Monographs Details:
Authority:
Renner, Susanne S. & Hausner, Gerlinde. 2005. Siparunaceae. Fl. Neotrop. Monogr. 95: 1--247 pp. (Published by NYBG Press)
Renner, Susanne S. & Hausner, Gerlinde. 2005. Siparunaceae. Fl. Neotrop. Monogr. 95: 1--247 pp. (Published by NYBG Press)
Family:
Monimiaceae
Monimiaceae
Synonyms:
Siparuna pyricarpa (Ruiz & Pav.) Perkins, Siparuna macrophylla (Kunth) A.DC., Siparuna limoniodora (Pav. ex Tul.) A.DC., Siparuna amplifolia A.DC., Siparuna harongifolia Perkins, Siparuna spectabilis Perkins, Siparuna tulasnei Perkins, Siparuna calocarpa Perkins, Siparuna exsculpta Perkins, Siparuna tabacifolia Perkins, Siparuna gigantophylla Perkins, Siparuna podocarpa Perkins, Siparuna ecuadorica Heilborn, Siparuna elliptica A.C.Sm., Siparuna quadrangularis A.C.Sm., Siparuna rimbachii Standl.
Siparuna pyricarpa (Ruiz & Pav.) Perkins, Siparuna macrophylla (Kunth) A.DC., Siparuna limoniodora (Pav. ex Tul.) A.DC., Siparuna amplifolia A.DC., Siparuna harongifolia Perkins, Siparuna spectabilis Perkins, Siparuna tulasnei Perkins, Siparuna calocarpa Perkins, Siparuna exsculpta Perkins, Siparuna tabacifolia Perkins, Siparuna gigantophylla Perkins, Siparuna podocarpa Perkins, Siparuna ecuadorica Heilborn, Siparuna elliptica A.C.Sm., Siparuna quadrangularis A.C.Sm., Siparuna rimbachii Standl.
Description:
Species Description - Dioecious shrub or tree, 2-10(-18) m tall, reaching a dbh of 25 cm; young branchlets quadrangular, covered with yellowish spreading hairs. Leaves opposite; petioles 3-5(-13) cm long; lamina typically coarsely bullate, drying yellowish brown to dark brown or olive-green, elliptic or broadly elliptic, (15-) 20-35(-70) X 11-20(-40) cm, the base truncate, cordate or rounded, the apex acute to acuminate, the upper surface typically covered with few-branched spreading hairs and often also a few simple hairs, gla-brescent when older, the lower surface more densely pubescent with tufted hairs, with (13-)16-20(-26) pairs of secondary veins, these impressed above, distinctly raised below, the margin dentate or irregularly doubly serrate. Cymes 4-7 cm long in the males, 24 cm long in the females, densely stellate-pubescent to tomentose, with 10-20 flowers. Fresh flowers yellow, turning orange-red; male floral cup narrowly ob-conical, sometimes subglobose, 4-5(-8) mm in diam., 5-7 mm high, more or less stellate-pubescent to tomentose, the floral roof moderately to distinctly raised, glabrous and drying black, the 4-6 tepals triangular, 2-3 mm long; stamens 5-6(-9), the outer stamens distinctly exserted at anthesis and their tips (pollen sacs) often bent backwards (cf. Fig. 12A); female floral cup of the same size and shape but the tepals up to 7 mm long, the floral roof with a central tube sheathing the styles; styles 10-30. Fruiting receptacle obovate to pear-shaped, 2-4 cm long (Fig. 13C), glabrescent, immature green with whitish spots, mature light red and with a strong sharp lemon smell when cut; drupelets 10-18, gray with a red-orange fleshy stylar aril.
