Monographs Details:
Authority:
Prance, Ghillean T. & Mori, S. A. 1979. Lecythidaceae - Part I. The actinomorphic-flowered New World Lecythidaceae (Asteranthos, Gustavia, Grias, Allantoma & Cariniana). Fl. Neotrop. Monogr. 21: 1-270. (Published by NYBG Press)
Prance, Ghillean T. & Mori, S. A. 1979. Lecythidaceae - Part I. The actinomorphic-flowered New World Lecythidaceae (Asteranthos, Gustavia, Grias, Allantoma & Cariniana). Fl. Neotrop. Monogr. 21: 1-270. (Published by NYBG Press)
Family:
Lecythidaceae
Lecythidaceae
Synonyms:
Chytroma idatimon (Aubl.) Miers, Eschweilera idatimon (Aubl.) Nied., Lecythis amara Aubl., Chytroma amara (Aubl.) Miers, Eschweilera amara (Aubl.) Nied., Lecythis lutea Aubl., Eschweilera lutea (Aubl.) Miers
Chytroma idatimon (Aubl.) Miers, Eschweilera idatimon (Aubl.) Nied., Lecythis amara Aubl., Chytroma amara (Aubl.) Miers, Eschweilera amara (Aubl.) Nied., Lecythis lutea Aubl., Eschweilera lutea (Aubl.) Miers
Description:
Description - Trees, usually understory, infrequently canopy, 10-20(-35 m) tall, unbuttressed. Twigs gray, 1.5-2.5 mm diam. Bark smooth with scattered vertical cracks. Leaf blades narrowly elliptic to oblong, (8.5-)10-15(-24) x 4-9 cm, glabrous, usually coriaceous, with 12-16 pairs of lateral veins; apex acuminate; base obtuse; margins entire, inconspicuously revolute; petiole 9-20 mm long, glabrous, often canaliculate. Inflorescences terminal or axillary, of simple racemes or once-branched paniculate arrangements of racemes, the principal rachis 3-15 cm long, often pink or reddish, pubescent; pedicels jointed, 1-6 mm long below joint, 4-12 mm long above joint, rugose, green, pink or reddish, with widely ovate, cucullate, caducous bract 5.5 x 4 mm at base and two ovate, caducous bracteoles 4.5 x 2.5 mm inserted directly below joint. Flowers 2-2.5 cm diam.; calyx with six ovate to very widely ovate, green or reddish lobes, 4.5-8 x 3.5-5.7 mm; petals six, subequal, widely obovate, 14-16 x 11-13 mm, white, white with tinges of pink, entirely pink, or reddish-pink; hood of androecium flat, 12-17 x 12-16 mm, white or pink, the appendages antherless, when pink with white apices; ligule with well-developed lateral flanges; staminal ring with 110-175 dimorphic stamens, the outermost strongly curved inwards, question mark shaped, 4-5 mm long, the innermost straight, 1-2 mm long, the anthers 0.4-0.5 mm long; hypanthium rugose, pubescent, cuneate at base; ovary (3-)4-locular, each locule with 2-5 ovules attached on lower part of septum, the summit truncate, the style geniculate, 4-8 mm long. Fruits conical, broadly conical, or turbinate, rugose or warty, 4-5 x 3-4 cm, the style persisting as woody spine, the pericarp 3 mm thick. Seeds with lateral aril, the aril extending from micropylar end to middle of seed, not projecting beyond base of seed.
