Search

Colletotrichum species are well-known plant pathogens, saprobes, endophytes, human pathogens and entomopathogens. However, little is known about Colletotrichum as endophytes of plants and cultivars including Citrus grandis cv. “Tomentosa”. In the present study, 12 endophytic Colletotrichum isolates were obtained from this host in Huazhou, Guangdong Province (China) in 2019. Based on morphology and combined multigene phylogeny [nuclear ribosomal internal transcribed spacer (ITS), glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (gapdh), chitin synthase 1 (chs-1), histone H3 (his3) actin (act), beta-tubulin (β-tubulin) and glutamine synthetase (gs)], six Colletotrichum species were identified, including two new species, namely Colletotrichum guangdongense and C. tomentosae. Colletotrichum asianum, C. plurivorum, C. siamense and C. tainanense are identified as being the first reports on C. grandis cv. “Tomentosa” worldwide. This study is the first comprehensive study on endophytic Colletotrichum species on C. grandis cv. “Tomentosa” in China.

A new combination, Serjania urvilleoides based on Cardiospermum urvilleoides (Sapindaceae, Paullinieae) is proposed. We are able to establish this new combination, on the basis of recent molecular evidence, complemented with carpological and seminal characters which are described for the first time. This species is endemic to Minas Gerais, Brazil. It is compared to its putative closest relative. In addition, illustrations, micromorphological characters of leaf epidermis, distribution map and conservation status are provided.

The following leafhoppers (Deltocephalinae: Bonaspeiini) of the Fynbos Biome of South Africa are treated: Colistra parvulus (Linnavuori, 1961) is redescribed and three new species of Colistra Davies are described, i.e., C. acapitatus sp. n., C. bucapitatus sp. n. and C. semialius sp. n.; four species of Proekoides Stiller, 1986 are reviewed with the addition of P. postspina sp. n.; Proekes cephaleus (Naudé, 1926) is redescribed with details of the female ovipositor, and three new species, i.e., P. hemiplatyphalis sp. n., P. tetracaphalis sp. n., P. diacaphalis sp. n.; a new genus, Xhoreus gen. n. is described with one new species, X. ulosentus sp. n. All species are of similar appearance, size and with reduced hind wings. Two species, C. acapitatus and C. bucapitatus, were collected on Rooibos tea. Keys are provided to species of Colistra, Proekes and Proekoides. Distribution models show limited ranges in the Western Cape province and confined to the Fynbos Biome while Xhoreus ulosentus is possibly endemic to the Cape Peninsula. The validity of the tribe Bonaspeiini is discussed.

Londoño-Echeverri, Yeison, Trujillo-López, Ana María, Pérez-Zabala, Jorge Andrés (2023): A new species of Conchocarpus and first record of Euxylophora (Galipeinae, Zanthoxyloideae, Rutaceae) from Colombia. Phytotaxa 601 (2): 174-184, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.601.2.4, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.601.2.4

Euxylophora paraensis Huber (1909: 85) Emergent tree up to 50 m tall, native to the Amazon region, previously only registered in Brazil. For Colombia it is here reported from a hitherto unidentified specimen collected by Richard Evans Schultes and Isidoro Cabrera in the year 1951 in the Amazon region (Figs. 3 & 4). This species is under the category EN-Endangered according to the IUCN criteria (Fernandez et al. 2020), and it is considered a well-known timber species in the Brazilian Amazon. Further field exploration and research will be needed for establishing the actual distribution area and the regional conservation status. Specimen examined:— COLOMBIA. Amazonas-Vaupés: Río Apaporis, entre el río Pacoa y el río Kananarí, Soratama, 250 m, 28 September 1951 (fr), R.E. Schultes & I. Cabrera 14160 (COL-60226!)., Published as part of Londoño-Echeverri, Yeison, Trujillo-López, Ana María & Pérez-Zabala, Jorge Andrés, 2023, A new species of Conchocarpus and first record of Euxylophora (Galipeinae, Zanthoxyloideae, Rutaceae) from Colombia, pp. 174-184 in Phytotaxa 601 (2) on page 181, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.601.2.4, http://zenodo.org/record/8129605, {"references":["Huber, J. (1909) Novitates Florae Amazonicae. Boletim do Museo Goeldi de Historia Natural e Ethnographia 6: 60 - 90.","Fernandez, E., Amorim, E., Martinelli, G. & Gomes, M. (2020) Euxylophora paraensis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2020: e. T 61958701 A 176125940. https: // dx. doi. org / 10.2305 / IUCN. UK. 2020 - 3. RLTS. T 61958701 A 176125940. pt"]}