Species Description - Dioecious shrub or tree, 2-10(-18) m tall, reaching a dbh of 25 cm; young branchlets quadrangular, covered with yellowish spreading hairs. Leaves opposite; petioles 3-5(-13) cm long; lamina typically coarsely bullate, drying yellowish brown to dark brown or olive-green, elliptic or broadly elliptic, (15-) 20-35(-70) X 11-20(-40) cm, the base truncate, cordate or rounded, the apex acute to acuminate, the upper surface typically covered with few-branched spreading hairs and often also a few simple hairs, gla-brescent when older, the lower surface more densely pubescent with tufted hairs, with (13-)16-20(-26) pairs of secondary veins, these impressed above, distinctly raised below, the margin dentate or irregularly doubly serrate. Cymes 4-7 cm long in the males, 24 cm long in the females, densely stellate-pubescent to tomentose, with 10-20 flowers. Fresh flowers yellow, turning orange-red; male floral cup narrowly ob-conical, sometimes subglobose, 4-5(-8) mm in diam., 5-7 mm high, more or less stellate-pubescent to tomentose, the floral roof moderately to distinctly raised, glabrous and drying black, the 4-6 tepals triangular, 2-3 mm long; stamens 5-6(-9), the outer stamens distinctly exserted at anthesis and their tips (pollen sacs) often bent backwards (cf. Fig. 12A); female floral cup of the same size and shape but the tepals up to 7 mm long, the floral roof with a central tube sheathing the styles; styles 10-30. Fruiting receptacle obovate to pear-shaped, 2-4 cm long (Fig. 13C), glabrescent, immature green with whitish spots, mature light red and with a strong sharp lemon smell when cut; drupelets 10-18, gray with a red-orange fleshy stylar aril.
Discussion:
An extract of the leaves in water is sometimes used against rheumatism.Siparuna aspera is characterized by conspicuous pear-shaped fruits (Fig. 13C) and large, elliptic, rugose to bullate leaves. The fruits have inspired epithets such as pyricarpa (pear-shaped fruit), podo-carpa (fruit with a thickened “foot”), and calocarpa (beautiful fruit), while the leaves are referred to by the names elliptica, amplifolia, tabacifolia, macrophylla, gigantophylla, and harongifolia.The name Citriosma aspera has a complicated history, partly because of a label mix-up and partly because of a name change between Ruiz and Pavón’s 1794 and 1798 publications. The collections of Ruiz and Pavón labeled C. aspera in Barcelona, Florence, Geneva, and Oxford represent a different species (viz. Siparuna tomentosa) than the C. aspera holotype in the Ruiz and Pavón herbarium in Madrid. Unfortunately, Tulasne and de Candolle took the Florence and Geneva material to represent S. aspera although they noted discrepancies between the protologues and the supposed original material (see also our discussion under S. tomentosa). Perkins tried to remedy the situation by using the younger name S. pyricarpa (Ruiz & Pavón, 1798) Perkins. We decided to use the older name, S. aspera (Ruiz & Pavón, 1794) A. DC., and to accept de Candolle’s transfer even though his concept of S. aspera is based on switched material and therefore incorrect. In a further twist, Ruiz and Pavón appear to have changed the name C. aspera into C. pyricarpa between their 1794 Flora peruvianae et chilensis prodromus and their 1798 Florae peruviana et chilensis. Of their seven collections or duplicates in MA, two are annotated as S. aspera by Sleumer (1934) and numbered “24/40” by J. F. Macbride, two are annotated as S. pyricarpa and numbered “24/39,” two are annotated as S. harongifolia and numbered “24/31,” and one has neither a Macbride number nor a Sleumer annotation but bears an original Ruiz & Pavón label “C. aspera. Fl. Peru.” All clearly represent the same species! Tulasne (1855b: 371) explains “Ad Citriosmam pyricarpam trahitur, in herbario Webbiano, specimen Pavonianum