (1837), isonym. -

Kaempferia L. subg. Monolophus (Wall.) Wall, ex Baker in Hook.f , FI. Brit. India

6: 222 (1894); Baker ex K.Schum. in Engl., Pflanzenr. IV, 46, Heft 20: 73 (1904),

isonym. - Caulokaempferia K.Larsen, Bot. Tidsskr. 60: 166 (1964), nom. superfl.

TYPE: Monolophus linearis Wall., lectotype designated by Wu & Chen (1978).

Perennial herbs up to 45 cm; stems with 2-A bladeless sheaths at the base.

Leaves 3-10, sessile or petiolate, ligule small, bilobed to entire. Inflorescence

terminal, acropetalous, flowers opening singly (?). Bracts 1-10, distichous, lanceolate,

acuminate, the margins quite free to the base; \-A flowered. Bracteoles membranous,

often not associated with the first flower in those species with single-flowered bracts.

Calyx tubular, often 2-3 dentate, not deeply split unilaterally. Floral tube long, narrow,

widening at the mouth; lobes 3, the dorsal broader and a little longer than the laterals.

Lateral staminodes petaloid, normally small in relation to the labellum. Labellum

large, orbicular, entire or bilobed, slightly concave. Stamen usually with a very short

filament (occasionally up to 5 mm long) or sessile on the floral tube; anther thecae

mostly parallel, dehiscing longitudinally; anther crest conspicuous, entire or dentate,

often reflexed. Epigymous glands short, mostly linear, free Ifom each other. Ovary

unilocular; placentation free central. Fruit a unilocular capsule with a lateral suture.

Seeds numerous, small, ellipsoid, glabrous or with a dense indumentum, aril white.

Nomenclatural changes in Zingiberaceae

223

Fig. 2. A. Boesenbergia alba (K.Larsen & R.M. Smith) Mood & L.M.Prince. B. Monolophus

linearis (Wall.) Wall. C. Monolophus saxicola (K.Larsen) Veldk. & Mood. D. Monolophus

secundus (Wall.) Wall. (Photos: A & C, J. Mood; B & D, S. Dey)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. We would like to thank Poonsak Vateharakom (Chanthaburi,

Thailand) for assistance in the field; R. Pooma (BKF) and L. Pashirajan, Botanical Survey

India (CAL) for botanical assistance; J. Leong-Skornickova (SING) for photography; PC.

Boyce (UNIMAS, Malaysia) for helpful comments; S.H. Chen (TAIE) for the translation of

Chinese texts; the reviewers for their time and diligence; and the Field Museum (F), Chicago,

USA, for use of laboratory facilities. Colour plates were created by T.D. Shafto (Hawaii, USA).

References

Baker, J.G. (1892). Scitamineae. In: Hooker, J.D. (ed) The Flora of British India 6: 198-264.

London: Reeve & Co.

224

Card. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

Bentham, G. (1883). Scitamineae. In: Bentham, G. & Hooker, J.D. (ed) Genera Plantarum 3:

636-657. London: L. Reeve & Co.; Williams & Norgate.

Burtt, B.L. & Smith, R.M. (1972). Key species in the taxonomic history of Zingiberaceae.

Notes Roy. Bot, Card, Edinburgh 31: 177-227.

Chaiyoot, A. (2007). Molecular studies of the genus Caulokaempferia (Zingiberaceae) in

Thailand and Laos. Unpublished M.Sc. Thesis. The Graduate School, Khon Kaen

University, Khon Kaen, Thailand. 156 pp. Deposited at KKU (n.v.).

Dalzell, N.A. (1850). Scitamineae. Contributions to the botany of western India. Hooker’s J.

Bot. Kew Gard. Misc. 2: 133-145.

Dalzell, N.A. & Gibson, A. (1861). Scitamineae. The Bombay Flora. Pp. 272-275. Bombay:

Education Society’s Press.

Dietrich, A. (1849). Beschreibung einer neuen Scitaminee, Monolophus philippianus Nob.,

nebst Angabe ilirer Kultur. ^4//g. Gartenzeitung 17: 265-267.

Endlicher, S. (1837). Zingiberaceae. Genera Plantarum: 221-225. Vienna: Beck.

Farr, E. (2013). Index Nominum Genericorum. http://botany.si.edu/ing/ (accessed on 7 Jul.

2014).

Holttum, R.E. (1950). Boesenbergia. The Zingiberaceae of the Malay Peninsula. Gard. Bull.

Singapore 13: 106-117.

Horaninov, P.F. (1862). Prodromus Monographiae Scitaminearum. Pp. 45. St. Petersburg:

Academia Caesareae Scientiarum.

Kress, W.J., Prince, L.M. & Williams, K.J. (2002). The phylogeny and a new classification

of the gingers (Zingiberaceae): evidence from molecular data. Amer J. Bot. 89: 1682-

1696.

Larsen, K. (1964), Studies in Zingiberaceae IV. Caulokaempferia, a new genus. Bot. Tidsskr.

60: 165-179.

Larsen, K. (1973). Studies in Zingiberaceae VI. Bot. Tidsskr. 68: 157-159.

Larsen, K. (2003). Tliree new species of Caulokaempferia (Zingiberaceae) from Thailand with

a discussion of the generic diversity. Nordic J. Bot. 22: 409^17.

Larsen, K. & Smith, R.M. (1972). Notes on Caulokaempferia. Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh

31:287-295.

Leong-Skomickova, J., O. Sida, V. Jarolimova, M. Sabu, T. Fer, R Travnicek & J. Suda.

(2007). Chromosome numbers and genome size variation in Indian species of Curcuma

(Zingiberaceae). H/7«. Bot. (Oxford) 100: 505—526.

Loesener, T, (1930). Kaempferia. In: Engler, A. (ed) Die Natiirlichen Pflanzenf ami lien ed. 2,

15a: 564-568. Leipzig: Engelmann.

McNeill, J., Barrie, F. R., Buck, W.R., Demoulin, V, Greuter, W., Hawksworth, D.L., Herendeen,

P.S., Knapp, S., Marhold, K., Prado, J., Prud’homme van Reine, W.F., Smith, G.F.,

Wiersema, J.H. & Turland, N.J. (2012). International Code of Nomenclature for algae,

fungi and plants (Melbourne Code). Regnum Vegetabile 154. 205 pp. Konigstein:

Koeltz Scientific Books.

Merrill, E.D. (1934). Unrecorded plants from Kwangtung Province III. Lingnan Sci. J. 13:

15-52.

Mood, J.D., Prince, L.M., Veldkamp, J.F. & Dey, S. (2013). The history and identity of

Boesenbergia longiflora (Zingiberaceae) and descriptions of five related new taxa.

Gard. Bull. Singapore 65: 47-95.

Newman, M., Lhuillier, A. & Poulsen, A.D. (2004). Checklist of the Zingiberaceae of Malesia.

Blumea, Suppl. 16: 1-166.

Nomenclatural changes in Zingiberaceae

225

Ngamriabsakul, C., Newman, M.F. & Cronk, Q.C.B. (2004). Thephylogeny of tribe Zingibereae

(Zingiberaceae) based on ITS (nrDNA) and tmL-F (cpDNA) sequences. Edinburgh J.

Bot. 60: 483-507.

Pfeiffer, L. (1874). Monolophus. Nomenclator Botanicus. P. 348. Cassel: Fischer.

Picheansoonthon, C., Chaiyoot, A. & Suki'ong, S. (2008). Jirawongsea, a new genus of the

family Zingiberaceae. Folia Malaysiana 9: 1-1 6.

