Myrcia edulis var. dominicana Krug & Urb.
-
Authority
Maguire, Bassett. 1969. The botany of the Guayana Highland-part VIII. Mem. New York Bot. Gard. 18: 1-290.
-
Family
Myrtaceae
-
Scientific Name
-
Discussion
Urban, in his treatment of the Myrtaceae of the West Indies, included Myrcia edulis (Aulomyrcia edulis Berg), and the above variety assigned to the same species. These plants were reported from the islands of St. Vincent, Guadeloupe, and Dominica. I have seen some of the specimens cited by Urban (e.g., St. Vincent, H. H. & G. W Smith 1553; Guadeloupe, Ramage, hb. Kew) and also the following: ST. LUCIA. J.S. Beard 478, P. Beard 1053, Proctor 17697, 17733, 17973.
Apparently what Urban called Myrcia edulis, and its var dominicana, represent an endemic West Indian population that is closely related to, but distinct from, M. inaequiloba, M . decorticans, and other South American species of Myrcia sect Armeriela (see Key above). Amshoff (Rec. Trav. Bot. Neerl. 42: 7. 1950) stated that "The West Indian specimens which Urban referred to this species [edulis], represent a rather distinct-looking form [of Aulomyrcia inaequiloba], not known to me from Guiana." In the Flora of Suriname she took the same stand, relegating the name A. edulis to the synonymy of A. inaequiloba, and saying of the latter "[having] a rather distinct form in the Lesser Antilles." I cannot explain how Urban reached the conclusion that Myrcia {Aulomyrcia) edulis was a species of the Lesser Antilles. The type is a specimen collected by Richard in French Guiana. It is a fruiting specimen that I should refer to M . platyclada D C.
The West Indian plant is mentioned here merely for comparison with what I take to be its nearest relatives in South America; in m y judgment it is certainly neither the same as Myrcia edulis nor a variety of M . inaequiloba. If it has a valid name I a m not aware of it.