ArticlePDF Available

A Note on Three “New“ Species of Xylobium (Orchidaceae , Maxillariinae ) from Ruiz and Pavón's Peruvian Collections

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

The recent transfer to the genus Xylobium of three orchid species originally described by Ruiz and Pavón as members of Maxillaria is challenged on the basis of the extant evidence found in the herbarium and the archives of the Royal Botanic Garden, Madrid, where the first set of materials intended for the Flora Peruviana et Chilensis is deposited. The study of the taxonomic literature does not support the claims about a common usage of the three names, Maxillaria alata, M. bicolor, and M. cuneiformis, as being referable to Xylobium. Keywords: Flora Peruviana et Chilensis, Maxillaria, Orchidaceae, Pavón Jiménez José Antonio, Ruiz López Hipólito, Xylobium
Content may be subject to copyright.

      Xylobium 
three orchid species originally described in the late eighteenth
         
     Maxillaria  

 

    
  
of the three transferred species of Maxillaria
  Maxillaria alata  
M. bicolorM. cuneiformis
    Xylobium, which the authors claim




        
who, in their quotes of one or another of the concerned
species of Maxillaria


   
M. alata    Cyrtidiorchis alata 
Camaridium alatum
HartwegM. bicolor and
M. cuneiformis are treated as true members of Maxillaria,
even though they recorded a personal communication
  M. bicolor belongs to
Xylobium M. triphylla,
which truly belongs instead to Cyrtochlium  
 Maxillaria cuneiformis was not discussed either
  
         
M. bicolor
      
      
 M. alata, and treats both M. bicolor
and M. cuneiformis as good species of Maxillaria

    
    
      
         
       
 
Cyrtochlium
        
members of their Maxillaria, and the last one as a species
of Bletia       
      Maxillaria originally
described in the Systema vegetabilium orae Peruvianae
et Chilensis      
    Systema  
modern concept of Maxillaria sensu lato, and only three
if the genera Maxillariella    
Ornithidium
Maxillaria   
to Cyrtopodium    Cyrtochilum  
to Ida    Sudamerlycaste  
to Oncidium Xylobium  
     
treated as incertae sedisMaxillariella, Ornithidium,
and Sauvetrea      
Maxillaria, three additional species of this genus must be

Fernandezia punctataF. haematodes
Bletia uniora

      
        
      

XYLOBIUM


franco pupulin1
Abstract.Xylobium Max-
illaria
Flora Peruviana et Chilensis
not support the claims about a common usage of the three names, Maxillaria alata, M. bicolor, and M. cuneiformis, as being referable
to Xylobium
Keywords: Flora Peruviana et Chilensis, MaxillariaXylobium
 


1
    

Harvard Papers in Botany


  
      
nature of the protologues published in the Systema 

set of their herbarium specimens, conserved in Madrid
   
 
      

         

      
       
        

in his manuscripts were eventually lost or dispersed after
        



       

illustrations prepared during the journey of the botanists
        
       

        
agregados      
      



        
presumably prepared in Madrid, which often synthesize the


 
the Systema is often further reduced with respect to the

      
publication of the Systema, and the subsequent planned
volume VIII of the Flora Peruviana et Chilensis
the Gynandria monandria and Gynandria diandria,
       
unequivocally associated the manuscripts with the botanical
illustrations, assigning them the same consecutive numbers
        
on the fair copy of the manuscripts when no associated
  s. i c.  s.icone sine icone, without

  sin esqueleto   
        
Maxillaria cuneiformis     
nor exsiccatum      s.ic. y sin
esqueleto        
        
        
manuscript, which fortunately includes further details

descriptions of Maxillaria alata   M. bicolor

were prepared, but made no reference to the lack of
exsiccata, this strongly suggests that actual type specimens
were originally incorporated into the herbarium of the Flora
Peruviana et Chilensis

the specimens sent from Peru and Ecuador by the agregados
      agregados above), are
       
Maxillaria
type of M. platypetala) is a true Maxillaria in the modern
sense, while four others belong to Cyrtochilum, three to
Ida and three to Xylobium, and one each to Cyrtopodium,
Epidendrum, and Oncidium    
       
  Fernandezia Orchys sic 
Ophrys     Maxillaria sensu lato
       
    Maxillaria undulata
   M. variegata   
could be assigned to Xylobium   
truly belonging to Maxillaria, none agree with the type
localities cited in the Systema
specimen of Maxillaria prolifera 
     
M. alata and M.
cuneiformis could be searched for within the many herbaria
where the specimens collected in Peru during the Botanical
      

          
        