Conchocarpus cardenasii Londoño-Ech., A.M. Trujillo & Pérez-Zab., sp. nov. (Figs. 1 & 2) Type:— COLOMBIA. Chocó: Mun. Riosucio, zona de Urabá, Cerros Del Cuchillo, camino La Eugenia (Nova) a la cumbre sureste, 50–300 m, 19 April 1988 (bud & fl), D. Cárdenas 1735 (holotype: JAUM-015131!). Diagnosis:— Conchocarpus cardenasii is morphologically similar to Conchocarpus grandis Kallunki in Kallunki & Pirani (1998: 299), Conchocarpus jirajaranus Kallunki & W. Meier (2019: 196) and in minor degree to Conchocarpus guyanensis (Pulle 1912: 142) Kallunki & Pirani (1998: 300). C. cardenasii can be distinguished from the former two species by its shorter petioles, up to 3.3 cm long (versus up to 12 cm long in C. grandis, up to 7.5 cm long in C. jirajaranus), its longer flowering pedicels 0.7–1 cm long (vs. 0.3–0.6 cm long in C. grandis, ca. 0.2 cm long in C. jirajaranus), its anthers basally and apically sterile (vs. anthers only apically sterile), its smaller mericarps ca. 1.2 × 0.9–1.1 cm (vs. 2–2.5 × 1.7–2 cm in C. grandis, 1.5–2 × 1.5–1.8 cm in C. jirajaranus) and its ovary glabrous (only different respect to C. jirajaranus with ovary densely strigulose). From C. guyanensis, the new species can be distinguished by its racemiform thyrses, bearing 15–26 sessile cymules along rachis (vs. long-pedunculate and corymbiform thyrses bearing 3–4 partial inflorescences near apex, each stalked, ca. 2 cm long) and its seeds with plano-convex cotyledons (vs. plicate-conduplicate cotyledons). Tree 5–10 m tall, branchlets with internodes evident, velvety to densely short-strigose, glabrescent, longitudinally ridged. Leaves 1-foliolate, alternate, the petiole (0.7–) 1.6–3.3 cm long, canaliculate adaxially, short-strigose, glabrescent, ridged longitudinally, transversely striate, swollen at the base and apex; blade (7–)15.5–26 × (3.4–) 5.6– 11.4 cm, elliptic, basally obtuse and cuneate to convex; apically acute and slightly acuminate; sparsely short-strigose on both surfaces, glabrescent; surface pellucid-punctate, the glands visible as dark dots; the margin entire, slightly revolute; secondary veins 12–17 pairs, eucamptodromous becoming brochidodromous distally, raised on both surfaces, more distinct abaxially, intersecondary veins present; tertiary veins percurrent, raised on both surfaces, more distinct abaxially. Inflorescence a racemiform thyrse, 4.7–19.1 cm long (including peduncle), short-strigose and puberulous, slightly ridged longitudinally, apparently supra-axillary (originating from a terminal meristem but reoriented laterally by the sympodial growth), the axillar vegetative bud persisting below; the peduncle 0.9–4.8 cm long, the flowering portion 2.5–14.3 cm long, bearing 15–26 flowering nodes, each a dense and sessile cymule, 1–3-flowered, the axes indiscernible; the primary bracts 1–2 × 1 mm, ovate, subtending each cymule, densely short-strigose on abaxial surface and on adaxial surface only towards the margin (glabrous toward the middle portion); the secondary bracts 0.2–0.5 × 0.2–0.5 mm, ovate, subtending some pedicels, densely short-strigose on abaxial surface and on adaxial surface only towards the margin (glabrous towards the middle portion), pedicels 0.7–1 cm long, short-strigose and puberulous, glabrescent. Flowers 5(–6)-merous, calyx cupular, 1.5–1.9 mm high, 5-dentate, the teeth glandular ca. 0.2 × 0.2 mm, densely to sparsely short-strigose abaxially, glabrous adaxially; corolla actinomorphic, cochlear, white, short-tubular by capillinection, the tube ca. 4.5 mm high; petals 7–9.6 × 1–1.6 mm, oblong, apically obtuse and rounded to slightly acuminate, coherent into a tube among them, tomentose abaxially, adaxially glabrous at the base and near to the portion adnate to the filaments, the rest of surface tomentose, on the mouth of tube mixed with little short-villous indumentum, pellucid-punctate more noticeably abaxially; androecium 5(–6)-merous, all stamens fertile, filaments 3–3.7 × 0.6–0.8 mm, oblong to narrowly oblanceolate, coherent among them by capillinection, adherent to the corolla at the base and adnate to it only by a small dorsal portion at the tube throat (perhaps postgenital fusion, see discussion), abaxially tomentose, glabrous near to the portion adnate to the corolla, adaxially glabrous at the base, the rest of surface tomentose, mixed with short-villous indumentum at the throat; anthers 3.2–4 × 0.5–0.7 mm, narrowly lanceolate, broadly attached to the filaments, sterile at the base and at the apex, eglandular at the connective, not exserted along their whole length from the corolla tube; thecae with a basal sterile portion of 0.2–0.4 mm long, a middle fertile portion of 1.5–2.1 mm long, abaxially sparsely short-villous, adaxially short-villous; the apical sterile portion 1.3–1.6 mm long, flattened, curved in anthesis, abaxially sparsely tomentose, adaxially sparsely tomentose mixed with little short-villous indumentum; disc ca. 0.7 mm high, glabrous, slightly shorter than the ovary, margin sinuate; gynoecium 5-merous, apocarpic, glabrous, not exserted from the throat at anthesis, ovary 0.8–0.9 mm high, ca. 0.8 mm diam., umbilicate, style ca. 0.3 mm long (measured over ovary apex), stigma 0.2–0.3 mm long, capitate. Fruits composed by a single mericarp, ca. 1.2 × 0.9–1.1 cm, semi-orbicular laterally, ventrally straight, dorsally rounded, very sparsely short-strigose, pellucid-punctate, transversely ridged. Seed 1 per carpel, ca. 1 × 0.8 cm, glabrous, slightly rugulose, testa papery, embryo straight, cotyledons plano-convex, thick. Distribution and habitat:— Conchocarpus cardenasii is endemic to Colombia. It has been collected only in a hill named as “Cerro del Cuchillo” on the Riosucio municipality of the Chocó department (Fig. 3). The Cerro del Cuchillo is a small and isolated hill on the Pacific Biogeographical Region (sensu Bernal 2016) in a range of elevation of 20–450 m, with annual precipitation between 4.000 to 8.000 mm (Cárdenas-López 2003). This region is considered under the Equatorial Rainforest climate (Af climate type sensu Kottek et al. 2006). Phenology:— Herbarium vouchers indicate blooming time in April and fruiting time in June. Etymology:— The epithet honors to Dairon Cárdenas, a noteworthy Colombian botanist who