quod sub cognomine Citriosmae aspera Pavonio ipsi (autographo) ad-hibito.” That Ruiz and Pavón’s names C. aspera (1794) and C. pyricarpa (1798) refer to the same species is clear because they described only one Siparuna with 6-8 stamens and 6-8 carpels. The other three species decribed in their Prodromus have seven stamens (C. subinodora), 60 stamens (C. muricata), and numerous stamens (C. fragante). The seven species mentioned in their Systema have seven stamens (C. subinodora), 60 stamens (C. muricata), 6-8 stamens (C. pyricarpa), 4-5 (C. dentata), 10-12 (C. tomentosei), 11-13 (C. ovalis), and numerous stamens (C. oblongifolia). Ruiz and Pavón apparently were trying to improve epithets so that they would point to the distinctive character of each species. Therefore, C. macrocarpa, a name that only appears on labels, may have become C. pyricarpa, and C. fragante may have become C. oblongifolia (see discussion of the last two under Doubtful names and Excluded Taxa).Siparuna aspera is variable in pubescence and number of tepals, which led to the description of several morphs as new species. For example, A. C. Smith (1932) suggested that S. elliptica was similar to S. amplifolia, both from Colombia and here considered synonyms of S. aspera, but thought the former was distinguishable by a less dense pubescence, receptacles being softly pilose rather than densely hispid, and 5 tepals rather than 3 or 4. However, tepal number varies from 3 to 5 on single plants of S. aspera (and in other species; cf. Flower Morphology, Anatomy, and Embryology) and pubescence varies from sparse to dense between shade and sun leaves (S. Renner, personal observation on S. aspera near Bogotá). Other entities here synonymized were described without much discussion. For example, Perkins (1916) indicated that S. podo carpa and S. gigantophylla “belong in the vicinity of S. pyricarpa, S. macrophylla, and S. exsculpta” (all here considered synonyms of S. aspera), but failed to say how they might differ from each other.In Ecuador, Siparuna aspera may be confused with S. conica and S. harlingii (see the discussion under those species for distinguishing characters). In Peru and Bolivia, it may be confused with S. subinodora from which it differs in a denser, longer, and more persistent pubescence (best seen on young branchlets and lower leaf surfaces) and usually larger flowers. Bolivian collections from around La Paz have thinner leaves than more northern collections of S. aspera. They closely resemble the type of S. spectabilis, Bang 352, from the La Paz Yungas area, and we initially tried to maintain them as a species. However, study of abundant material (during a visit to LPB in August 2001) showed that there are numerous intermediates between the thinner-leaved La Paz form and the thick-leaved remaining Bolivian collections.A few collections from Antioquia, Chocó, and Valle (Cogollo et al. 6606, Forero et al. 2848, Forero et al 2928, Luteyn et al. 12340, Sánchez S. et al. 855, Sánchez S. et al. 1279, and Silverstone-Sopkin et al. 2848) differ from typical Siparuna aspera in having pustulate fruits. Their leaves resemble those of S. aspera and S. echinata except that they are covered by a peculiar indumentum of simple or bifid hairs arranged in patches in the center of the areoles. Whether or not these female collections represent a new species may become clear once matching males are collected. (In the List of Exsiccatae these collections appear as “S. aspera or sp. nov.”)Prieto (Camp E-4949) mentions that, on average, the leaves of the female trees of S. aspera are somewhat larger and are more inclined to be rugose than those of the male trees. Further secondary sex differences, for instance in floral longevity and stem dbh, in this and other species are discussed by Feil (1992) and Nicotra (1998, 1999a, 1999b).