Maxillaria to Xylobium    
those species that indisputably belong to Xylobium,
 Maxillaria undulata and M. variegata  
        
       
quinque septem nervia striataquinquenervia plicata


   rugoso granulatum
in M. undulata; ad apicem puntatoglandulosum  M.
variegata    
    M.
cuneiformis      
ensiformia canaliculatanitida
glossy, and the manuscript description characterizes the lip
 integrum      
with Xylobium, whose species invariably present plicate
       
    M. bicolor are described as
Xylobium species,
  subdichotomi  
opposite rows in the same plane, while in Xylobium the

  M. alata is, if possible,
still more curt, and the manuscript description conserved in
fiGure 1AMaxillaria alata
B, Fair copy manuscript description of Maxillaria alata
CMaxillaria variegataD, Fair copy manuscript
description of Maxillaria variegata  

 XYLOBIUM 
  


the winged characteristic of the fruits, but a trigonous ovary
is at most rare in Xylobium

of the less obvious species of Maxillaria originally described


it is including them in Maxillaria

the access to the type specimens of two of the concerned
      
suggests that at least two of the species, M. bicolor and M.
cuneiformis, certainly do not belong to Xylobium according
to their characteristic morphological features, as described

   M. alata, strongly suggests
that it is not a species of Xylobium

from one genus to another without gaining any additional
information about the real nature of the concerned
      
      
   Xylobium with the addition of three
       
the phylogeographic history of the genus and altering the

precludes serious attempts at interpreting and understanding
         

  

         

the plants originally collected during the long journey of the

literature citeD
blanco, m., G. carnevali, w. m. whitten, r. SinGer, S. Koehler,
n. williamS, i. oJeDa. K. neubiG anD l. enDara. 
    

braKo, l. anD J. l. zarucchi
 

carpio lau, J. n., e. a. molinari-novoa anD m. menDoza
tincopa.  Notulae nomenclaturales    
three Maxillaria      

DalStrom, S       Cyrtochilum
     

GarcÍa Guillén, e. anD o. muñoz paz  
        
        f.
muñoz GarmenDÍa, eD La botánica al servicio de la Corona.
La expedición de Ruiz, Pavón y Dombey al Virreinato del Perú
(1777–1831)
miller, h.S       
       

pupulin, f. 2012      
 

 2012       


          

roDrÍGuez nozal, r
         

roque J. anD b. leÓn     

ruiz, h. anD pavÓn J  Flora peruvianae et chilensis
prodromus
 Systema vegetabilium Florae Peruvianae et
Chilensis, characteres prodromi genericos differentiales,
specierum omnium differentias, durationem, loca natalia,
tempus orendi, nomina vernacula, vires et usus nonnullis
illustrationibus interspersis complectens   

Schuiteman, a. anD m. chaSe. Maxillaria

Schweinfurth, c.

Steele, a. r. 1964 Flowers for the King: The expedition of
Ruiz and Pavón and the Flora of Peru

whitten, w. m.  Xylobium    a. m.
priDGeon, p. cribb, m. w. chaSe anD f. n. raSmuSSen, eDS
Genera Orchidacearum. Volume 5. Epidendroideae (Part II)

