Cheniella tenuiflora (Watt ex C.B.Clarke) R.Clark & Mackinder, 2017

Clark, Ruth P., Mackinder, Barbara A. & Banks, Hannah, 2017, Cheniella gen. nov. (Leguminosae: Cercidoideae) from southern China, Indochina and Malesia, European Journal of Taxonomy 360, pp. 1-37 : 23

9. Cheniella tenuiflora (Watt ex C.B.Clarke) R.Clark & Mackinder comb. nov. urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:77165915-1

Basionym: Bauhinia tenuiflora Watt ex C.B.Clarke, The journal of the Linnean Society. Botany 25: 18 ( Clarke 1889). – Bauhinia glauca subsp. tenuiflora (Watt ex C.B.Clarke) K.Larsen & S.S.Larsen , Natural history bulletin of the Siam Society 25 (1–2): 10 ( Larsen & Larsen 1973). – Type: India, Muneypore, Nongjaibang, 30 Nov. 1885, C.B. Clarke 42304E (lecto- ( Bandyopadhyay & Sharma 1992): K000980300!). – Remaining syntypes: India, West Muneypore, 1500–2500 ft., s. coll. 42304A (K000980296!). Ibid., s. coll. 42304B (CAL). Ibid., s. coll. 42304C (K000980297!). Ibid., s. coll. 42304D (CAL). Ibid., s. coll. 42255, 42342 (location of specimen unknown).

Description Leaf shallowly bilobed to 1/10 (or less) to ½, with mucro (1.5–) 2 to 4 mm, 4.2–9.0 × 4.7–10.7 cm; upper

surface glabrous or with few hairs at base, or sparsely tomentose, lower surface sparsely appressed ferruginous hirsute, pilose, or villose; secondary veins 6–10. Petiole 1.3–6.0 cm. Stipules 4–6 mm. Inflorescence a raceme, corymbose at apex, axis 2.5–12 cm. Pedicel 1.7–2.7 cm. Bracts 5–9 mm. Bracteoles 6–7 mm. Hypanthium 1.1–3.0 cm, sparsely to moderately, occasionally densely, ferruginous pilose. Petals white to yellowish or pinkish, 10–19 × 5–14 mm, moderately to densely ferruginous hairy on basal portion, densest around midvein, sometimes extending (sparsely) across whole blade, claw 2–5 mm. Fertile stamens 3, each 12–17 mm. Staminodes 7, of which 2 are inserted individually between the stamens, 5 mounted on a raised fleshy disc that is open on the side where the stamens are inserted, disc 1–2 × 2 mm, staminodes 5–7 mm. Ovary glabrous or with few hairs on stipe or basal part of lower suture (both can occur on a single plant). Fruit broadly oblong, apex truncate, base rounded, 16.5–27 × 3.3–5.6 cm. Seeds (10–)17–31 per fruit, funicle encircling most of the seed circumference.

Distribution

Cambodia, China (Guangxi, Guizhou, Guangdong, Hong Kong, Hainan, Hunan, Hubei, Nanto, Shaanxi, Szechuan, Yunnan), India (Assam, Manipur), Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, Vietnam ( Fig. 10 ).

Ecology

Tropical evergreen forest, roadsides and open areas, thicket, disturbed hillside, mixed forest; elevation to 1,400 m a.s.l.

Preliminary conservation assessment

Extent of Occurrence 3,592,509.952 km 2 = Least Concern (LC). This is a widespread and apparently common species, found from central China to east India and the Gulf of Thailand, and is therefore considered here to be Least Concern (LC).

Taxonomic notes

Specimens C.B. Clarke 42304A, 42304B, 42304C and 42304D can be considered as remaining syntypes following the lectotypification by Bandyopadhyay & Sharma (1992) of C.B. Clarke 42304E, because C.B. Clarke 42304 was cited in the protologue without the associated letters A, B, etc., and thus could refer to any of these specimens. Larsen et al. (1980) cited the type of Bauhinia glauca subsp. tenuiflora to be Watt 6915 ( Birmanie [ Burma], E00064065!, K000760782!), but this is erroneous as this specimen is not one of the syntypes listed in the protologue.

The decision to recognise this taxon at the species level, rather than as a subspecies of Bauhinia glauca as it was designated by Larsen et al. (1980), was based on morphological differences, and on geographical separation (see Discussion). The morphological differences, highlighted in Table 1 , consist of the indumentum or lack thereof on the hypanthium, the much more deeply bilobed leaf of C. glauca comb. nov., and differences between the size ranges of the floral parts and fruit characters. The differences between the two taxa are at least as great as those separating other species in the genus, and were therefore deemed to be sufficient to merit the recognition of this taxon as a distinct species. Moreover, Larsen et al. (1980) did not explain their reasons for choosing to down-rank Bauhinia tenuiflora , as it was originally described, to a subspecies of Bauhinia glauca .

Figures

Fig. 10. Distribution of Cheniella glauca (Wall. ex Benth.) R.Clark & Mackinder comb. nov. and C. tenuiflora (Watt ex C.B.Clarke) R.Clark & Mackinder comb. nov.