dedicated most of his career to improving knowledge of the Colombian Amazonian flora. The only known specimens for the new species were collected by Dairon early in his career. This is a modest acknowledgment to Dairon, for his assiduous work that rendered so many contributions to the knowledge of the flora, also to his kindness and friendship with the authors when they visited the COAH herbarium. Preliminary conservation status:— Conchocarpus cardenasii is only known by a subpopulation with AOO= 4 km 2. The forest that inhabits is a small fragment i.e., the unique known population is severe fragmented and under continuous decrease of habitat quality). Although it can be classified as “Critically endangered” according to the criteria B: B2ab(iii) of IUCN (2012), the Cerro del Cuchillo is currently a protected area, which decreases the effect from any threat. It should be rather considered as “Endangered” species, due to its small and restricted geographical distribution, surrounded by livestock pastures with null ecological connectivity with near forests. Additional specimens examined (paratype):— COLOMBIA. Chocó: Mun. Riosucio, zona de Urabá, Cerros Del Cuchillo, camino de Cidon a la Cumbre sureste, 50–100 m, 23 June 1988 (fr), D. Cárdenas 2090 (JAUM-015132!). Notes:— Conchocarpus cardenasii has a close resemblance to C. grandis and C. jirajaranus. These three species share the 1-foliolate leaves, the racemiform thyrses with partial inflorescences sessile (only stalked at the lowermost ones in C. grandis), the cupular calyx, the actinomorphic corolla (not verified for C. grandis), the all-fertile stamens, the lanceolate and apically sterile anthers, the umbilicate ovary (not verified for C. jirajaranus) and the seeds with plano-convex cotyledons. On the other hand, C. guyanensis shares with the new species the unique in the genus presence of anthers with thecae basally sterile, but can be easily differentiated from it and the other two species above mentioned by its long-pedunculate and corymbiform thyrses and seeds with plicate-conduplicate cotyledons. Other features are relatively similar among the four species discussed (Kallunki & Pirani 1998, Kallunki & Meier 2019), see Table 1. aMeasures or features in parentheses were taken from synonyms protologues (Ducke 1922, Porter & Elias 1979). For complete synonymy see Kallunki & Pirani (1998). bMeasures or features in parentheses were taken from synonyms protologues (Cuatrecasas 1952, McPherson 1988). cKallunki & Pirani (1998) noted the cotyledons of C. toxicarius as “conduplicate, not plicate and thick”, clearly differencing it from plicate-conduplicate “conduplicate, plicate and thin” or plano-convex “plano-convex and thick”. Subsequently, Groppo et al. (2017) noted it under the character state “cotyledons plane or plane-convex”. The filaments of Conchocarpus cardenasii are here described as adnate to the corolla only by a small dorsal portion at the tube throat, because they are strongly united and hardly detachable without being torn apart. El Ottra et al. (2019) recently reported a kind of postgenital floral fusion in Galipeinae consisting in the union by papillae or cuticular projections; whether this is the situation responsible for the structure here observed in C. cardenasii remains a matter depending on further anatomical studies. The cotyledons plano-convex in Conchocarpus cardenasii, C. grandis and C. jirajaranus are morphologically atypical for Conchocarpus sensu stricto, and its taxonomic relevance could be tested in further phylogenetic studies. Similarly, other species currently under Conchocarpus have uncommon features that could support new classification proposals. For example, Conchocarpus nicaraguensis [Standley & Williams (1953: 206–207)] Kallunki & Pirani (1998: 314) and Conchocarpus ucayalinus [Huber (1906: 573–574)] Kallunki & Pirani (1998: 323) from northwestern South America, Central America and western Amazonia, resemble at first glance species of Dryades because their calyx lobes imbricate and overlapping even after anthesis. However, not all diagnostic features of Dryades are present in C. nicaraguensis and C. ucayalinus and these species have not been included in phylogenetic analyses. Added to the morphological relevance of the cotyledons in the classification of Conchocarpus sensu lato, Groppo et al. (2017) found Conchocarpus toxicarius [Spruce ex Engler (1874: 114–115)] Kallunki & Pirani (1998: 322), phylogenetically segregated from Conchocarpus s.s. and Dryades (this genus not segregated yet in Groppo et al. 2017), besides noting it under the character state “cotyledons plane or plane-convex” (see Table 1), which suggest that this species perhaps might be recognized under another genus when a more complete sampling becomes available (Groppo, pers. comm. 2018). Interestingly, although Conchocarpus toxicarius can be distinguished by its leaves 5–7-foliolate from C. cardenasii, C. grandis and C. jirajaranus, all four species share their androecium with all stamens fertile, lanceolate anthers and in a sensu lato, their actinomorphic corolla, umbilicate ovary and plano-convex cotyledons (see Table 1). Remarkably, one of the two syntypes of C. toxicarius belongs to Conchocarpus heterophyllus [A. Saint-Hilaire (1823: 131)] Kallunki & Pirani (1998: 300), an inconsistence solved by Kallunki & Pirani (1998); thus, although the protologue of C. toxicarius indicated only three fertile