Prince, L.M. (2010). Phylogenetic relationships and species delimitation in Canna (Cannaceae)

In: Seberg, O., Petersen, G., Barfod, A.S. & Davis, J.I. (eds) Diversity, Phylogeny, and

Evolution in the Monocotyledons. Pp. 307-331. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press.

Rambaut, A. (1996). Se-Al (v2.0all) Sequence Alignment Editor, http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/

software/seal/ (accessed 3 Dec. 2013).

Ridley, H.N. (1899). The Scitamineae of the Malay Peninsula. J. Straits Branch Roy. Asiat.

50^.32: 85-184.

Schumann, K. (1904). Zingiberaceae. In: Engler, A. & Prantl, K. (eds) Das Pflanzenreich IV,

46, Heft 20: 63-64, 73-75, 82, 85-86. Leipzig: Engelmann.

Steudel, E.T. (1841). Nomenclator Botanicus, ed. 2, vol. 2: 158. Stuttgart, Tubingen: Cotta.

Swofford D.L. 2002. H4UP*- Phylogenetic An cdy sis Using Parsimony (*and other methods),

vers. 4.0bl0. USA, Massachusetts, Sunderland: Sinauer Associates, Inc., .

Thong-a-ram, D., Mahakham, W. & Namdee, K. (2005). Classification of the genus

Caulokaempferia K. Larsen (Zingiberaceae) based on the molecular phylogenetic

analysis. Khon Kaen Univ. Res. J. 10: 5-12.

Valeton, T. (1918). New notes on the Zingiberaceae of Java and Malaya. Bull. Jard. Bot.

Buitenzoig, Ser. II 27: 1-163.

Wallich, N. (1820), Kaempferia secunda, Kaempferia linearis. In: Roxburgh, W. (ed) Flora

Indica 1: 19-20. Serampore: Mission Press.

Wallich, N. (1829). Gastrochilus. Plantae Asiaticae Rariores 1: 22-23, t. 27. London: Treuttel

& Wiirz.

Wallich, N. (1832). A Numerical List of Dried Specimens (“Catalogue”). London: Wallich.

Wu, T.L. & Chen, S.J. (1978). Materials for Chinese Zingiberaceae. Acta Phytotax. Sin. 16(3):

25-46.

Wu, T.L. & Chen, S.J. (1981). Caulokaempferia. In: Wu, T.-L. (ed) Flora Reipublicae Popularis

Sinicae 16: 36-38. Beijing: Science Press.

Zaveska, E, Fer, T., Sida, O., Krak, K., Marhold, K. & Leong-Skomickova, J. (2012). Phylogeny

of Curcuma (Zingiberaceae) based on plastid and nuclear sequences: Proposal of the

new subgenus Ecomata. Taxon 61: 747-763.

Appendix 1. Enumeration of Monolophus species

1. Monolophus amplexicaulis (Suksathan) Veldk. & Mood, comb. nov. - Caulokaempferia

amplexicaulis Suksathan in K.Larsen et al., Nordic J. Bot. 23: 401, t. 1, 2. (2005)

tyamplexicaule’'). TYPE: Thailand, Mae Hong Son, Muang Distr., Doi Hua Kai-Doi Pui,

Wongnak et al. 705 (holotype QBG; isotypes AAU, BKF, E, K, US).

2. Monolophus appendiculatus (K.Laisen & Triboun) Veldk. & Mood, comb. nov. -

Caulokaempferia appendiculata K.Larsen & Triboun in K.Larsen, Nordic J. Bot. 22: 409, t. 1

(2003). TYPE: Thailand, Chiang Mai, Ang Kang, Kop, Dung village, Triboun 617 (holotype

AAU; isotypes BK, BKF).

226

Card. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

3. Monolophus bolavenensis (Picheans. & Koontemi) Veldk. & Mood, comb. nov. -

Caulokaempferia bolavenensis Picheans. & Koontenn, in Picheans. et al, Nat. Hist. Bull. Siam

Soc. 56: 86, t. 14. (2008). TYPE: Laos, Champasak, Paksong Distr., Bolaven Plateau, Tad

Kamued Waterfall, Picheansoothon & Koontenn 821 (holotype BKF; isotype SING).

4. Monolophus bracteatus (K.Larsen & S.S.Larsen) Veldk. & Mood, comb. nov. -

Caulokaempferia bracteata K.Larsen & S.S.Larsen, Nordic J. Bot. 22; 41 1 , t. 2. (2003). TYPE:

Thailand, Chatuchak Market in Bangkok, originally fromNong Khai, Larsen 4733 7 (holotype

AAU; isotype BKF).

5. Monolophus chayanianus (Tiyaw.) Veldk. & Mood, comb. nov. - Caulokaempferia

chayaniana Tiyaw., Telopea 12: 480, t. 1, 2 (2010). TYPE: Thailand, Mae Hong Son, Pai Distr.,

Doi Jik Jong, Picheansoothon 1017 (holotype BKF; isotypes BK, SING).

6. Monolophus coenobialis Hance, J. Bot. 8: 75 (1870). - Kaempferia coenobialis (Hance)

C.H.Wright, J. Linn. Soc., Bot. 36: 68 (1903). - Caulokaempferia coenobialis (Hance)

K.Larsen, Bot. Tidsskr. 60: 177 (1964). TYPE: China, North River, Fi-loi-tsz Monastery,

Sampson 11369 (holotype K),

Roscoea flava Merr., Lingnan Sci. J. 13: 21 (1934). - Type: China, Kwangtung [Guangdong],

Tsungfa-Lungmoon Distr., Sam Kok Shan, CCC 20595 (W.T. Tsang) (holotype SYS; isotypes

E, possibly in A).

7. Monolophus jirawongsei (Picheans. & Mokkamul) Veldk. & Mood, comb. nov. -

Caulokaempferia jirawongsei Picheans. & Mokkamul, Folia Malaysiana 5: 75, t. 9-15 (2004).

TYPE: Thailand, Nong Khai, Phu Wua, Picheansoothon & Mokkamul 759 (holotype BKF;

isotypes BK, I<:EP, SING).

8. Monolophus khaomaenensis (Picheans. & Mokkamul) Veldk. & Mood, comb. nov. -

Caulokaempferia khaomaenensis Picheans. & Mokkamul, Folia Malaysiana 5: 6, 1 2, 3B, 4- 7.

(2004). TYPE: Thailand, Nakhon Si Thanmiarat, summit of Kliao Maen, Mokkamul 130703-01

(holotype BKF; isotypes BK, KEP, SING).

9. Monolophus kuapii (K.Larsen) Veldk. & Mood, comb. nov. - Caulokaempferia kuapii

K.Larsen, Bot. Tidsskr. 60: 175, t. 5 (1964). TYPE: Thailand, Chantaburi, Mt. Khao Kuap, Put

3016 (holotype C).

1 0. Monolophus larsenii (Suksathan & Triboun) Veldk. & Mood, comb. nov. - Caulokaempferia

larsenii Suksathan & Triboun, Edinburgh J. Bot. 60: 513, t. 1. (2004). TYPE Thailand, Chiang

Mai, Doi Phe Pan Nam, : Suksathan, Triboun & Wongnak 3429 (holotype QBG; isotypes AAU,

BK, BKF, E, K).

11. Monolophus limianus (Mokkamul & Picheans.) Veldk. & Mood, comb. nov. -

Caulokaempferia limiana Mokkamul & Picheans., Folia Malaysiana 5: 188, t. 1,2, 3, 5, 8

(2004). TYPE: Thailand, Phitsanulok ,Chat Trakan Waterfalls National Park, Picheansoonthon

& Mokkamul 742 (holotype BKF; isotypes BK, KEP, SfNG).

