Mouriri guianensis Aubl.

  • Authority

    Morley, Thomas. 1976. Melastomataceae tribe Memecyleae. Fl. Neotrop. Monogr. 15: 1-295. (Published by NYBG Press)

  • Family

    Melastomataceae

  • Scientific Name

    Mouriri guianensis Aubl.

  • Type

    Type. J. B. C. F. Aublet sn (lectotype, BM, lower right corner of sheet; probable isotype, Smithian Herbarium at LINN). French Guiana, probably on the savanna near the home of Mr. Duchassis. In flower and presumably fruit, January, 1762-64. See discussion.

  • Synonyms

    Petaloma mouriri Sw., Myrtus umbellata Desv. ex Ham., Eugenia brachybotrya DC., Mouriri polyantha Miq., Mouriri weddellii Naudin, Mouriri ulei Pilg.

  • Description

    Description - Typically a small often bushy tree to 10 m high with a trunk to 20 cm in diam, less often to 20 m high and the trunk to 50 cm in diam; plants glabrous except for the inflorescence; young twigs channeled or narrowly 4-winged; bark of older trunk (Williams 11600) thin, dark gray, scaly, peeling off in long strips, at times with small superficial roots; sapwood (Williams 11600) light-colored, the heartwood dark brownish, durable. Leaves glossy green, dimorphic, those of dorsiventral shoots with petioles 1.0-4.0(-5.0) mm long, the blades 3.0-13.0 cm long, 1.5-5.3cm wide, ovate to ovate-elliptic or seldom elliptic, acute to acuminate at the apex, acute with an included angle of 80° to rounded or seldom shallowly cordate at base; leaves of leader shoots shorter, relatively broad, and cordate at base when dimorphy is strong; midrib slightly rounded to flat or rarely slightly grooved above, prominent below, rounded at base, becoming 2-angled farther out; lateral nerves invisible or slightly visible above and below when fresh, invisible to prominent when dry. Midrib xylem tubular; stomatal crypts Type II or rarely approaching Type III, averaging in a leaf (15-)20-32(-44) µ in diam, 15-34 µ high, 90-260 per sq mm (extremes 13-51 µ diam, 12-38 µ high, 75-330 per sq mm); upper epidermis mostly one cell thick, very rarely two cells thick in a few places in the same leaf, usually with occasional mucilaginous walls, these sometimes absent or frequent; hypodermis present, rarely interrupted, with mucilaginous walls occasional to frequent or rarely absent, often more common in a hypodermis present above the lower epidermis than in the upper hypodermis; free stone cells present only in petiole; terminal sclereids mostly stellate but very irregular and variable, often with a strong columnar tendency, sometimes like those of M. grandiflora consisting of a short columnar segment with few to several radiating arms above and below, the central bodies when normally developed mostly (1-)1 1/2-3 times as long as wide with relatively few horizontal arms of short to medium length and usually with 1-4 vertical arms on the under side and 1-3 on the upper side, the arms straight to curved. Inflorescences axillary or at upper leafless nodes on twigs up to 5.0 mm thick, 1 or 2 per side, each (l-)3-17-flowered, 1.2-15.0(-25.5) mm long to base of farthest pedicel measured along the axes and with (l-)2-4 internodes in that length; bracts 1.0-2.6 mm long, triangular to ovate, acute, usually some or all persistent until flowering, sometimes all deciduous. Axes of inflorescence, pedicels, and sometimes the bracts and base of the ovary minutely puberulent. True pedicels 1.6-7.0(-11.0) mm long; calyx including inferior ovary yellow-green to yellow or brown, 3.6-5.2 mm long, campanulate, the ovary with a broader angle and sometimes almost truncate at base when the locules are 4 or 5; free hypanthium 1.8-2.3 mm long; calyx lobes before anthesis 0.7-1.3 mm long, 1.6-2.8 mm wide, triangular and acute to broadly rounded and often minutely apiculate, 1.0-2.0 mm long from the stamen attachment, the calyx splitting and stretching between the lobes at anthesis for 0-0.7 mm. Petals white to pink, violet, or sometimes yellow, often darker on the midvein or tip, 4.0-7.0 mm long, 2.0-6.0 mm wide, squarish or roundish to broadly ovate to trullate, acute or abruptly so, erose on the margin, with a very short claw at base. Antesepalous filaments 4.0-7.5 mm long, antepetalous ones ca 6.0-9.0 mm long; anthers yellow or apparently sometimes purple or white, 2.1-3.2 mm long; sporangia 1.7-2.3 mm long, dehiscing by elongate apical pores; gland darker than the anther, 0.3-0.9 (-1.2) mm long, 1.2-2.0 mm from apex of anther when measured from center of gland; cauda 0.7-1.0 mm long. Ovary 2-5-locular; ovules axile-basal, produced only outwardly from each placenta, or through compaction nearly axile with the attachment point at about 1/3 of the locule height above the locule base, the ovules 9-33 in all; style 10.0-13.0 mm long. Fruit edible, sweet, orange to red or sometimes purple-black, oblong-globose to globose or wider than high when more than 1-seeded, sometimes laterally flattened, crowned with the hypanthium and often a few remaining calyx lobes, 6.5-11.0 mm high excluding calyx and 6.2-13.0 mm thick when dry, estimated 8.0-15.0 mm high and 7.5-17.0 mm thick when fresh; flesh pale orange or dark yellow. Seeds 1 or 2(-3), dark to pale brown and smooth, 6.7-9.4 mm long, 5.3-8.0 mm wide, 5.1-7.4 mm thick, irregularly and broadly ellipsoid, flattened on the contact faces if more than one, with a rough roundish to elliptic or crescent-shaped hilum ca 2.5-4.5 mm wide by 1.5-3.0 mm high situated on the side near the base or angling from side to base.