stamens, Kallunki & Pirani (1998) indicated that it have five stamens fertile, which is according to the original illustration at the complete flower drawings [see Engler (1874: t.24, fig. 1) and the lectotype Spruce 2171 (K barcode 000531071 [digital image!]); note the original illustration at stamens details drawings showing those lanceolate anthers of C. toxicarius as staminodes and probably, those of C. heterophyllus as fertile stamens. Currently, the recognition of other segregate groups from Conchocarpus is not definitive considering the lack of sampling species with deviating morphological combinations in molecular analyses (e.g., actinomorphic corolla, five stamens fertile, lanceolate anthers and plano-convex cotyledons). Despite of the fact that Conchocarpus cardenasii could undergo nomenclatural and taxonomic changes if the splitting of Conchocarpus is supported in future phylogenetic studies, its morphological features fits into the current circumscription of the genus. Considering the remarkably presence of cotyledons plano-convex and anthers basally sterile, C. cardenasii may be a critical species to be included in future morphological and DNA systematics studies of the genus. Finally, given its condition of being a restricted endemic and endangered species, this formal taxonomic recognition is fundamental for supporting current and future conservation actions at the unique Cerros del Cuchillo remnant forests., Published as part of Londoño-Echeverri, Yeison, Trujillo-López, Ana María & Pérez-Zabala, Jorge Andrés, 2023, A new species of Conchocarpus and first record of Euxylophora (Galipeinae, Zanthoxyloideae, Rutaceae) from Colombia, pp. 174-184 in Phytotaxa 601 (2) on pages 175-181, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.601.2.4, http://zenodo.org/record/8129605, {"references":["Kallunki, J. A. & Pirani, J. R. (1998) Synopses of Angostura Roem. & Schult. and Conchocarpus J. C. Mikan (Rutaceae). Kew Bulletin 53 (2): 257 - 334. https: // doi. org / 10.2307 / 4114501","Pulle, A. (1912) Neue Beitrage zur Flora Surinams III. Mit zwei Tafeln. Recuei des Travaux Botaniques Neerlandais 9 (2): 125 - 169.","Bernal, R. (2016) Geografia de Colombia. In: Bernal, R., Gradstein, S. R. & Celis, M. (Eds.) Catalogo de plantas y liquenes de Colombia. Instituto de Ciencias Naturales, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogota, pp. 19 - 32.","Cardenas-Lopez, D. (2003) Inventario floristico en el Cerro del Cuchillo, Tapon del Darien colombiano. Caldasia 25 (1): 101 - 117.","Kottek, M., Grieser, J., Beck, C., Rudolf, B. & Rubel, F. (2006) World map of the Koppen Geiger climate classification updated. Meteorologische Zeitschrif 15 (3): 259 - 263. https: // doi. org / 10.1127 / 0941 - 2948 / 2006 / 0130","IUCN. (2012) IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria: Version 3.1. Second edition. IUCN Species Survival Commission. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, England, 32 pp.","Kallunki, J. A. & Meier, W. (2019) Conchocarpus jirajaranus (Rutaceae), a new endemic species of the Coastal Cordillera of Venezuela. Brittonia 71 (2): 196 - 200. https: // doi. org / 10.1007 / s 12228 - 019 - 09572 - 1","Ducke, W. A. (1922) Plantes nouvelles ou peu connues de la region amazonienne (II partie). Archivos do Jardim Botanico do Rio de Janeiro 3: 3 - 269.","Porter, D. M. & Elias, T. S. (1979) Flora of Panama Part VI. Family 89. Rutaceae. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 66 (2): 123 - 164. https: // doi. org / 10.2307 / 2398906","Cuatrecasas, J. (1952) Notas a la Flora de Colombia XII. Revista de la Academia Colombiana de Ciencias Exactas, Fisicas y Naturales 8 (32): 464 - 488.","McPherson, G. (1988) New and noteworthy taxa from Panama. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 75 (1): 373 - 378.","Groppo, M., Bruniera, C. P., Ferreira, P. L., Ferreira, C., Pirani, J. R. & Kallunki, J. A. (2017) Phylogeny and delimitation of Galipeeae (Rutaceae, Sapindales) based on molecular data: insights on the evolution of zygomorphic flowers and staminodes. XIX International Botanical Congress, Shenzhen.","El Ottra, J. H. L., Demarco, D. & Pirani, J. R. (2019) Comparative floral structure and evolution in Galipeinae (Galipeeae: Rutaceae) and its implications at different systematic levels. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 191: 30 - 101. https: // doi. org / 10.1093 / botlinnean / boz 029","Standley, P. C. & Williams, L. O. (1953) Plantae Centrali-Americanae V. Ceiba 3 (3): 187 - 220.","Huber, J. (1906) Materiaes para a flora amazonica VI. Plantas vasculares colligidas e observadas no baixo Ucayali e no Pampa del Sacramento, nos mezes de outubro a dezembro de 1898. Boletim do Museo Goeldi de Historia Natural e Ethnographia 4: 510 - 619.","Engler, H. G. A. (1874) Rutaceae. In: Martius, C. F. P. & Eichler, A. G. (eds.) Flora Brasiliensis, enumeratio plantarum in Brasilia hactenus detectarum 12 (2). Lipsiae [Liepzig]: Apud Frid. Fleischer in Comm. pp. 77 - 196.","Saint-Hilaire, A. F. C. P. (1823) Description de principaux genres nouveaux et de especes nouvelles de la Flore de Bresil, cites das le Memoire sur le Gynobase. Bulletin des Sciences, par la Societe Philomatique de Paris 1823: 129 - 133."]}