12. Monolophus linearis (Wall.) Wall., Numer. List 6592 (1832). - Kaempferia linearis Wall,

in Roxb., FI. Ind. 1: 20 (1820). - Costus linearis (Wall.) Spreng., Syst. Veg. 1: 13 (1824,

Nomenclatural changes in Zingiberaceae

227

“1825”). — Caulokaempferia linearis (Wall.) K.Larsen, Bot. Tidsskr. 60: 170 (1964). TYPE:

India, Silhet, Gomez (“lEG.”) in Wallich 6592 (holotype K; isotypes C, CAL, E, L, P, IDC

microfiche 7394).

13. Monolopitus pedemontanus (Triboun & K.Larsen) Veldk. & Mood, comb. nov. -

Caulokaempferia pedemontana Triboun & K.Larsen in K.Larsen et al., Nordic J. Bot. 23:

403, t. 3 (2005). TYPE: Thailand, Nakon Nayok, Nang Rong Tails, Larsen, Larsen, Tange &

Niyomdham 43774 (holotype AAU; isotype BK).

14. Monolophus petelotii (K.Larsen) Veldk. & Mood, comb. nov. - Caulokaempferia petelotii

K.Larsen, Bot. Tidsskr. 80: 176, t. 6. (1964). TYPE: Vietnam, Chapa, Petelot s.n. Jul 1924

(holotype P).

15. Monolophus phulangkaensis (Picheans.) Veldk. & Mood, comb. nov. - Caulokaempferia

phulangkaensis Picheans., Taiwania 53: 249, t. 3, 4, 7 (2008). TYPE: Thailand, Loei, Phu

Luang, Kok Nok-kraba, Picheansoothon 729 (holotype BKF; isotypes BK, SING).

16. Monolophus phuluangensis (Picheans. & Mokkamul) Veldk. & Mood, comb. nov. -

Caulokaempferia phuluangensis Picheans. & Mokkamul, Folia Malaysiana 5: 70, t. 1, 2, 4-8

(2004). TYPE: Thailand, Loei, Phu Luang, Kok Nok-kraba, Picheansoonthon & Mokkamul

739 (holotype BKF; isotypes BK, KEP, SING).

17. Monolophus phutokensis (Picheans.) Veldk. & Mood, comb. nov. - Caulokaempferia

phutokensis Picheans, in Picheans. & Koonterm, Taiwania 53: 253, t. 5-7. (2008). TYPE:

Thailand, Nong Khai, Amphoe Si Wilai, Phu Tok Noi, Picheansoonthon 732 (holotype BKF;

isotypes BK, SING).

18. Monolophus phuwoaensis (Picheans. & Koonterm) Veldk. & Mood, comb. nov. -

Caulokaempferia phuwoaensis Picheans. & Koontenn, Taiwania 53: 248, t. 1, 2, 7 (2008).

TYPE: Thailand, Nong, Khai, Amphoe Bung Klila, Pu Woa Wildlife Sanctuary, Picheansoothon

723 (holotype BKF; isotypes BK, SING).

19. Monolophus saksuwaniae (K.Larsen) Veldk. & Mood, comb. nov. - Caulokaempferia

saksuwaniae K.Larsen, Bot. Tidsslcr. 68: 157, 1. 1 . (1973). TYPE: Thailand, Phangnga, Takuapa,

Mt. Khao Pra Mi, Larsen, Larsen, Nielsen & Santisuk 30832 (holotype AAU).

20. Monolophus satunensis (Picheans.) Veldk. & Mood, comb. nov. - Caulokaempferia

satunensis Picheans., Folia Malaysiana 8: 56, t. 15 (2007). TYPE: Thailand, Satun, Thung Wa,

Tan Pliu Waterfall, Picheansoonthon 531 (holotype BKF; isotypes KEP, SING).

21 . Monolophus saxicola (K.Larsen) Veldk. & Mood, comb. nov. - Caulokaempferia saxicola

K.Larsen, Bot. Tidsslcr. 60: 171, t. 3, 4 (1964). TYPE: Thailand, Prachinburi, Mt. Khao Khieo

Hills, Larsen s.n. (holotype C).

22. Monolophus secundus (Wall.) Wall., Numer. List 6591 (1 832) {“secimda”). - Kaempferia

secunda Wall, in Roxb., FI. Ind. 1:19 (1820). - Costus secundus (Wall.) Spreng., Syst. Veg. 1:

13 (1824, “1825”). - Caulokaempferia secunda (Wall.) K.Larsen, Bot. Tidsskr. 60: 1 70 (1964).

228

Card. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

TYPE: India, Silhet, F.D. & W.G. (Da Silva and Gomez) in Wallich 6591 (holotype K; isotypes

C, CAL, P, IDC microfiche 7394).

23. Monolophus sikkimensis (King ex Baker) Veldk. & Mood, comb. nov. - Kaempferia

sikkimensis King ex Baker in Hook.f., FI. Brit. India 6: 223 (1890). - Caulokaempferia

sikkimensis (King ex Baker) K.Larsen, Bot. Tidsskr. 60: 169 (1964). TYPE: India, Sikkim,

Elwes s.n., Aug 1886 (lectotype K, designated here).

24. Monolophus sirirugsae (Ngamr.) Veldk. & Mood, comb. nov. - Caulokaempferia

sirirugsae Ngamr., Nordic J. Bot. 26: 325, t. 1, 2 (2009). TYPE: Thailand, Phangnga, Khao

Lumpee Waterfall, Ngamriahsakul 51-01 (holotype BKF; isotypes PSU, Wailak Univ. Herb.).

25. Monolophus tamdaoensis (Picheans. & Inthar.) Veldk. & Mood, comb. nov. -

Caulokaempferia tamdaoensis Picheans. & Inthar., J. Jap. Bot. 89: 134 (2014). TYPE:

Picheansoonthon & Phokham 180812-1 (holotype BK).

Appendix 2. Taxa excluded from Monolophus (name in bold is currently accepted name).

1. Gastrochilus ochroleucus Ridl., J. Straits Branch Roy. Asiat. Soc. 32: 109, 110. (1899)

{"^ochroleucd’"). - Kaempferia ochroleuca (Ridl.) K.Schum. in Engler, Pflanzenr. IV, 46, Heft

20: 75. (1904). - Boesenbergia ochroleuca (Ridl.) Schltr. in Fedde, Repert. Spec. Nov. Regni

Veg. 12: 316. (1913). TYPE: Thailand, between Kasum and Pungah, Ridley Illustration 00754

(lectotype SING, designated by Turner 2000: 25-26, t. 2; isotype K?).

Note - Included in Gastrochilus Wall, non D. Don unranked § Mesanthi by Ridley (1899: 109)

and in Kaempferia subg. Monolophus by Schumann (1904).

2. Kaempferia L. subg. Pyrgophyllum Gagnep., Bull. Soc. Bot. France 48: Ixxviii (1902,

“1901”). — Camptandra Ridl. sect. Pyrgophyllum (Gagnep.) Gagnep. ex K.Schum. in Engler,

Pflanzenr. IV, 46, Heft 20: 63 (1904). - Caulokaempferia K.Larsen sect. Pyrgophyllum

(Gagnep.) R.M.Sm., Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 31: 291 (1972). - Pyrgophyllum

(Gagnep.) T.L.Wu & Z.Y.Chen, Acta Phytotax. Sin. 27: 126 (1989). TYPE: Kaempferia

yunnanensis Gagnep.

Note - Pyigophyllum in our analysis (Fig. 1) is distinct from Monolophus (see below #10).