  • Discussion

    used for beams in the construction of houses (Williams 11600). important edible fruit (Rusby & Squires 301; reported edible by several others).

    The type sheet at BM is mixed. It bears four shoots, those in the upper right and lower left hand corners being identified as Schomburgk 201; these are M. guianensis in the sense used here. The shoots in the upper left and lower right hand corners are noted as “Fr Aublet;” they are two different species, and the lower right one has been chosen as the lectotype. The upper left shoot is M. vernicosa Naudin; it is in flower. Judging by the known habitat preferences of the two species, the M. vernicosa specimen is probably the plant Aublet collected in November in forests near the great and last rapids of the Sinnamary River, the first of two sites he refers to in the original descriptioa The lower right plant, M. guianensis, is typical of savannas and is probably the second plant Aublet mentions, although it too is in flower whereas he says his plant from the savanna bore fruit, in January. The blooming times of the two species do not clearly distinguish them; both bloom in Oct.-Nov. as well as in May-June, so both would bear fruit in January; however, label data also show M. guianensis to bear both flower and fruit in April, which gives it a wide range of blooming times and makes it possible for it to be in both flower and fruit in January, as Aublet’s second plant may have been.

    Finally, there are fragments of a dissected fruit in a pocket on the sheet. They may be from the fruits Aublet described; the identity of those fruits unfortunately is not clear. His described and illustrated fruits definitely are not from Af. vernicosa, whose fruits in French Guiana would have ten prominent lengthwise ridges. The described fruit could have been M. guianensis, but if so it is exceptional in having four seeds; three is the usual maximum for that species. The fruit could be M. grandiflora, which has 1-5 seeds. One of the fragments of hypanthium in the pocket is relatively large and thick and could have been from Af. grandiflora but not from M. guianensis. Mouriri grandiflora in French Guiana is a plant of shady forests near streams, and would not be expected in a savanna, although presumably it might occur there. No leaves of M. grandiflora are on the sheet. However, there is at Kew an Aublet collection of M. grandiflora, in flower, which may be part of the mystery.