1. Acer decandrum Merr. (Aceraceae) in Lingnan Sci. J. 11(1): 47. 1932. TYPE:— CHINA. Hainan: Hongmao Shan, 6 June 1929, W. T. Tsang & H. Fung 253 (i.e. Lingnan University Herbarium 17787) (holotype: NY 00337730 image!; isotype: A 00050399 image!, A 00050400 image!). Tsang & Fung 17787 (NY) was the only gathering cited inthe protologue of the name Acer decandrum Merr. (Merrill, 1932).However, the collecting number on the label of the holotype specimen is 253, while its herbarium number is Lingnan University Herbarium 17787. Thus, the collecting number cited in the protologue is to be corrected., Published as part of Lin, Yun, Bi, Hai-Yan, Sun, Jun & Sun, Qian, 2023, Correction of collecting number errors in the protologues of sixty-four taxon names from China, pp. 271-282 in Phytotaxa 598 (4) on page 272, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.598.4.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7983799, {"references":["Merrill, E. D. (1932) A fourth supplementary list of Hainan plants. Lingnan Science Journal 11 (1): 37 - 61."]}

23. Evodia hainanensis Merr. (Rutaceae) in Philipp. J. Sci. 21(4): 346. 1922. TYPE:— CHINA. Hainan: Wuzhishan, Wuzhi Shan, alt. 1000 m, 7 December 1921, F. A. McClure 1891 (i.e. Canton Christian College Herbarium 8449) (syntype: PNH, destroyed, A 00044060 image!, A 00105566 image!, ECON 00061246 image!). Merrill (1922a) validly published the name Evodia hainanensis Merr. with only one gathering, McClure 8449, cited in the protologue. However, the collecting number on the labels of the syntype specimens is 1891, while the herbarium number is Canton Christian College Herbarium 8449. Therefore, the erroneous collecting number is to be corrected., Published as part of Lin, Yun, Bi, Hai-Yan, Sun, Jun & Sun, Qian, 2023, Correction of collecting number errors in the protologues of sixty-four taxon names from China, pp. 271-282 in Phytotaxa 598 (4) on page 275, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.598.4.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7983799, {"references":["Merrill, E. D. (1922 a) Diagnoses of Hainan Plants. The Philippine Journal of Science 21 (4): 337 - 355."]}

64. Xerospermum topengii Merr. (Sapindaceae) in Philipp.J. Sci. 23(3): 250. 1923. TYPE:— CHINA. Hainan: Wuzhishan, Wuzhi Shan, 5 May 1922, F. A. McClure 2901 (i.e. Canton Christian College Herbarium 9455) (syntype: PNH, destroyed, A 00051012 image!, A 00051013 image!, ECON 00249540 image!). McClure 9455 was the only gathering cited in the protologue of the name Xerospermum topengii Merr. (Merrill, 1923). However, the collecting number on the labels of the syntype specimens is 2901, while the herbarium number is Canton Christian College Herbarium 9455. Thus, the collecting number cited in the protologue is to be corrected., Published as part of Lin, Yun, Bi, Hai-Yan, Sun, Jun & Sun, Qian, 2023, Correction of collecting number errors in the protologues of sixty-four taxon names from China, pp. 271-282 in Phytotaxa 598 (4) on page 281, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.598.4.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7983799, {"references":["Merrill, E. D. (1923) Diagnoses of Hainan Plants, II. The Philippine Journal of Science 23 (3): 237 - 268."]}

15. Clausena moningerae Merr. (Rutaceae) in Philipp. J. Sci. 23(3): 247. 1923. TYPE:— CHINA. Hainan: Tai Wan San Hui, 9 April 1922, F. A. McClure 2550 (i.e. Canton Christian College Herbarium 8995) (syntype: PNH, destroyed, A 00044032 image!). The name Clausena moningerae Merr. was validly published with a gathering “ McClure 8995 ” designated as the type (Merrill, 1923). However, on the label of the syntype specimen exists in A, the collecting number is 2550 and the herbarium number is Canton Christian College Herbarium 8995. Therefore, the erroneous collecting number in the designation of type is to be corrected., Published as part of Lin, Yun, Bi, Hai-Yan, Sun, Jun & Sun, Qian, 2023, Correction of collecting number errors in the protologues of sixty-four taxon names from China, pp. 271-282 in Phytotaxa 598 (4) on page 274, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.598.4.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7983799, {"references":["Merrill, E. D. (1923) Diagnoses of Hainan Plants, II. The Philippine Journal of Science 23 (3): 237 - 268."]}

A new Cedrela (Meliaceae) species, Cedrela angusticarpa, is described through a combination of taxonomic, morphological, and molecular analyses. Cedrela kuelapensis, originally described as an endemic species of northern Peru, is also reported here as a new record for Ecuador. Cedrela angusticarpa has oblong or oblong-lanceolate glabrous leaflets, rounded at the base. Inflorescences are up to 70 cm long, and flowers present a cupuliform calyx with five regular teeth. Fruits are narrowly obovoid capsules. Through molecular analyses using nine microsatellite loci, it is evident that samples from C. angusticarpa form their own genetic cluster when compared to the most morphologically similar species, C. odorata, suggesting that they belong to a new separate species. Additionally, here we report that C. angusticarpa has a very narrow geographic range, recorded between 550 and 1300 m in elevation, and restricted to the relatively small areas of northwestern Ecuador. Climatic niche modelling techniques were used as a proxy for assessing potential distributions and habitat loss percentages for both C. angusticarpa and C. kuelapensis. Finally, IUCN Red List categories and criteria were applied to assess the conservation status of both Cedrela species analyzed here.