zelenKo, h anD p. bermúDez
  h. zelenKo, anD p. bermúDez, eDS Orchid species of
Peru
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
A recent phylogenetic analysis of four DNA regions for ca. 354 species of core Maxillariinae strongly indicate that the genus Maxillaria, as traditionally circumscribed, is grossly polyphyletic. We pre-sent a new phylogenetic classification for core Maxillariinae that recognizes 17 genera. Necessary realign-ments include: 1) resurrection of the genera Camaridium, Heterotaxis, and Ornithidium; 2) recognition of the recent segregates Brasiliorchis (=Maxillaria sect. Repentes), Christensonella (=Maxillaria sect. Urceolatae), Nitidobulbon (in press), and a recircumscribed Sauvetrea (=Maxillaria sect. Trigonae); 3) adoption of the new genera Inti (=Maxillaria sect. Polyphyllae), Mapinguari, Maxillariella (=Maxillaria sections Ebulbes and Erectae), and Rhetinantha; 4) transfers from Maxillaria sect. Reflexae to Ornithidium, and Maxillaria sect. Rufescens to Mormolyca; and 5) synonymizing of the genera Adamanthus, Pseudomaxillaria, Psittacoglossum, and Sepalosaccus (under Camaridium), Anthosiphon (under Cryptocentrum), Chrysocycnis (under Mormolyca), Dicrypta, Marsupiaria, and Pentulops (under Heterotaxis), and Laricorchis, Neo-urbania, and Siagonanthus (under Ornithidium). Some new synonyms at the specific level are also presented. RESUMEN. Un reciente análisis filogenético de cuatro regiones de ADN para ca. 354 especies de la subtribu Maxillariinae indican fuertemente que el género Maxillaria, en su circunscripción tradicional, es altamente polifilético. Presentamos una nueva clasificación filogenética para Maxillariinae que reconoce 17 géneros. Los cambios necesarios incluyen: 1) la resurrección de los géneros Camaridium, Heterotaxis, y Ornithidium; 2) el reconocimiento de los recientes segregados genéricos Brasiliorchis (=Maxillaria sección Repentes), Christensonella (=Maxillaria sección Urceolatae), Nitidobulbon (en prensa), y una Sauvetrea recircunscrita (=Maxillaria sección Trigonae); 3) la adopción de los nuevos géneros Inti (=Maxillaria sec-ción Polyphyllae), Mapinguari, Maxillariella (=Maxillaria secciones Ebulbes y Erectae), y Rhetinantha; 4) transferencias de Maxillaria sección Reflexae a Ornithidium, y Maxillaria sección Rufescens a Mormolyca; y 5) puesta en sinonimia de los géneros Adamanthus, Pseudomaxillaria, Psittacoglossum y Sepalosaccus (bajo Camaridium), Anthosiphon (bajo Cryptocentrum), Chrysocycnis (bajo Mormolyca), Dicrypta, Marsupiaria y Pentulops (bajo Heterotaxis), y Laricorchis, Neo-Urbania, y Siagonanthus (bajo Ornithidium). Algunos sinónimos nuevos al nivel de especie también son presentados.
Article
Full-text available
Inspired by King Carlos III in the second half of 18th Century, the Spanish government demonstrated a serious interest in the study of the rich floras of the colonies of the New World. The Royal expedition to Peru and Chile, led by Ruiz and Pavón, continued for 11 years in the two colonies and was followed by the activities of Tafalla and Manzanilla, who botanized in Peru and Ecuador. Two preliminary accounts of the flora of Peru were published in 1794 and 1798, but only three of the planned eleven volumes and five supplements of the Flora Peruviana et Chilensis were eventually published. The seventh volume, devoted to the Orchids, never saw the light of day. Due to the short descriptions published in 1798, and the dispersal of large parts of Ruiz and Pavón’s herbarium, the concepts of several of their orchid species remained obscure to modern botanists. These species can now be identified for the first time through the critical study of the unpublished illustrations and manuscripts of the expedition, kept at the Royal Botanical Garden of Madrid (RJB). The results in orchidology of the expedition, with a discussion of the new findings and interpretations, made possible by the study of Ruiz and Pavón’s orchid iconography, are presented in two contributions. In this first part – an introduction – notes on the illustrators and their work, as well as on the orchid manuscripts and collections, are given. Orchid taxa are presented alphabetically, from Acianthera to Maxillariella . For each taxon references to the nomenclatural types, synonymy, illustrations and exsiccata prepared during the expedition, as well as to Ruiz’s diaries and the unpublished manuscripts of the expedition’s botanists, are provided. In the absence of any actual specimens referable to the type collections and associated with the protologues, Bletia repanda, Epidendrum cordatum, E. viride, Fernandezia laxa, Maxillaria longipetala, M. ramosa, and M. Triphylla are formally lectotypified with the type illustrations conserved in MA. New combinations are proposed for the basionyms Bletia parviflora, Fernandezia punctata, Humboldtia po lystachya, Maxillaria ramosa, and M. Triphylla . Bajo el impulso del rey Carlos III, el gobierno español demostró en la segunda mitad del siglo XVIII un serio interés en el estudio de las ricas floras de sus colonias en el Nuevo Mundo. La Real Expedición al Perú y Chile, liderada por Ruiz y Pavón, trabajó por 11 años en las dos colonias y fue continuada posteriormente por Tafalla y Manzanilla, quienes botanizaron en el Perú y en el Ecuador. En 1794 y 1798 se publicaron dos trabajos preliminares sobre la flora del Perú, pero solamente tres de los 11 volúmenes y cinco suplementos de