3. Kaempferia decus-sylvae Hallier f., Ann. Jard. Bot. Buitenzorg 13: 321, t. 27, f 4. (1896).

- Haplochorema decus-sylvae (Hallier f.) Valeton, Bull. Jard. Bot. Buitenzorg ser. II, 27: 116.

(1918). TYPE: Indonesia, Kalunantan, Liang Gagang Mts, Hallier 2636 (lectotype L [122322

spirit], designated here; isotype BO).

Note - Attributed to Kaempferia sect. Monolophus by Hallier.

4. Kaempferia elegans Wall., PI. Asiat. Rar. 24, t. 27 (1829). - Monolophus elegans (Wall.)

Wall., Numer. List 6593 (1832); Horan., Prodr. Monogr. Scitam.: 22 (1862). TYPE: Wallich

(1829) cited “Pegu, Martaban, Rangoon, Amherst, Moalmyne”. Only the Rangoon locality is

mentioned in the Wallich Herbarium, K-W. We here select 6593-A, bottom specimen-{\Qcto\ypQ

K-W [IDC microfiche 7394], first step designation by Picheansoonthon & Koonterm (2008b:

77, “Tenasserim”), second step designated here: Bimia, Rangoon.

Note - Included in Kaempferia subg. Monolophus by Baker (1892).

Nomenclatural changes in Zingiberaceae

229

5. Kaempferia gracillima K.Schuin. in Engler, Pflanzenr. IV, 46, Heft 20: 74 (1904). -

Camptandra gracillima (K.Schum.) Valeton, Bull. Jard. Bot. Buitenzorg II, 27: 115. (1918).

TYPE: Sarawak, Selebut, Haviland 448 (holotype B, lost; isotype K). = Camptandra parvula

(King ex Baker) Ridl. van angustifoUa Ridl,, fide Newman et al. (2004: 61).

Note — Included in Kaempferia subg. Monolophus by Schumann (1904: 74).

6. Kaempferia macrochlamys Baker in Hook.f., FI. Brit. India 6: 223. 1892. - Stahlianthus

macrochlamys (Baker) Craib, Bull. Misc. Inform. Kew. 1912: 401 (1912). TYPE: Burma,

Tenasserim, Parish s.n. (holotype K).

Note -Included in Kaempferia subg. Monolophus by Baker (1892).

7. Kaempferia pai^ula King ex Baker in Hook.f., FI. Brit. India 6: 223 (1892). - Camptandra

parvula (King ex Baker) Ridl., J. Straits Branch Roy. Asiat. Soc. 32: 104. (1 899). TYPE: Malay

Peninsula, Goping, King’s collector (holotype K [000255350]; isotype CAL, K).

Note - Included in Kaempferia subg. Monolophus by Baker.

8. Kaempferia philippinensis Merr., Philipp. J. Sci., sect. C, Bot. 10: 296 (1915). TYPE:

Philippines, Luzon, Laguna, San Antonio, Dahican River, Ramos BS 14952 (holotype PNH,

lost).

Note - Included m Kaempferia subg. Monolophus by Loesener (1 930: 566) and Merrill (1934).

9. Kaempferia siphonantha King ex Baker in Hook.f, FI. Brit. India 6: 222 (1892). -

Boesenbergia siphonantha (King ex Baker) M.Sabu et al., Rheedea 14: 55, t.l, 2. 2004.

TYPE: Andaman Isl, King’s collector 372 (probably Kunstler) (holotype K [000640517];

isotype CAL).

Note - Included in Kaempferia subg. Monolophus by Baker (1892).

10. Kaempferia yunnanens is Gagnep., Bull. Soc. Bot. France 48: Ixxvii (1901). - Camptandra

yunnanensis (Gagnep.) K.Schum. in Engler, Pflanzenr. IV, 46, Heft 20: 64. (1904). —

Caulokaempferia yunnanensis (Gagnep.) R.M.Sm., Notes Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 31: 292,

t. 2. (1972). — Monolophus yunnanensis (Gagnep.) T.L.Wu & S.J.Chen in Anon., Iconogr.

Connophyt. Sin. 5: 586, t. 8001 (1976), nom. inval,, sine basion.; T.L.Wu & S.J.Chen

(“Senjen”) Acta Phytotax. Sin. 16(3): 29 (1978). - Pyrgophyllum yunnanensis (Gagnep.)

T.L.Wu & Z.Y.Chen, Acta Phytotax. Sin. 27: 127 (1989). TYPE: China, Yunnan, N of Tali,

Tsong-so gorges (Ten tchouan), Delavay 2721 (holotype P; isotype E).

Kaempferia fongyuensis Gagnep., Bull. Soc. Bot. France 48: Ixxviii (1901). - Camptandra

fongyuensis (Gagnep.) K.Schum. in Engler, Pflanzenr. IV, 46, Heft 20: 64. (1904). TYPE:

China, Yunnan, Fung- Yu, near Er’Hai lake, d ’Orleans s.n., 19 Jun (holotype P) (synonymy

fide Wu & Chen, 1978: 29).

1 1 . Monolophus philippianus A.Dietr. , Allg. Gartenz. 1 7 : 266 ( 1 849). - Kaempferia philippiana

(A. Dietr.) K.Schum. in Engler, Pflanzenr. lV,46,Heft20: 85 {\90A).-Stahlianthusphilippianus

(A.Dietr.) Loes. in Engler, Nat. Pflanzenfam., ed. 2, 15a: 564 (1930). TYPE: From India, sent to

Remecke of the Decker Garten, Berlin, flowered in 1849, Philippi A° 1 846 (holotype B, lost).

12. Monolophus scaposus (Nimmo) Dalzell in Hook., J. Bot. Kew Gard. Misc. 2: 143 (1850). -

Hedychium scaposum Nimmo in Graham, Cat. PI. Bombay: 205 (1839). —Kaempferia scaposa

(Nimmo) Benth. in Benth. & Hook.f, Gen. PI. 3: 642 (1883). - Curcuma scaposa (Nimmo)

230

Card. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

Skomick. & M.Sabu, Ann. Bot. (Oxford) 100: 524 (2007). TYPE: India, southern Concan,

Kings.}!, (neotype BM, designated by Leong-Skomickova et al. (2007); isoneotype K).

Note - Included in Kaempferia L. sect. Stachyanthesis Benth. (1883). According to Leong-

Skomickova et al. (2007) Hedychium scaposmn Nimmo is the basionyin of Monolophus

scaposus even though the name was not mentioned by Dalzell (1850). Later, Dalzell & Gibson

(1861) described Hedychium scaposum Nimmo with M. scaposus Dalz. in synonymy. Under

Art 41.4 of the ICN, even though there is no reference to a basionyin, DalzelTs intention is

obvious and Nimmo is to be accepted as the author of the basionyin. As no Graham nor Nimmo

material apparently exists Leong-Skomickova et al. (2007) designated a neotype.

Appendix 3. New Boesenbergia combinations.

Boesenbergia Kuntze, Revis. Gen. PI. 2 (1891) 685. - Gastrochilus Wall., PI. Asiat. Rar. 1

(1829) 22. TYPE: Boesenbeigia pulcheirima (Wall.) Kuntze, lectotype designated by Holttum

(1950: 107).

Jirawongsea Picheans., Folia Malaysiana 9:2 (2008). TYPE: Jirawongsea laotica (Picheans.

& Mokkamul) Picheans.

1. Boesenbergia alba (K.Larsen & R.M.Sm.) Mood & L.M.Prince, comb. nov. -

Caidokaempferia alba K.Larsen & R.M.Sm., Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 31: 288, t. 1

(1972). - Jirawongsea alba (K.Larsen & R.M.Sm.) Picheans., Folia Malaysiana 9: 3, t. 1^.