Cedrela kuelapensis T.D. Penn. & Daza (2010: 65–68). Cedrela has been considered endemic to northern Peru (Pennington & Muellner (2010), however, today it is known to be widely distributed, also, in the Loja province of Ecuador (Figure 5). Field characteristics: —Tree up to 18 m high and 65 cm dbh, slightly fissured grayish bark, rounded crown. The flowers have pink petals with margin cream. Flowering and phenology: — The species shows asynchronous phenology, as happens with other species of the genus in Ecuador. In December of 2017, for example, in the northeast of Loja, some trees had leaves and others were defoliated, while towards the central part of the province, a few trees had flowers and others were presenting young leaves. In August 2018 on the other hand, when a strong dry season was present in the central and southern part of the province (e.g., in Nambacola and Cariamanga sites), the trees were defoliated and some had old fruits; meanwhile, towards the northeast of Loja, the trees presented leaves and very young inflorescences. Distribution and habitat: —Until now, the species was considered endemic to Peru (Pennington & Muellner 2010). In Ecuador, C. kuelapensis inhabits only the seasonally semi-deciduous forests of southern Ecuador, in the province of Loja, northern Peruvian border. The first collections of this species in Ecuador were made in 1995, in forest remnants occurring ~ 1600m in elevation, between Malacatos and El Tambo localities. Recent collections during this investigation (Table 1) expand the distribution of the species, which is now reported between 700 and 1600m in elevation. All the collected individuals were found in degraded areas along roads, pastures, and forest remnants. In Loja, this species occurs in ecosystems like those where it grows in Peru; it grows associated with Jacaranda sparrei A.H. Gentry (1977: 138) and Vachellia macracantha (Humboldt & Bonpland ex Willdenow 1806: 1080) Seigler & Ebinger (2005: 160), but it has also been located at about 700m in elevation, usually growing on the banks of watercourses, in dry forests dominated by Cochlospermum vitifolium (Willdenow 1809: 720) Sprengel (1895: 596). Conservation status: — Cedrela kuelapensis has a potential distribution area that covers a large part of the province of Loja (Figure 3), which significantly increases the previously known distribution area in Peru. However, it must be considered that the forests of this Ecuadorian province are mainly at secondary succession stages. Also (and according to resulting maps, Figure 3), the species faces a habitat loss of 54%, calculated after applying criterion A, an Extent of Occurrence (EOO) of 1,167.182 km ², and an Area of Occupancy (AOO) of 20 km ². These data, which were analyzed under the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria (IUCN, 2019), suggest that the species could be evaluated as Endangered. However, considering that the potential reduction in its population size is at least 61% and a maximum of approximately 80% (W. Palacios pers. obs.), and that the trees mainly occur in secondary forests and are sparse and distant from each other, the species should be evaluated as Critically Endangered (CR A2c) for the country. Specimens examined: — ECUADOR. Loja: Cantón Olmedo, vía a Surapo, 1660 m, October–November 2018, Sanchez & Gonzaga 124 (LOJA). Malacatos-El Tambo road, near the village El Era, 1600 m, 16 May 1995, Borgtoft et al. 104298 (LOJA, QCA). Km 12 Malacatos-Gonzanamá, 1280 m, 4°12’S, 78°21’W, 21 November 1995, Merino et al. 4617 (LOJA). Catamayo, vía intervalles Malacatos-Catamayo, 2 km antes de El Tambo, 1533 m, 4°04’S, 79°18’W, 24 December 2017, Palacios 18284, 18285 (QCNE). Cariamanga, Vía Cariamanga-Colaisaca, aprox. 7 km, sector San Pedro, 1835 m, 4°20’06’’S, 79°06’W, 24 December 2017, Palacios 18292 (QCNE). Macará, Sabiango, lecho de quebrada, hacia el NW de Sabiango, Bosque seco, 760 m, 4°21’S, 79°49’W, 27 December 2017, Palacios 18288 (QCNE). NC: cedro blanco., Published as part of Palacios, Walter A., Torres, Maria De Lourdes, Quintana, Martina Albuja, Asadobay, Pacarina, Iglesias, Juan, Quillupangui, Richard, Rojas, Estefania, Santiana, Janeth, Sola, Augusto & Rivas-Torres, Gonzalo, 2023, A new species and a new record for Cedrela (Meliaceae, Sapindales) in Ecuador: morphological, molecular, and distribution evidence, pp. 127-138 in Phytotaxa 595 (2) on pages 136-137, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.595.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7905812, {"references":["Pennington, T. D. & Muellner, A. N. (2010) A monograph of Cedrela (Meliaceae). Dh books, Milborne Port, 112 pp.","Gentry, A. H. (1977) A new Jacaranda (Bignoniaceae) from Ecuador and Peru. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 64: 138 - 139. https: // doi. org / 10.2307 / 2395242","Willdenow, C. L. von (1809) Enumeratio Plantarum Horti Botanici Berolinensis 2. 75 pp. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 165500","IUCN Standards and Petitions Committee. (2019) Guidelines for Using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. Version 14. Prepared by the Standards and Petitions Committee. Available from http: // www. iucnredlist. org / documents / RedListGuidelines. pdf (4 May 2023)"]}