la Flora Peruviana et Chilensis vieron finalmente la luz. El séptimo volumen, dedicado a las Orquídeas, nunca se publicó. Debido a las descripciones sintéticas publicadas en 1798 y a la dispersión de una parte cuantiosa del herbario de Ruiz y Pavón, muchos conceptos de sus especies de orquídeas quedaron obscuros para los botánicos modernos. El estudio crítico de las ilustraciones y manuscritos inéditos de la expedición, conservados en el Real Jardín Botánico de Madrid (RJB), permiten ahora identificar por primera vez muchas de estas especies. Los resultados orquideológicos de la expedición, con una discusión de los nuevos hallazgos e interpretaciones hechos posibles por el estudio de la iconografía de orquídeas de Ruiz y Pavón, se presentan en dos contribuciones. En esta primera parte se proporcionan una introducción, notas sobres los ilustradores y su obra, así como sobre los manuscritos y colecciones de orquídeas. Los táxones de orquídeas se presentan alfabéticamente, de Acianthera a Maxillariella . Para cada uno de los táxones se proveen referencias a los tipos nomenclaturales, sinonimia, ilustraciones y exsiccata preparados durante la expedición, así como a los diarios de Ruiz y a los manuscritos inéditos de los botánicos de la expedición. En ausencia de especímenes de material original o de alguna manera asociable a los protólogos, se lectotipifican Bletia repanda, Epidendrum cordatum, E. viride, Fernandezia laxa, Maxillaria longipetala, M. ramosa y M. Triphylla con las ilustraciones de los tipos conservadas en MA. Se proponen nuevas combinaciones para los basiónimos Bletia parviflora, Fernandezia punctata, Humboldtia polysta chya, Maxillaria ramosa y M. Triphylla .
Article
Full-text available
Orchids are the most diverse plant family in the Peruvian flora, with approximately 212 genera and 2020 species registered to date (Brako & Zarucchi, 1993; Ulloa Ulloa et al., 2004). Estimates of Peru's total orchid diversity fluctuate between 2500 and 3500 species (Collantes, pers. comm.). Most Peruvian orchids are epiphytic or terrestrial herbs, and in many cases both habits may be found in a species. Here we recognize 775 endemic species in 137 genera, making the Orchidaceae one of the most important families for Peru's endemic flora. Endemic taxa have been found in several ecological regions, but mainly in Very Humid Montane Forests, Very Humid Lowland Forests, and Mesoandean regions, between 100 and 4600 m elevation. Habitat destruction and illegal extraction and illegal commerce of wild plants make these taxa particularly threatened. One hundred and five orchid species endemic to Peru have been reported to date from the country's system of protected areas. La familia Orchidaceae constituye para la flora peruana la familia más diversa, con alrededor de 212 géneros y 2020 especies (Brako & Zarucchi, 1993; Ulloa Ulloa et al., 2004), aunque se estima que el número real podría oscilar entre 2500 y 3500 especies (Collantes, com. pers.). La mayoría son hierbas epífitas o terrestres, aunque hay también las que presentan ambos hábitos. En este trabajo reconocemos 775 endemismos en 137 géneros, lo que la constituye también en la familia con más taxones restringidos al Perú. Estos endemismos han sido encontrados en varias regiones ecológicas, principalmente en la Bosques Muy Húmedos Montanos, Bosques Muy Húmedos Premontanos y Mesoandina, entre los 100 y 4600 m de altitud. La destrucción de sus hábitats y el comercio ilegal de plantas silvestres la hacen particularmente vulnerable desde el punto de vista de conservación. Ciento cinco taxones se encuentran en áreas naturales protegidas.
Article
It is argued that a broad and expanded circumscription of Maxillaria is to be preferred over a narrower one that necessitates the recognition of many segregate genera. These more narrowly circumscribed genera are often difficult to diagnose, increasing the risk of misidentifications, especially when material is only identified to genus level. The genera of the Maxillaria alliance as recognised in Genera orchidacearum are treated as sections of an expanded genus Maxillaria. Cryptocentrum, Cyrtidiorchis, Mormolyca, Pityphyllum, and Trigonidium are here included in Maxillaria. Criteria for generic delimitation are discussed, the necessary combinations are made, and a key to the sections as well as a provisional checklist of the 634 species of Maxillaria arranged according to section are provided. Maxillaria prolifera is shown to be the correct name for M. pendens. Maxillaria humilis is a new combination for M. gracilis.
Article
The herbarium of Aylmer Bourke Lambert (1761-1842), British botanist, is of interest today because of its sale at auction after his death, and the consequent obscurity of its history. However, little known facts about its scope and fate can be found in manuscript material and published references. Lambert had many opportunities for acquiring the some 50,000 specimens, many of them types, from at least 130 collectors. The herbarium was freely consulted by many writers of the time, including Robert Brown, De Candolle, Martius, George Don and David Don. At the sale it was divided into 317 lots, bought by 16 buyers. There are today at least 18 institutions in Europe and the United States where specimens originally in the herbarium are now deposited.
  • C Schweinfurth
Schweinfurth, c. 1960. Orchidaceae, Orchids of Peru. Fieldiana, Botany 30(3): 533-785.