(2008). TYPE: Thailand, Phitsanulok, summit Phu Mieng, Smitinand & Wd/-ncke 949 (holotype

AAU; isotype BKF).

2. Boesenbergia burttii (K.Larsen & Jenjitt.) Mood & L.M.Prince, comb. nov. - Caidokaempferia

burttii K.Larsen & Jenjitt., Edinburgh J. Bot. 60: 509, t. 1. (2004). - Jirawongsea burttii

(K.Larsen & Jenjitt.) Picheans, Folia Malaysiana 9: 3, t. 5-8 (2008). TYPE: Laos, Champassak,

Paksong (Bolaven Plateau), Jenjittikul 8263 (holotype AAU; isotypes BKF, E, PBM).

3. Boesenbergia laotica (Picheans. & Moklcamul) Mood & L.M.Prince, comb. nov. -

Caulokaempferia laotica Picheans. & Mokkamul, Nat. Hist. Bull. Siam Soc. 54: 75, t. 1-5.

(2006). - Jimwongsea laotica (Picheans. & Mokkamul) Picheans., Folia Malaysiana 9: 4, t.

7, 8 (2008). TYPE: Laos, Champasak, Phu Luang, Bolaven Plateau, Picheansoonthon 581

(holotype BKF; isotype SING),

4. Boesenbergia thailandica (K.Larsen) Mood & L.M.Prince, comb. nov. - Caulokaempferia

thailandica K.Larsen, Bot. Tidsskr. 68: 157, t. 2. (1973). TYPE: Thailand, Loei, Phu Kradung,

Smitinand 336 (holotype BKF).

5. Boesenbergia violacea (K.Larsen & Triboun) Mood & L.M.Prince, comb. nov. -

Caulokaempferia violacea K.Larsen & Triboun in K.Larsen, Nordic J. Bot. 22: 414, t. 3, 4.

(2003). TYPE: Thailand, Loei, Phu Rhua, Triboun 399 (holotype BK; isotypes AAU, BKF).

Appendix 4: GenBank accession numbers for Zingiberaceae used in this study. Format:

identification, plant sample number [for newly sequenced samples] (collector and voucher

number, herbarium), ITS GenBank number/rmif GenBank number.

Nomenclatural changes in Zingiberaceae

231

Boesenbergia alba (K.Larsen & R.M.Sm.) Mood & L.M.Prince: M3253 {Mood 3253, BISH)

KF982792/KF982801.

Boesenbergia alba (K.Larsen & R.M.Sm.) Mood & L.M.Prince: M12C30 {Funakoshi s.n.,

MBK) KF982793/KF982802.

Boesenbergia bnrttii (K.Larsen & Jenjitt.) Mood & L.M.Prince: M12C32 (Funakoshi s.n.,

MBK) KF982794/KF982803.

Boesenbergia curtisii (Baker) Schltn: Ml 739 {Mood 1739, BISH) KF982795/KF982804

Boesenbergia hamiltonii Mood, S. Dey & L.M.Prince: M301 7 {Mood 301 7, BISH) JX992754/

JX992815.

Boesenbergia plicata van lurida Holttum: M3 120 {Mood & Vatcharakorn 3120, BK)

JX992808/JX992839.

Boesenbergia pulcherrima (Wall.) Kuntze: M08P276 {Mood 08P276, BISH) X992809/

JX992748.

Boesenbergia rotunda (L.) Mansf.: {Kress 00-6737, US) AF478726/AF478726.

Boesenbergia thailandica (K.Larsen) Mood & L.M.Prince: {Ngamriabsakul 61, BKF)

AY424748/-.

Boesenbergia violacea (K.Larsen & Triboun) Mood & L.M.Prince: M12C31 {Funakoshi s.n.,

MBK) KF982796/KF982805.

Camptandra paimda (King ex Baker) Ridley: {Kress 99-6328, US) AF478730/AF478830.

Cornukaempferia aurantiflora Mood & K.Larsen: {Kress 01-6983, US) AF478736/AF478835.

Distich ochlamys rubrostriata W. J.Kress & Rhese: {Kress 01-6848, US) AF478745/AF478844.

Globba curtisii Holttum: {Kress 99-6347, US) AF478754/AF478853.

Haniffia albiflora K.Larsen & Mood: (Kress 99-6370, US) AF478756/AF478855.

Hedychiunt bordelonianum W.J.Kress & K.J. Williams: {Kress 99-6462, US) AF478757/

AF478856.

Herniorchis rhodorrhachis K.Schum.: {Newman 861, E) AF478763/ AF478863.

Hitchenia glauca Wall.: {Kress 00-6743 US) AF478765/AF478864.

Hornstedtia hainanensis T.L.Wu & S.J.Chen: {Kress 97-5769, US) AF478766/AF478865.

Kaempferia rotunda L.: {Kress 99-6304, US) AF478767/AF478868.

Monolopltus coenobialis Hance: (unknown) HM236121/".

Monoloplius limianus (Mokkamul & Picheans.) Veldk. & Mood.: M3246 {Mood 3246, BISH)

KF982797/KF982806.

Monolopltus linearis (Wall.) Wall.: M12C193 (Dey NU198, CAL) KF982798/KF982807.

Monoloplius saxicola (K.Larsen) Veldk. & Mood: M12C29 {Funakoshi s.n., MBK) KF982799/

KF982808.

Monoloplius sikkimensis (King ex Baker) Veldk. & Mood: New2458 {Newman 2458, spirit,

E) KF982800/KF982809.

Pommereschea lackneri Witt.: {Kress 00-6739, US) AF478776/AF478877.

Pyrgophyllum yunnanense (Gagnep.) T.L.Wu & Z.Y.Chen: {Kress 00-6596, US) AF478777/

AF478878.

Rhyncliantlius beesianus W.WSm.: {Kress 97-5827, US) AF478784/AF478885.

Roscoea purpurea Sm.: {Kress 01-6953, US) AF478787/AF478888.

Siliquamomum tonkinense Baill.: {Kress 00-6802, US) AF478791/AF478892.

Siphonochilus kirkii (Hook.f.) B.L.Burtt: {Kress 94-3692, US) AF478794/AF478895.

Tamijia flagellaris S.Sakai & Nagam.: {Kazuyuki S55, KYOTO) AF478797/AF478898.

Zingiber gramineum Noronha ex Blume: {Kress 96-5739, US) AF478800/AF478902.

Gardens’ Bulletin Singapore 66(2): 233-239. 2014

233

Conservation status and lectotypfication of Alangium

ridleyi (Cornaceae) in Singapore

L. Wijedasa^’^’^ Z.Q. Shee^ & E. Chia^

’Singapore Botanic Gardens, 1 Cluny Road, Singapore 259569

^Applied Entomology Lab, Department of Biological Sciences,

National University of Singapore, 14 Science Drive 4, Singapore 117543

^Rimba, 18E Kampung Basung, Kuala Berang 21700,

Terengganu, Malaysia

lahirux@gmail .com

ABSTRACT. Alangium ridleyi King is lectotypified and the conservation status updated from

Nationally Extinct to Endangered in Singapore and Endangered in Penmsula Malaysia.

Keywords. Alangium ridleyi King, Endangered, lectotypification. Peninsula Malaysia,

Singapore

Introduction

The genus Alangium Lam. in the family Cornaceae comprises 24 species of woody

trees and climbers distributed in the tropical and subtropical regions of the Old World

(Berhaman, 1995; Feng et ah, 2009). Five species oi Alangium have been recorded in

Singapore, of which one, Alangium ndleyi King, has been presumed to be nationally

extinct in Singapore (Tan et ah, 2008; Chong et ah, 2009).

