Encyclia bracteata Schlechter ex Hoehne (1930
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/phytotaxa.342.1.1 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/117187F9-0F23-FFA3-FF75-678FFC42FBA9 |
|
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
|
scientific name |
Encyclia bracteata Schlechter ex Hoehne (1930 |
| status |
|
8. Encyclia bracteata Schlechter ex Hoehne (1930 View in CoL : t. 33). Basionym: Epidendrum bracteatum Barbosa Rodrigues
(1877: 52), nom. illeg., non Vellozo (1831). Epidendrum pabstii Hawkes (1956: 177) , nom superfl. Type:— BRAZIL.
Espirito Santo: no locality, October, no collector (lectoype designated by Fowlie & Duveen (1992): unpublished illustration by Barbosa Rodrigues in Iconographie des orchidées du Brésil: t. 9! ( Fig. 8 View FIGURE 8 and 24H View FIGURE 24 ).
Heterotypic synonyms: Epidendrum pusillum Rolfe (1892: 669) , nom. illeg. non Linnaeus (1763: 1352) nec Koenig (1791: 49). Type:—no locality, October 1891, no collector (holotype: K 583879!).
Epidendrum chondrodes Reichenbach , in sched. Type:— BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro (?): no locality, 1885, Binot s.n. (original material, W-R 143!).
Epiphytic herbs, 17.0−24.0 cm tall. Pseudobulbs conical, c. 3.0 × 0.8 cm. Leaf 1, linear, acute, 14.0−21.0 × 0.3−0.4 cm. Inflorescence a 1–3-flowered raceme; peduncle 3.5−7.0 cm long; rachis c. 2.5 cm long. Flower with pedicel c. 2.2 × 0.3 cm, pedicel glabrous; sepals greenish tinged brownish with subtle brown spotting, dorsal lanceolate, 1.5−1.7 × 0.5 cm, laterals lanceolate, 1.5−1.8 × 0.5−0.6 cm, pendent, margin entire, apex acute; petals greenish suffused with brown with subtle brown spotting, spatulate, acute, 1.6−1.7 × 0.5−0.6 cm, pendent, margin entire; lip unguiculate, the claw c. 0.3 × 0.2 cm, the lateral lobes triangular, free from midlobe, c. 0.7−0.8 × 0.3 cm, white, at about a 45° angle to the midlobe (in the flattened lip), not overlapping it, margin entire, midlobe obdeltoid, obtuse, 0.6−0.7 × 1.0− 1.1 cm, pink from the middle to the edge and white at the base, revolute, margin entire, callus cymbiform, apex of the callus acute; column clavate, 0.8−0.9 × 0.3−0.4 cm, clinandrium apex tridentate, lateral teeth triangular, apex acute, arms of the column triangular, acute, 0.1 × 0.2−0.3 cm; stigma elliptic, without basal hooks; anther one, whitish.
Distribution and habitat:— Endemic to the Atlantic Forest ( Fig. 7 View FIGURE 7 ).
Phenology:— Flowering November–May.
Etymology:— Referring to the floral peduncle covered in bracts.
Taxonomic notes:— A distinctive species, Encyclia bracteata bears some similarities to E. cyperifolia because both have triangular lateral lip lobes, and in fact they have been recovered as sister species in the phylogenetic analysis of Bastos (2014). However, E. bracteata is smaller (17−24 cm) relative to E. cyperifolia (c. 35 cm). The flowers also differ. Encyclia bracteata has petals and sepals green with subtle brown spotting, and the lip midlobe is completely pink from the middle to the margins and white close to the column with white lateral lobes, whereas E. cyperifolia has yellowish green sepals and petals with pink markings, and the lip is yellowish with pink stripes. They also have disjunct distributions, the former from eastern Brazil and the latter from western Brazil and Peru.
Epidendrum bracteatum was published by Barbosa Rodrigues (1877: 52; Sprunger et al. 1996), but it was a later homonym of a name used by Vellozo in 1831 for a different species of Epidendrum . The synonym Epidendrum pusillum Rolfe (1892: 669) was also illegitimate because of use by Linnaeus in 1763 and another by Koenig (1791). Hawkes (1956: 168) created a nomen novum in Epidendrum , E. pabstii . In Encyclia , E. bracteata Schlechter ex Hoehne (1930 : t. 33) can be automatically considered as as nomen novum based on the same type of Epi. bracteatum Barb. Rodr. (Fowlie & Duveen 1992) following article 58 of the Code ( McNeill et al. 2012). Having overlooked the previous lectotypification made by Fowlie & Duveen (1992), Meneguzzo et al. (2010) superfluously lectotypified the Barbosa Rodrigues name with the illustration of the original description.
In W, we found material of E. bracteata identified by Reichenbach as Epidendrum chondrodes . At first, we thought this was a name that would make E. bracteata a synonym, but we did not find a published description.As such, it seems that Epidendrum chondrodes is a name in scheda.
Withner (2000) listed E. hoehnei (Hawkes 1956: 171) Pabst (1975: 21) as a synonym of E. bracteata . This is a mistake because in fact E. hoehnei applis to a species from a different genus, Prosthechea megahybos ( Schlechter 1921: 75) Dodson & Hágsater (1999: 956) , illustrated as Epidendrum squamatum Barbosa Rodrigues (1882: 134; Sprunger 1996). Epidendrum squamatum had been previously used for a different species by Poiret (1810), and therefore Epidendrum squamatum Barb.Rodr. is an illegitimate name designated as Epi. hoehnei by Hawkes (1956).
Selected specimens examined:— BRAZIL. Bahia: Canavieiras , 44 m, 13 April 1965, Belém & Magalhães 833 ( UB) ; Porto Seguro, Arraial d’Ajuda to Trancoso road, 20 April 1982, Carvalho et al. 1279 ( CEPEC, SP) . Espírito Santo: Domingos Martins , farm of Dr. Kautsky, 22 November 2004, Kautsky s.n. ( HEPH 213675 About HEPH ) ; Fundão, APA of the Goiapaba-açu , 685 m, 8 February 2007, Fontana & Brahim 2831 ( RB) ; Santa Leopoldina, Serra do Ramalhete , 250−550 m, 16 February 2006, Demuner et al. 1863 ( MBML) ; Santa Teresa, Santa Lúcia Biological Station , 5 May 1999, Lopes et al. 609 ( MBML) ; São Roque do Canaã, Misterioso , 763 m, 24 December 2003, Vervloet et al. 2591 ( MBML) ; Venda Nova do Imigrante , 854 m, February 1976, Zappi 32 ( HB) .
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.