Cedrela angusticarpa W. Palacios, sp. nov. (Figures 1 & 2). Type:— ECUADOR. Esmeraldas: Quinindé, Rosa Zárate, Reserva FCAT, El Descanso, 513 m, 0°22’N, 79°40’W, 23 January 2022, fl., few old fruits attached to the branches, W. Palacios, F. Castillo & J. Olivo 18755 (holotype: QCNE 260031 - leaves and inflorescence; QCNE 260032 - leaves and fruits, isotype: MO). Diagnosis: — Cedrela angusticarpa is related to C. odorata. The distinctive characteristics of these species are: a) leaflets oblong to oblong-lanceolate, base obtuse or rounded, (8–)9–15 × (4–)5–6 (–7) cm in C. angusticarpa vs leaflets oblong, oblong-falcate, base usually strongly asymmetric and rounded on one side, acute or obtuse on the other, 7–14 × 2.5–4 cm in C. odorata; b) inflorescence a robust-erect panicle, 40–70 cm long in C.angusticarpa vs a curved panicle, 15–40 cm long in C. odorata; c) calyx with five teeth in C. angusticarpa vs calyx 2–3-lobed in C. odorata; d) fruits narrowly obovoid, 1.3–1.8 cm in diameter, base acute, sometimes slightly 5-angled when dry in C. angusticarpa vs fruits oblong or ellipsoid, 1.8–2.6 cm in diameter, base rounded or obtuse in C. odorata. Trees up to 30 m high; young branches 0.8–1.1 cm in diameter, glabrous, with circular or elliptic, scattered lenticels; young buds puberulent, covered by ovate scales 0.4–0.6 mm long. Leaves paripinnate, 45–70 (75) cm long; petiole 9–15 cm long, terete, glabrous, lenticellate; rachis 30–70(–80) cm long, terete, glabrous, lenticellate. Leaflets (6–)8– 10(–13) pairs, (8–)9–15 × (4–)5–6 (–7) cm, opposite or sub-opposite, oblong, oblong-lanceolate, rarely slightly falcate, coriaceous, glabrous or with very short and scattered trichomes, shinning above; apex acuminate; base rounded, symmetric or, less frequently, with a slightly uneven side; venation eucamptodromous; secondary veins 9–14 pairs, parallel to each other and curved towards the margin; intersecondary veins absent or inconspicuous, or only present between few pairs of secondary veins; tertiary veins inconspicuous or not visible to the naked eye; petiolules 3–5 mm long, terete. Inflorescence is a broadly pyramidal panicle, 40–70 cm long, curved; lateral branches up to ca. 35 cm long; peduncle and rachis lenticellate, glabrous. Flowers 8–9 mm long; pedicel 0.8–1 mm long; calyx cyathiform, 2–2.3 mm long, puberulent, 5-dentate, teeth ovate with acute apex, symmetric, 0.8–1.1 mm long, with obtuse or rounded apex; petals 5, oblong, oblong-spatulate or oblong-lanceolate, 7–7.5 × 1.8–2.1 mm, adnate to androgynophore in the lower half, moderately puberulent inside, densely puberulent outside; stamens (free portion) 1.9–2.1 mm long, glabrous; ovary broadly ovoid, glabrous, style with thick discoid head. Capsule narrowly obovoid and tapering towards the base, apex rounded, base acute, sometimes slightly 5-angulated in dry condition, 3.5–5.5 × 1.4–1.8 cm in diameter, with scattered lenticels; valves 0.7–1.1 cm wide. Seeds 3–3.5 cm long. Flowering and fruiting period: —Flowering occurs in the dry season, between July and September. The fruits are mature about seven months after flowering. Distribution and habitat: — Cedrela angusticarpa is restricted to the foothill forests of the western Andes Mountain Range of northern Ecuador, between 550 and 1300m in elevation mainly between the cantons of San Miguel de los Bancos and Santo Domingo, along the Las Mercedes road and in the mountains of Mache (canton Quinindé) between 400 and 700 m. As a result of the climatic modeling, it was observed that C. angusticarpa shows a relatively small potential distribution area in the provinces of Pichincha, Santo Domingo de los Tsachilas, and Esmeraldas.Within this distribution, some individuals of this species can also be recorded in grasslands as part of the tree vegetation that farmers leave as shade or to keep individuals for high-quality wood provision (Figure 3). Etymology: —The specific epithet refers to the narrow fruits recorded in this taxon, although the length is equivalent to that of other species. Conservation status of Cedrela angusticarpa: —Endemic to Ecuador. The modeled geographic distribution showed that the species’ habitat has been lost by ~80% due to the expansion of agricultural and livestock frontiers. As mentioned before, where found, most of C. angusticarpa individuals are growing in secondary forests. Calculated Extent of Occurrence (EOO) resulted in 1,607.06 km ², and the area of occupancy (AOO) was calculated to be 36 km ² for this species. Due to the habitat loss