Based on observations of the population of this species in the Singapore Botanic

Gardens, H.N. Ridley, Director of Singapore Botanic Gardens (SBG) from 1888 to

1912, believed this tree could be a new species. When the trees eventually did flower

in 1 892, Ridley collected specimens and sent them to his colleague, Sir George King,

the superintendent at the Royal Botanic Garden, Calcutta, who subsequently described

the species as Alangium ridleyi in 1902 in honour of Ridley. The flowering in 1892

was documented by Ridley and the Gardens’ botanical artists of the time, J.B. de Alwis

and C.G. de Alwis. The painting is deposited in the SING library (Fig. 1).

There is some confusion on the exact type locality of this tree in the Gardens. In

the Flora of the Malay Peninsula, Ridley ( 1 922) stated the following: ‘I have only seen

one tree. Singapore, rockery in Gardens.’ The rockery, during Ridley’s time, was the

location of the current Fernery, which is adjacent to the Gardens Jungle and consisted

of trees which originally belonged to the Gardens Jungle. While King’s description

includes specimens from Singapore and the Malaya Peninsula, he lists the distribution

as ‘SINGAPORE, m the Botanic Garden Jungle, Ridley 4941’ with no mention on

the number of sheets nor the herbaria in which the specimens were deposited, as such

all material are syntype material. We lectotypify the species based on a study of the

234

Card. Bull Singapore 66(2) 2014

Fig. 1. The 1892 painting of Alangium ridleyi King by J. De Alwis, H.N. Ridley and C. De

Alwis. Reproduced with permission from the Singapore Botanic Gardens.

Alangium ridleyi in Singapore

235

available material at SING, CAL and K. We also assess the conservation status of

Alangium ridleyi in Singapore and Peninsular Malaysia.

A recent prolonged dry spell in Singapore, which lasted for a period of nine

weeks from mid-January 2014 through to mid March 2014 saw new records for the

driest month since records began in 1 869 as well as the windiest month in the last 30

years (National Environment Agency, 2014). Only 0.2 mm of rain were recorded in

February 2014, compared to average monthly rainfalls of 161 mm since 1869. Since

the dry spell, many species of plants in various habitats throughout Singapore have

been observed to flower, including the Alangium ridleyi mentioned here (Fig. 2). This

has stimulated new interest in this species.

Taxonomic notes

Alangium ridleyi King, J. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, Pt. 2, Nat. Hist. 71(1): 78. (1902);

Ridley, FI. Malay Penin. 1: 893 (1922). TYPE: Singapore Botanic Gardens, 1892,

H.N. Ridley 4941 (lectotype SING! [SING0059170], designated here; isolectotypes

CAL!, K! [K00007704].

Conservation Status

To assess the conservation status of Alangium ridleyi we used herbarium specimen

distribution data fi'om SING and KEP (Fig. 3) for Peninsular Malaysia and Singapore

to calculate the extent of occurrence (EOO) and area of occupancy (AGO) using

GeoCAT (Baclunan et al., 2011) - a software used to generate lUCN Red List

assessments (lUCN, 2001) using distribution area alone. While a Global Biodiversity

Inventory Facility (2014) search revealed the potential presence of this species in

Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam, this could not be verified. As such the conservation

assessments are national ones for Singapore and Malaysia where identity of the

specimens is confirmed.

Our assessment of the lUCN conservation status of Alangium ridleyi in

Peninsular Malaysia assessed by GeoCAT was Endangered (EN B2ab(iii)) based on an

estimated area of occupancy (AOO) of less than 100 km^ (using the lUCN default cell

width of 2 km). Of the 32 documented specimen localities, eight (i.e. 25%) are within

protected areas while a further fifteen (46%) appear to be in forested areas outside of

protected areas and subject to disturbance and decline.

In Singapore, the latest version of the Singapore Red Data Book (Davison et

al., 2008) and the checklist of vascular flora for Singapore (Chong et al, 2009) list the

conservation status of this species as Nationally Extinct. However, remnants of the

original population of trees in the Botanic Gardens stil 1 exists. In addition two additional

trees, one in MacRitchie reservoir and another in Mandai forest, have recently been

observed although they lack specimens for verification. This is a reduction from the

236

Card. Bull Singapore 66(2) 2014

Fig. 2. Alangium ridleyi King. A. Flowering branch. B. Close up of flowers. Photographed at

Singapore Botanic Gardens, Lawn H, Ace. No. 00/705 1*A. (Photo: Edmund Chia)

Alangium ridleyi in Singapore

237

Pulau Pinanbpii^ PjAa

Kelantan

SOUTH

CHINA

SEA

PENINSULAR

MALAYSIA

Pahang

Selaaafir

Negeri Sembllan

Melaka

SUMATRA

200

Kilometers

Fig. 3. Distribution of Alangium ridleyi King in Peninsular Malaysia and Singapore.

(Distribution data are from SfNG and KEP).

former distribution based on specimen data (Table 1). Our conservation assessment

for Singapore is Critically Endangered (CR D) based on the very small number of

remaining individuals in Singapore.

238

Card. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

Table 1. Previous collections of Alangium ridleyi in Singapore in herbaria.

Collector

Herbarium

Collector

Number

Date

Collected

Locality

Samsuri, A.

SING

158

29 July 2003

Nee Soon Swamp Eorest

Tang, E.

SING

393

27 March 1995

SBG

Ngadiman, I.

SING, KEP

36136

23 April 1940

Bkt. Timah

Kiah, S.

SING

s.n.

20 August 1940

Bkt. Mandai

Ridley, H.N.

SING,K

4941

1893

SBG, Rain Forest

Cantley, N.

SING

s.n.

1880

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. We thank Dr David Middleton and two anonymous reviewers for

conuTients on the manuscript. Dr Kaliyamurthy Karthigeyan for assistance in viewing the type

specimens at CAL. Dr Richard Chung for sharing the distribution data of specimens in KEP.

Sunia Teo, Craig Williams, Ali Ibrahim and Lua Hock Keong for information on potential

populations of Alangium ridleyi in MacRitchie and Mandai.

References

Bachman, S., Moat, J., Hill, A.W., de la Torre, J. & Scott, B. (2011). Supporting Red List threat

assessments with GeoCAT: Geospatial Conservation Assessment Tool. In: Smith, V. &

Penev, L. (eds) e-Infrastructures for data publishing in biodiversity science. ZooKeys

150:117-126.

Berhaman, A. (1995). Alangiaceae. In: Soepadmo, E. & Wong, K.M, (eds) Tree Flora of Sabah

and Sarawak 1 : 5-1 7. Kuala Lumpur: Ampang Press Sdn. Bhd.

Chong, K. Y., Tan, H.T. W. & Corlett, R.T. (2009). A Checklist of the Total Vascular Plant

Flora of Singapore: Native, Naturalised and Cultivated Species. Raffles Museum of

Biodiversity Research, National University of Singapore, Singapore. 273 pp. http://

nnbr.nus.edu.sg/raffIes_museum_pub/flora_of_singapore_tc.pdf

(accessed on 14 Apr. 2014).

Davison, G.W.H., Ng, P.K.L. & Ho, H.C. (eds) The Singapore Red Data Book: Threatened

plants and animals of Singapore, 2'“^ ed. Pp. 285. Singapore: The Nature Society

(Singapore).

Feng, C.M., Manchester, S.R., & Xiang, Q.Y.J. (2009). Phytogeny and biogeography of

Alangiaceae (Comales) inferred from DNA sequences, morphology, and fossils. Molec.