Description - Trees, usually understory, infrequently canopy, 10-20(-35 m) tall, unbuttressed. Twigs gray, 1.5-2.5 mm diam. Bark smooth with scattered vertical cracks. Leaf blades narrowly elliptic to oblong, (8.5-)10-15(-24) x 4-9 cm, glabrous, usually coriaceous, with 12-16 pairs of lateral veins; apex acuminate; base obtuse; margins entire, inconspicuously revolute; petiole 9-20 mm long, glabrous, often canaliculate. Inflorescences terminal or axillary, of simple racemes or once-branched paniculate arrangements of racemes, the principal rachis 3-15 cm long, often pink or reddish, pubescent; pedicels jointed, 1-6 mm long below joint, 4-12 mm long above joint, rugose, green, pink or reddish, with widely ovate, cucullate, caducous bract 5.5 x 4 mm at base and two ovate, caducous bracteoles 4.5 x 2.5 mm inserted directly below joint. Flowers 2-2.5 cm diam.; calyx with six ovate to very widely ovate, green or reddish lobes, 4.5-8 x 3.5-5.7 mm; petals six, subequal, widely obovate, 14-16 x 11-13 mm, white, white with tinges of pink, entirely pink, or reddish-pink; hood of androecium flat, 12-17 x 12-16 mm, white or pink, the appendages antherless, when pink with white apices; ligule with well-developed lateral flanges; staminal ring with 110-175 dimorphic stamens, the outermost strongly curved inwards, question mark shaped, 4-5 mm long, the innermost straight, 1-2 mm long, the anthers 0.4-0.5 mm long; hypanthium rugose, pubescent, cuneate at base; ovary (3-)4-locular, each locule with 2-5 ovules attached on lower part of septum, the summit truncate, the style geniculate, 4-8 mm long. Fruits conical, broadly conical, or turbinate, rugose or warty, 4-5 x 3-4 cm, the style persisting as woody spine, the pericarp 3 mm thick. Seeds with lateral aril, the aril extending from micropylar end to middle of seed, not projecting beyond base of seed.
Discussion:
This species is often identified as one of its synonyms, Eschweilera amara. The error began with Eyma (1932) who correctly associated the type of Lecythis amara with the species under consideration. However, he erred in retaining the species in Eschweilera and by failing to recognize that the type of L. idatimon represented the same species. The species falls within our current concept of Lecythis because of its four locular ovary and flat androecial hood.The correct name for this species is L. idatimon because the protologue unequivocally refers to it. Moreover, the types of both L. idatimon and L. amara are similar. So much so that, in fact, they may represent duplicates of the same gathering. However, the protologue of L. amara appears to be based on several species. The illustration of the leaves and flowers do not show the open androecial hood and rugose pedicel so characteristic of this species. Moreover, the yellow flower color described by Aublet is never found in any of the rugose species of Lecythis. I believe that Aublet’s illustration of the habit, as well as part of his description, probably refer to a species of Eschweilera, most likely E. coriacea. However, this cannot be established with certainty. The illustration of the fruit refers to a species of Lecythis because a four locular ovary is depicted. The form of the fruit is that of L. zabucaja but its “egg” size is not characteristic of mature fruits of this species. Consequently, I feel that the illustration of the fruit also cannot be placed to species with certainty.Aublet may have collected the closely related L. persistens. A sheet identified as L. amara, from Miers’ herbarium marked “Guiane Aublet,” has a packet containing a flower with a rugose pedicel, a hypanthium, and a drawing of a hood with the annotation “all staminiferous” (Eyma, 1932). These flowers could only come from L. persistens for it is the only Lecythis with rugose pedicels and hypanthia in combination with antheriferous hood appendages. Nevertheless, Aublet made no mention of these important features in his protologue, and, therefore, I have excluded the flowers from the type. They may have even been placed in the packet by Miers.In summary, I have placed L. amara in synonymy with L. idatimon because the leaves of the two types are similar. Moreover, I conclude that Aublet’s protologue description includes two different species, neither of which can be identified with certainty. The only inconsistency with my treatment of these names is the appearance of a flower of L. persistens in a packet on one of the types of L. amara. I have chosen to use the leaves to typify L. amara because Aublet’s protologue clearly does not refer to the salient features of the flowers of L. persistens.Lecythis idatimon is variable in flower color. The petals and hood are usually pink or red but sometimes may be white, especially in the more southern part of its range. Nevertheless, most collections of individuals with white petals and hoods have these parts tinged with different shades of pink at their margins and bases.Aublet (1775), in his description of L. lutea, says that it is identical to L. idatimon in all respects except that it possesses yellow instead of flesh-colored flowers. Lecythis lutea probably represents a plant which had white flowers and therefore it falls within the normal variation in flower color of L. idatimon. Aublet seems to have used dried flowers, which could be interpreted as yellow, when he wrote his description.