An extract of the leaves in water is sometimes used against rheumatism.Siparuna aspera is characterized by conspicuous pear-shaped fruits (Fig. 13C) and large, elliptic, rugose to bullate leaves. The fruits have inspired epithets such as pyricarpa (pear-shaped fruit), podo-carpa (fruit with a thickened “foot”), and calocarpa (beautiful fruit), while the leaves are referred to by the names elliptica, amplifolia, tabacifolia, macrophylla, gigantophylla, and harongifolia.The name Citriosma aspera has a complicated history, partly because of a label mix-up and partly because of a name change between Ruiz and Pavón’s 1794 and 1798 publications. The collections of Ruiz and Pavón labeled C. aspera in Barcelona, Florence, Geneva, and Oxford represent a different species (viz. Siparuna tomentosa) than the C. aspera holotype in the Ruiz and Pavón herbarium in Madrid. Unfortunately, Tulasne and de Candolle took the Florence and Geneva material to represent S. aspera although they noted discrepancies between the protologues and the supposed original material (see also our discussion under S. tomentosa). Perkins tried to remedy the situation by using the younger name S. pyricarpa (Ruiz & Pavón, 1798) Perkins. We decided to use the older name, S. aspera (Ruiz & Pavón, 1794) A. DC., and to accept de Candolle’s transfer even though his concept of S. aspera is based on switched material and therefore incorrect. In a further twist, Ruiz and Pavón appear to have changed the name C. aspera into C. pyricarpa between their 1794 Flora peruvianae et chilensis prodromus and their 1798 Florae peruviana et chilensis. Of their seven collections or duplicates in MA, two are annotated as S. aspera by Sleumer (1934) and numbered “24/40” by J. F. Macbride, two are annotated as S. pyricarpa and numbered “24/39,” two are annotated as S. harongifolia and numbered “24/31,” and one has neither a Macbride number nor a Sleumer annotation but bears an original Ruiz & Pavón label “C. aspera. Fl. Peru.” All clearly represent the same species! Tulasne (1855b: 371) explains “Ad Citriosmam pyricarpam trahitur, in herbario Webbiano, specimen Pavonianum quod sub cognomine Citriosmae aspera Pavonio ipsi (autographo) ad-hibito.” That Ruiz and Pavón’s names C. aspera (1794) and C. pyricarpa (1798) refer to the same species is clear because they described only one Siparuna with 6-8 stamens and 6-8 carpels. The other three species decribed in their Prodromus have seven stamens (C. subinodora), 60 stamens (C. muricata), and numerous stamens (C. fragante). The seven species mentioned in their Systema have seven stamens (C. subinodora), 60 stamens (C. muricata), 6-8 stamens (C. pyricarpa), 4-5 (C. dentata), 10-12 (C. tomentosei), 11-13 (C. ovalis), and numerous stamens (C. oblongifolia). Ruiz and Pavón apparently were trying to improve epithets so that they would point to the distinctive character of each species. Therefore, C. macrocarpa, a name that only appears on labels, may have become C. pyricarpa, and C. fragante may have become C. oblongifolia (see discussion of the last two under Doubtful names and Excluded Taxa).Siparuna aspera is variable in pubescence and number of tepals, which led to the description of several morphs as new species. For example, A. C. Smith (1932) suggested that S. elliptica was similar to S. amplifolia, both from Colombia and here considered synonyms of S. aspera, but thought the former was distinguishable by a less dense pubescence, receptacles being softly pilose rather than densely hispid, and 5 tepals rather than 3 or 4. However, tepal number varies from 3 to 5 on single plants of S. aspera (and in other species; cf. Flower Morphology, Anatomy, and Embryology) and pubescence varies from sparse to dense between shade and sun leaves (S. Renner, personal observation on S. aspera near Bogotá). Other entities here synonymized were described without much discussion. For example, Perkins (1916) indicated that S. podo carpa and S. gigantophylla “belong in the vicinity of S. pyricarpa, S. macrophylla, and S. exsculpta” (all here considered synonyms of S. aspera), but failed to say how they might differ from each other.In Ecuador, Siparuna aspera may be confused with S. conica and S. harlingii (see the discussion under those species for distinguishing characters). In Peru and Bolivia, it may be confused with S. subinodora from which it differs in a denser, longer, and more persistent pubescence (best seen on young branchlets and lower leaf surfaces) and usually larger flowers. Bolivian collections from around La Paz have thinner leaves than more northern collections of S. aspera. They closely resemble the type of S. spectabilis, Bang 352, from the La Paz Yungas area, and we initially tried to maintain them as a species. However, study of abundant material (during a visit to LPB in August 2001) showed that there are numerous intermediates between the thinner-leaved La Paz form and the thick-leaved remaining Bolivian collections.A few collections from Antioquia, Chocó, and Valle (Cogollo et al. 6606, Forero et al. 2848, Forero et al 2928, Luteyn et al. 12340, Sánchez S. et al. 855, Sánchez S. et al. 1279, and Silverstone-Sopkin et al. 2848) differ from typical Siparuna aspera in having pustulate fruits. Their leaves resemble those of S. aspera and S. echinata except that they are covered by a peculiar indumentum of simple or bifid hairs arranged in patches in the center of the areoles. Whether or not these female collections represent a new species may become clear once matching males are collected. (In the List of Exsiccatae these collections appear as “S. aspera or sp. nov.”)Prieto (Camp E-4949) mentions that, on average, the leaves of the female trees of S. aspera are somewhat larger and are more inclined to be rugose than those of the male trees. Further secondary sex differences, for instance in floral longevity and stem dbh, in this and other species are discussed by Feil (1992) and Nicotra (1998, 1999a, 1999b).