Phylogenet. EvoL 51(2): 201-214.

Global Biodiversity Inventory Facility (2014). http://data.gbif org/ (accessed on 9 Oct. 2014).

lUCN (2001). lUCN Red List Categories and Criteria: Version 3.1. 2nd ed. Switzerland, Gland

and UK, Cambridge: lUCN.

National Enviromiient Agency (2014). Dry Spell Advisory (4 Mar). Joint Advisory between

NEA and PUB. http://app2.nea.gov.sg/corporate-flinctions/newsroom/advisories/

year/20 1 4/month/3/category/weather-climate/dry-spell-advisory-(4-mar) (accessed

onl2 Aug. 2014).

Alangium ridleyi in Singapore

239

Ridley, H.N. (1922). The Flora of the Malay Peninsula 1: 893. London: L. Reeve & C.o Ltd.

Tan, H.T.W., Tan, K.-X., Ali bin Ibrahim, Chew, RT., Chua, K.S., Duistermaat, H., Ganesan,

S.K., Goh, M.W.K., Gwee, A.T., Kiew, R., Lee, S.M.L., Leong, R, Lim, J., Lok, A.F.S.L.,

Loo, A.H.B., Lum, S.K.Y., Morgany, T., SaiRiddin bin Suran, Sim, S., Haji Samsuri bin

Haji Ahmad, Wee, Y.C., Yap, K.F., Yeo, C.K. & Yong, J.W.H. (2008). Checklists of

threatened species — Seed plants. In: Davison, G.W.H., Ng, R.K.L. & Ho, H.C. (eds) The

Singapore Red Data Book: threatened plants & animals of Singapore, Edition. Rp.

213-244. Singapore: The Nature Society (Singapore).

Turner, I.M. (1997). A catalogue of the vascular plants of Malaya. Gard. Bull. Singapore

47(1): 1-757.

Gardens’ Bulletin Singapore 66(2): 241-242. 2014

241

BOOK REVIEW: Flora of Peninsular Malaysia. Series II: Seed Plants, Volume 4.

(Malayan Forest Records No. 49) R. Kiew, R.C.K. Chung, L.G. Saw & E. Soepadmo

(eds). 2013.

Kepong: Forest Research Institute Malaysia. 25.7 cm x 18 cm, hard cover. 405 pp. ISBN 978-

967-0622-08-8. Price RM 100 / US$ 75.

The Flora of Peninsular Malaysia project is

progressing remarkably well, with the fourth volume

of the seed plants series released late last year. This

volume includes eight taxonomic revisions, namely

Actinidiaceae, Cabombaceae, Crypteroniaceae,

Goodeniaceae, Meliaceae, Memecylaceae,

Opiliaceae and Pandaceae, altogether 166 taxa in 29

genera. As anticipated, this volume is well structured

and produced.

The volume begins with a short chapter on

conservation by L.S.L. Chua that includes two tables

summarising (i) the number of native taxa for each

Red List category assessed using the lUCN Red List

Categories and Criteria (Version 3.1), and (ii) a list of

threatened (i.e.. Critically Endangered, Endangered

and Vulnerable), Data Deficient and Rare taxa, recorded in the volume. The taxonomic

accounts of the eight families are then presented in alphabetical order. The format of

each revision is quite standard, as in any long-running Flora series, following styles

adopted for the first volume. There are taxonomic keys provided to distinguish genera,

as well as species, for all the families revised, and these keys are easy-to-use.

The bulk of this volume is the account of the Meliaceae by D.J. Mabberley and

C.M. Pannell, with a contribution by J.M. Edmonds for Toona. The account has a total

of 15 genera and 106 species of which 51 species are in the genus Aglaia. This genus

was revised by Caroline M. Pannell who has spent many years working diligently

on this very diverse genus and who has already contributed taxonomic accounts for

the Tree Flora of Malaya (1989), Flora Malesiana (1995), and the Tree Flora of

Sabah and Sarawak (2007). Also included in the Meliaceae account is a list of useful

spot characters to identify Meliaceae genera in Peninsular Malaysia. This list is not

only useful for botanists, but also foresters and naturalists. A new term ‘berryoid’ is

introduced to define the fruit type of some Meliaceous taxa, such as Aglaia, Lansium,

Pseudoclausena, Reinwardtiodendron and Walsura, that cannot be considered either a

berry or a capsule based on the current classification of fruit types.

The second largest family in the volume is the Memecylaceae which includes

the two gQnQra Lijndenia (1 species) mdMemecylon (32 species). The well-researched

account by M. Hughes contains some very informative figures to guide users through the

taxonomy of Peninsular Malaysian Memecylon based on the morphological characters

of the anther, if fertile materials are available, or based on leaf size, shape and venation

prominence, when only non-fertile materials are available. However, I noticed that in

242

Card. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

Figure 3 (page 278), an illustration of “M megacarpunf' is included amongst a selection

of Peninsular Malaysian Memecylon species with distinct marginal veins. Perhaps it

would have been better to illustrate “M. pseudomegacarpum’' instead ofM megacarpum

which is endemic to Borneo. Likewise, in die “Foreword” and “Acknowledgements”

sections, the family is erroneously refen*ed to as “Memecylonaceae”.

In contrast to these two large-sized families, the rest are fairly small and

straightforward, namely Actinidiaceae (2 genera, 11 species), Cabombaceae (1 genus,

2 species), Crypteroniaceae (2 genera, 3 species), Goodeniaceae (1 genus, 1 species),

Opiliaceae (4 genera, 4 species) and Pandaceae (2 genera, 4 species).

This volume is well illustrated with 67 line-drawings representing slightly fewer

than half of the taxa enumerated in the volume. On the other hand, distribution maps

are provided for almost all of the species treated in the volume. At the end, just before

the index, there are 30 pages of colour plates for some of the taxa. With the publication

of this volume, 46 seed plants families (see inner back cover of the book) have now

been revised for the Flora of Peninsular Malaysia and we eagerly look forward to the

next one.

Y.W. Low

Singapore Botanic Gardens

Gardens’ Bulletin Singapore 66(2): 243-244. 2014

243

BOOK REVIEW: A Guide to the Native Palms of Singapore, H.B. Loo, Ang

Wee Foong, William J. Baker & Hugh T.W Tan. 2014.

Singapore: Science Centre. 15 cm x 10.4 cm, card cover. 176 pp. ISBN 978-981-07-8878-0.

Price SGD 7.90.

What a fine little book! Diminutive in size (fits easily

into the pocket of a bush jacket, although that really

is not required in much of Singapore!), concise in

its writing, and well-conceived in its coverage, this

Guide must do more than any other in the same time

spent perusing it.

Singapore is an island nation and it can be

quite astounding how rich its natural vegetation

is, despite the intensive waves of change it has

weathered. For some time now, the most ardent

of Singaporean naturalists have been actively

promoting the value of the native fiora and joining

them today are an entire community of nature lovers

very much into understanding more of what this

inherently rich island has. And now we have our

handy guide to Singapore palms. Palms do not fail

to captivate because of their unique form, yet there is a huge diversity with over 2500

species worldwide.

Palms are generally thought of as large plants; a botanist who collects from a tall

tree palm has few means of obtaining truly representative specimens and in time takes

home nothing short of trophies. The spiny palms, especially the climbing ones called

rotan in Malay (‘rattans’), some of which drape the most majestic of rainforest trees

even, have attracted only the bravest and most stubborn of students. No doubt, the

universal appeal of palms has stemmed from displays in botanical gardens, augmented

by some use in landscaping and street planting. The myriad ways in which palms are

useful to tropical communities are legend. The palms contributing much public appeal

are those that thrive in open, exposed sites and which are therefore more amenable to

cultivation. Thus, building up an interesting diversity of such palms brings with it both

awe and envy because of the increasingly demanding space requirements.