and its restricted distribution, and using IUCN Categories and Criteria (2019), the species should be considered as Critically Endangered (CR A2cd). This conclusion is validated by W. Palacios, Meliaceae specialist for Ecuador. Field characteristics: — Cedrela angusticarpa is a tree that reaches up to 30 m in height and ca. 1.6 m in dbh. Adult trees have rough or superficially cracked bark (Fig. 2A). In open places, the crown is wide, rounded, and dense (i.e. many leaflets and leaves), with a dark green color. Common names and local uses:—Local name: “cedro”. Farmers of the Santo Domingo and San Miguel de los Bancos use this species as wood provision (for building houses) and as cattle shading. On the other hand, in the mountains of Mache, where it seems that the populations were more abundant, between 1995 and 2005, the peasants sold the adult trees to merchants who, in turn, sold the wood in the national market. Taxonomic relationships:—Vegetatively, C. angusticarpa is close to C. odorata L. The taxonomic differences between these species are detailed in the diagnosis. At this point, one must remember that Pennington & Muellner (2010) indicate that C. odorata may be treated as a compound of species that include three taxonomic entities, one of which occurs in Ecuador and Guyanas. This observation was corroborated by Cavers et al. (2013), who used several molecular markers for phylogenetic analyses of Cedrela, with an emphasis on C. odorata. Using internal transcribed spacer (ITS) sequence data obtained from a large sample of C. odorata from Central and South America and the Caribbean, and following the work done by Pennington & Muellner (2010), Cavers et al. (2013) identified 22 haplotypes, four of them corresponding to specimens from the coast of Ecuador, which formed a clade with C. montana Moritz ex Turczaninow (1858: 415) and C. angustifolia DC. (1824: 624), both of which are montane species. Despite having a close genetic affinity with these two montane species, most of the specimens analyzed by Cavers et al. (2013) were obtained from trees showing a clear C. odorata morphology. One of the specimens (Perez et al. 3255, QCA 133167) cited by Cavers et al. (2013) as belonging to C. odorata was analyzed here and placed under C. angusticarpa. Specimens examined: — ECUADOR. Esmeraldas: Quinindé, Santa Isabel, Refugio del Gavilán, REMACH, 541 m, 648298W, 41878N, 27 August 2020, Palacios et al. 18745 (QCNE); January 2023, Palacios et al. 18831, 18832 (QCNE). Pichincha: San Miguel de Los Bancos, vía principal a Quito, cerca del sector Solaya, aprox. 5 km antes de Los Bancos, 1100 m, 1180, 0°01’33’’N, 78°51’34’’O, 5 Jun 2019, Palacios 18435, 18445 (QCNE). Los Bancos-Las Mercedes, 605 m, 0°10’03’’S, 79°05’13’’W, 18 March 2007, Pérez et al. 3255 (QCA). Vía a Santo Domingo, sector 23 de June, potreros, 1191, 0°1’16’’S, 78°53’09’’W, 7 April 2019, Palacios et al. 18406 (QCNE). San Miguel de Los Bancos, sector Nuevo Amanecer, 857 m, 0°2’36’’S, 78°57’37’’W, 4 April 2019, Palacios et al. 18407 (QCNE). Vía a Santo Domingo, entre Mulaute y Las Mercedes, 698 m, 0°07’09’’S, 79°0’15’’W, 13 June 2018, Palacios et al. 18408 (QCNE). Santo Domingo de los Tsáchilas: vía a Santo Domingo, sector Las Mercedes, 751 m, 0°10’44’’S, 79°01’50’’W, 6 June 2018, Palacios et al. 18466 (QCNE); sector río Achotillo, potreros, 581 m, 0°08’58’’S, 79°05’09’’W, 7 June 2018, Palacios et al. 18412, 18413, 18414 (QCNE). Molecular evidence supporting the differentiation of C. angusticarpa from C. odorata :—The PCoA, based on nine microsatellite loci, produced a two-dimensional plot for the first two principal coordinates (Figure 4), which accounted for 42.9% of the data variation. The samples of C. angusticarpa clearly formed their own genetic cluster when compared to C. odorata populations located in the Coast and Amazon regions in Ecuador, suggesting that they belong to a new, separate species., Published as part of Palacios, Walter A., Torres, Maria De Lourdes, Quintana, Martina Albuja, Asadobay, Pacarina, Iglesias, Juan, Quillupangui, Richard, Rojas, Estefania, Santiana, Janeth, Sola, Augusto & Rivas-Torres, Gonzalo, 2023, A new species and a new record for Cedrela (Meliaceae, Sapindales) in Ecuador: morphological, molecular, and distribution evidence, pp. 127-138 in Phytotaxa 595 (2) on pages 131-135, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.595.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7905812, {"references":["Pennington, T. D. & Muellner, A. N. (2010) A monograph of Cedrela (Meliaceae). Dh books, Milborne Port, 112 pp.","Cavers, S., Telford, A., Arenal-C, F., Perez-C, A. J., Valencia, R., Navarro, C., Buonamici, A., Lowe, A. J. & & Vendramin, G. G. (2013) Cryptic species and phylogeographical structure in the tree Cedrela odorata L. throughout the Neotropics. Journal of Biogeography 40: 732 - 746. https: // doi. org / 10.1111 / jbi. 12086"]}