Distribution:
Norte de Santander Colombia South America| Antioquia Colombia South America| Boyacá Colombia South America| Caldas Colombia South America| Cauca Colombia South America| César Colombia South America| Cundinamarca Colombia South America| Huila Colombia South America| Magdalena Colombia South America| Nariño Colombia South America| Putumayo Colombia South America| Quindío Colombia South America| Risaralda Colombia South America| Santander Colombia South America| Valle del Cauca Colombia South America| Mérida Venezuela South America| Táchira Venezuela South America| Trujillo Venezuela South America| Zulia Venezuela South America| Azuay Ecuador South America| Bolívar Ecuador South America| Cañar Ecuador South America| Carchi Ecuador South America| Cotopaxi Ecuador South America| El Oro Ecuador South America| Esmeraldas Ecuador South America| Imbabura Ecuador South America| Loja Ecuador South America| Morona-Santiago Ecuador South America| Napo Ecuador South America| Pastaza Ecuador South America| Pichincha Ecuador South America| Sucumbíos Ecuador South America| Tungurahua Ecuador South America| Zamora-Chinchipe Ecuador South America| Amazonas Peru South America| Ayacucho Peru South America| Cajamarca Peru South America| Huánuco Peru South America| Junín Peru South America| Madre de Dios Peru South America| Pasco Peru South America| Piura Peru South America| San Martín Peru South America| Ucayali Peru South America| Cochabamba Bolivia South America| La Paz Bolivia South America| Cusco Peru South America|
Norte de Santander Colombia South America| Antioquia Colombia South America| Boyacá Colombia South America| Caldas Colombia South America| Cauca Colombia South America| César Colombia South America| Cundinamarca Colombia South America| Huila Colombia South America| Magdalena Colombia South America| Nariño Colombia South America| Putumayo Colombia South America| Quindío Colombia South America| Risaralda Colombia South America| Santander Colombia South America| Valle del Cauca Colombia South America| Mérida Venezuela South America| Táchira Venezuela South America| Trujillo Venezuela South America| Zulia Venezuela South America| Azuay Ecuador South America| Bolívar Ecuador South America| Cañar Ecuador South America| Carchi Ecuador South America| Cotopaxi Ecuador South America| El Oro Ecuador South America| Esmeraldas Ecuador South America| Imbabura Ecuador South America| Loja Ecuador South America| Morona-Santiago Ecuador South America| Napo Ecuador South America| Pastaza Ecuador South America| Pichincha Ecuador South America| Sucumbíos Ecuador South America| Tungurahua Ecuador South America| Zamora-Chinchipe Ecuador South America| Amazonas Peru South America| Ayacucho Peru South America| Cajamarca Peru South America| Huánuco Peru South America| Junín Peru South America| Madre de Dios Peru South America| Pasco Peru South America| Piura Peru South America| San Martín Peru South America| Ucayali Peru South America| Cochabamba Bolivia South America| La Paz Bolivia South America| Cusco Peru South America|
Common Names:
canelón, chuchapanga, cojón de chucha, lava chisme, limón de monte, Olla de mono, palo de mono, higo, higo del monte, pera de monte, añisquero, caywongue, chivato
canelón, chuchapanga, cojón de chucha, lava chisme, limón de monte, Olla de mono, palo de mono, higo, higo del monte, pera de monte, añisquero, caywongue, chivato