But the other side of the challenge is much less visible or understood. In the

rainforest regions of the world, the understorey palms abound, many of which can

only survive with sufficient shade, humidity and particular soil conditions. And many

must be disappearing with forest conversion and fragmentation. Conserving such

species is always best achieved with their natural habitat, although few public gardens

have ventured into presenting forest understorey palms as a conservation exhibit, or

developing conservation collections to any meaningful extent. There are a number of

smaller pot palms that have found their way from the shade of the rain forest, but the

true diversity of form and elegance in forest palms is a remarkable one.

A Qufd'i ta

244

Gard. Bull. Singapore 66(2) 2014

This Guide is a good and handy primer. The first 39 figures are numbered

for easy reference in the general chapters (Introduction, Economic Importance of

Palms, Palm Characteristics, Why Study Palms in Singapore?) but not the rest of the

illustrations which, placed with their respective taxa, are still easily referred to. Table

5 lists the 54 species of native Singapore palms, with 12 thought to be locally extinct.

The species are introduced via three groupings: the feather (pinnate-leaved) palms, fan

palms, and mostly climbing, scaly-fruited rattan palms, their distinctive fomi and habit

constituting the most logical presentation. The book is the 47th in the Singapore series

sustained so well by the Science Centre Singapore with the support of BP Singapore

Pte Ltd.

K.M. Wong

Singapore Botanic Gardens

The Gardens’ Bulletin

Singapore

VOL. 66 2014

ISSN 0374-7859

VOLUME 66

No. 1

No. 2

pages 1-120 (printed version published 10 July 2014)

pages 121-244 (printed version published 20 November 2014)

THE GARDENS’ BULLETIN, SINGAPORE

The Gardens* Bulletin, Singapore is a peer-reviewed journal publishing original papers and

reviews on a wide range of subjects: plant taxonomy (including revisions), phytogeography,

floristics, morphology, anatomy, as well as horticulture and related fields, such as ecology and

conservation, with emphasis on the plant life of the Southeast Asian-Pacific region.

Dr David J. Middleton Dr Jana Leong-Skomickova

(Editor-in-Chief) (Managing Editor)

S. Lee Y.W. Low Christina Soh

(Graphics Editor) (Copy Editor) (Business Manager)

Editorial Advisory Board

Professor Sir Peter Crane

Yale University

U.S.A.

Dr Rogier PJ. de Kok

Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew

U.K.

Dr W. John Kress

National Museum of Natural History

Smithsonian Institution

U.S.A.

Dr Mark Hughes

Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh

U.K.

Dr Kiat W. Tan

Gardens By The Bay

Singapore

Dr Nigel P Taylor

Singapore Botanic Gardens

National Parks Board, Singapore

Dr Ian M. Turner

Singapore Botanic Gardens

National Parks Board, Singapore

Dr Jan-Frits Veldkamp

National Biodiversity Center

The Netherlands

Dr Jun Wen

National Museum of Natural History

Smithsonian Institution

U.S.A.

Professor Nianhe Xia

South China Institute of Botany

PR. China

Published twice yearly by the National Parks Board, Singapore, the annual subscription for the journal

is Singapore $100.00 including postage. Overseas subscribers should make payment in the forai of

bank draft or international money order in Singapore cuiTency, payable to National Parks Board. Please

forward payment to “Accounts Receivable Section, National Parks Board, Headquarters,

Singapore Botanic Gardens, 1 Cluny Road, Singapore 259569”.

National Parks Board

Singapore Botanic Gardens

1 Cluny Road

Singapore 259569

Printed by Oxford Graphic Printers Pte Ltd

CONTENTS OF VOLUME 66 (2014)

VOL. 66 (1), July 2014

D.J. Middleton

Editorial 1

K.H. Lau

The conservation of Peninsular Malaysian Geostachys (Zingiberaceae) 3

J. Leong-Skornickova

Orchidantha lengguanii (Lowiaceae), a new species

from Peninsular Malaysia, and typification of O. maxillarioides 15

J. Leong-Skornickova, H.-J. Tillich & Q.B. Nguyen

Two new species and one new variety of Aspidistra

(Asparagaceae: Nolinoideae) from southern Vietnam 27

J. Leong-Skornickova, H.D. Tran, Q.B. Nguyen & O. Sida

Siliquamomum alcicorne (Zingiberaceae: Alpinioideae),

a new species from central Vietnam 39

Y.W. Low, P.K.F. Leong, S.P. Tee, Rajesh Singh,

M.L.C. Tay & K.M. Wong

Margaritaria (Phyllanthaceae), a new generic record

for the Singapore flora 47

D.J. Middleton

A new combination in Liebigia (Gesneriaceae) 57

T.K.T. Nguyen & N.T. Nguyen

Anew species of Mallotus (Euphorbiaceae) from Vietnam 61

V.D. Nguyen, H.Q. Bui & J. Bogner

The status of Cryptocoryne annamica

(Araceae: Aroideae: Cryptocoryneae) in Vietnam 67

S.M. Scott & D.J. Middleton

A revision of Ornithoboea (Gesneriaceae) 73

VOL. 66 (2), November 2014

Y.F. Deng

Phlogacanthus magnus, a new combination in the Acanthaceae

from Malaysia 121

R. Kiew

Two new species and one new subspecies of Ridleyandra (Gesneriaceae)

from Peninsular Malaysia 125

R. Kiew

Two new white-flowered Codonoboea species (Gesneriaceae)

from Peninsular Malaysia 137

J. Leong-Skornickova

Anew lectotypiflcation of Zingiber gracile var. elatius (Zingiberaceae) 145

J. Leong-Skornickova, A. Thame & P.T. Chew

Notes on Singapore native Zingiberales I: A new species of Zingiber

and notes on the identities of two further Zingiber taxa 153

S. Lindsay & C.W. Chen

Three new combinations in Haplopteris (Pteridaceae subfam. Vittarioideae) 169

R.O. Makinson & B.J. Conn

Puccinia psidii (Pucciniaceae - Eucalyptus Rust, Guava Rust, Myrtle Rust)

- a threat to biodiversity in the Indo-Pacific region 173

D.J. Middleton, J. Leong-Skornickova & Q.B. Nguyen

Anew species of Billolivia (Gesneriaceae) from Vietnam 189

M. Moller, W.-H. Chen, Y.-M. Shui, H. Atkins & D.J. Middleton

A new genus of Gesneriaceae in China and the transfer of Briggsia species

to other genera 195

J.D. Mood, J.F. Veldkamp & L.M. Prince

A new species and a new record of Boesenbergia (Zingiberaceae)

for Thailand 207

J.D. Mood, J.F. Veldkamp, S. Dey & L.M. Prince

Nomenclatural changes in Zingiberaceae: Caulokaempferia is a superfluous

name fox Monolophus md Jirawongsea is reduced to Boesenbergia 215

L. Wijedasa, Z.Q. Shee & E. Chia

Conservation status and lectotypfication of Alangium ridleyi (Comaceae)

in Singapore 233

BOOK REVIEWS

Flora of Peninsular Malaysia. Series II: Seed Plants, Volume 4. R. Kiew,

R.C.K. Chung, L.G. Saw & E. Soepadmo (eds). 2013. (Y.W. Low) 241

A Guide to the Native Palms of Singapore. (Adrian H.B. Loo, Ang Wee Foong,

William J. Baker & Hugh T.W Tan). 2014. (K.M. Wong)

243