Advertisement

Brittonia

, Volume 49, Issue 4, pp 480–486 | Cite as

Notes on calycophyllous Rubiaceae. Part II. Morphological comparison of the genera Bathysa and Schizocalyx

  • Piero G. Delprete
Articles

Abstract

A close comparison of Bathysa and Schizocalyx has revealed that the two taxa are congeneric. In addition, the two species currently recognized under Schizocalyx are conspecific and transferred to Bathysa, for which a new combination is proposed (B. bracteosa).

Key words

Bathysa Schizocalyx Rondeletieae Calycophylleae Rubiaceae calycophylls leaf bacterial nodules 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Andersson, L. 1993. Pollen characteristics of the tribes Calycophylleae, Cinchoneae, and Hillieae (Rubiaceae). Nordic J. Bot. 13: 405–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. — 1994. Cinchoneae. In: G. Harling & L. Andersson, itors. Flora of Ecuador 50. Distributor: Council for Nordic Publication in Botany, Botanical Museum, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  3. — 1991. Circumsciption of the tribe Cinchoneae (Rubiaceae)—a cladistic approach. Pl. Syst. Evol. 178: 65–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Delprete, P. G. 1996a. Notes on calycophyllous Rubiaceae. Part I. Morphological comparisons of the genera Chimarrhis, Bathysa, and Calycophyllum, with new combinations and a new species, Chimarrhis gentryana. Brittonia 48: 35–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. — 1996b. Evaluation, of the tribes Chiococceae, Condamineeae and Catesbaeeae (Rubiaceae) based on morphological characters. Opera Bot. Belg. 7: 165–192.Google Scholar
  6. — 1996c. Notes on the taxonomic position of the monotypic Brazilian genus Kerianthera (Rubiaceae). Opera Bot. Belg. 7: 271–275.Google Scholar
  7. Delprete, P. G.. Rondeletiaea (Rubiaceae)—part I. Flora Neotropica Monographs. (submitted).Google Scholar
  8. Hooker, J. D. 1873. Schizocalyx. Ordo LXXXIV. Rubiaceae. In: G. Bentham & J. D. Hooker, editors. Genera Plantarum. 2: 39, London.Google Scholar
  9. Presl, C. B. 1845. Bathysa. Abh. Königl, Böhm. Ges. Wiss. 3: 514–515. (reimpr. Bot. Bemerk. 84. 1844 [1846]).Google Scholar
  10. Robbrecht, E. 1988. Tropical woody Rubiaceae. Characteristic features and progression. Contribution to a new subfamilial classification. Opera Bot. Belg. 1: 1–271.Google Scholar
  11. Schumann, K. 1891. Rubiaceae. In: A. Engler & K. Prantl, editors, Die Natürlichen Pflanzenfamilien 4(4): 1–156. Engelmann, Leipzig.Google Scholar
  12. Standley, P. C. 1929. Schizocalyx hirsutus. Studies on American plants—I. Publ. Field Mus., Bot. 4: 266–267.Google Scholar
  13. — 1930. Schizocalyx, The Rubiaceae of Colombia. Field Mus. Nat. Hist., Bot. Ser. 7: 21.Google Scholar
  14. Weddell, H. A. 1854. Schizocalyx. Notice sur quelques Rubiacées de l'Amérique tropicale. Ann. Sci. Nat. 4: 73–74.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The New York Botanical Garden 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Piero G. Delprete
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Systematic BotanyThe New York Botanical GardenBronxUSA

Personalised recommendations