This species is often identified as one of its synonyms, Eschweilera amara. The error began with Eyma (1932) who correctly associated the type of Lecythis amara with the species under consideration. However, he erred in retaining the species in Eschweilera and by failing to recognize that the type of L. idatimon represented the same species. The species falls within our current concept of Lecythis because of its four locular ovary and flat androecial hood.The correct name for this species is L. idatimon because the protologue unequivocally refers to it. Moreover, the types of both L. idatimon and L. amara are similar. So much so that, in fact, they may represent duplicates of the same gathering. However, the protologue of L. amara appears to be based on several species. The illustration of the leaves and flowers do not show the open androecial hood and rugose pedicel so characteristic of this species. Moreover, the yellow flower color described by Aublet is never found in any of the rugose species of Lecythis. I believe that Aublet’s illustration of the habit, as well as part of his description, probably refer to a species of Eschweilera, most likely E. coriacea. However, this cannot be established with certainty. The illustration of the fruit refers to a species of Lecythis because a four locular ovary is depicted. The form of the fruit is that of L. zabucaja but its “egg” size is not characteristic of mature fruits of this species. Consequently, I feel that the illustration of the fruit also cannot be placed to species with certainty.Aublet may have collected the closely related L. persistens. A sheet identified as L. amara, from Miers’ herbarium marked “Guiane Aublet,” has a packet containing a flower with a rugose pedicel, a hypanthium, and a drawing of a hood with the annotation “all staminiferous” (Eyma, 1932). These flowers could only come from L. persistens for it is the only Lecythis with rugose pedicels and hypanthia in combination with antheriferous hood appendages. Nevertheless, Aublet made no mention of these important features in his protologue, and, therefore, I have excluded the flowers from the type. They may have even been placed in the packet by Miers.In summary, I have placed L. amara in synonymy with L. idatimon because the leaves of the two types are similar. Moreover, I conclude that Aublet’s protologue description includes two different species, neither of which can be identified with certainty. The only inconsistency with my treatment of these names is the appearance of a flower of L. persistens in a packet on one of the types of L. amara. I have chosen to use the leaves to typify L. amara because Aublet’s protologue clearly does not refer to the salient features of the flowers of L. persistens.Lecythis idatimon is variable in flower color. The petals and hood are usually pink or red but sometimes may be white, especially in the more southern part of its range. Nevertheless, most collections of individuals with white petals and hoods have these parts tinged with different shades of pink at their margins and bases.Aublet (1775), in his description of L. lutea, says that it is identical to L. idatimon in all respects except that it possesses yellow instead of flesh-colored flowers. Lecythis lutea probably represents a plant which had white flowers and therefore it falls within the normal variation in flower color of L. idatimon. Aublet seems to have used dried flowers, which could be interpreted as yellow, when he wrote his description.
Distribution:
Suriname South America| French Guiana South America| Brazil South America| Amapá Brazil South America| Pará Brazil South America| Maranhão Brazil South America|
Suriname South America| French Guiana South America| Brazil South America| Amapá Brazil South America| Pará Brazil South America| Maranhão Brazil South America|
Common Names:
oema barklak, pikin loeabi, pinda-laloe, lebi loabi, mahot, mahot blanc, mahot rouge, weti loabiu, cagador, jatereu, Matamatá, ripeira
oema barklak, pikin loeabi, pinda-laloe, lebi loabi, mahot, mahot blanc, mahot rouge, weti loabiu, cagador, jatereu, Matamatá, ripeira