    Aublet’s description and illustration of the flowering material find a better overall fit in M. vernicosa than in M. guianensis, but agree in all details with neither. The whitish wood, pair of bracts “beneath” the calyx, yellow petals, and furrowed (“sillonnée”) anther (reference is to the gland) of the description all suggest Af. vernicosa, but could also be Af. guianensis, which has “light” colored sapwood, bracts not far below the ovary depending on the pedicel length, yellow petals on some plants although that is unusual, and a conspicuous anther gland which could be regarded as a short furrow. The stated bract character is contradicted by the illustration which does not show such an arrangement, if the intention was to describe bracts immediately below the ovary, as in M. vernicosa. The petal description and illustration are also contradictory: the description calls them nearly round and with a broad basal claw, which fits M. guianensis, while the drawing shows them to be ovate and unclawed, which fits M. vernicosa. Most other characters could be applied to either species.

    Apparently Aublet confused his records. His original notes on flowering material must have been taken from M. vernicosa, but he evidently modified these from the pressed material of the savanna plant, M. guianensis, thinking the two at that later time to be the same. The fruits may have come from the same M. guianensis, getting by chance an unusual 4-seeded form, or he may have picked up somewhere along a river a few fruits of M. grandiflora, perhaps even mixing them later with those of M. guianensis, taking no leaves.

    There is no indiciation that any of the early students of the genus saw Aublet’s mixed specimen at BM and made a choice among its different elements. Most use the name Af. guianensis in the sense used here. Poiret (1797) saw Leblond specimens of at least two different species from the Cayenne area in Lamarck’s herbarium, but failed to recognize the mixed nature of Aublet’s description and continued it in his own. Miquel (1844, 1850) and Sagot (1883) recognized that Aublet’s description and illustration held inconsistencies for the present sense; both used Miquel’s name M. polyantha for the present M. guianensis, but both misunderstood the element that could appropriately have been associated with the latter name: Miquel applied Af. guianensis to plants of the present M. acutiflora, Sagot to plants of the present M. sagotiana, neither species being represented in the type material. Naudin (1852) was the first accurately to name the two species that are present in the type, although he was unaware of having done so; he used Af. guianensis in the sense used here.

    Triana (1871) was the first to indicate that he actually saw type material, and he used Af. guianensis in the present sense. Cogniaux (1888, 1891) also indicated he saw Aublet material, and followed Triana in usage. It is not clear what specimen or specimens these authors studied; almost certainly it was not the one at BM. The only possibility I know of is a specimen of M. guianensis on Sheet 784 in the Smithian Herbarium at LINN, labelled “Guiana. Aublet. H. L. fil.” According to Mr. Th. O’Grady (personal communication), Executive Secretary of the Linnean Society, this specimen could quite possibly be from Aublet’s herbarium via the younger Linnaeus, although it does not bear the specific Aublet label which is on some other sheets.

    In view of the confusion in the description and illustration, and considering the facts that the two or perhaps three elements of the type sheet have all received alternative names, leaving no unsegregated element, that all are discordant with the protologue, and that type material of one of the elements was apparently seen by two authors who used Aublet’s name accordingly, it seems sensible to follow the course of least confusion, as urged in Recommendation 7B of the Rules. Therefore, present usage is that of Cogniaux and most other authors.

    The Galibi Indian name Mouririchira, recorded by Aublet for his new species, has not been reported since, and hence cannot be used to help solve the riddle of Aublet’s intent, nor can it be safely applied to any of the species involved.

    Mouriri guianensis is a wide-ranging and polymorphic species, but none of its variations appears at the moment to warrant formal taxonomic status. An attempt will be made to describe some of these variations, among which is a cline with the Guianas as a focal point.

    The leaves are typically ovate to ovate-elliptic and with the lateral veins raised and moderately visible when dry. The ovate forms, however, are largely restricted to coastal or near-coastal regions such as Trinidad, Guyana, Surinam, French Guiana, and Pará, Ceará, Bahia, and Rio de Janeiro of Brazil (ovate-elliptic forms also occur in these areas). In these regions the lateral veins are usually quite conspicuous when dry. At the other extreme, elliptic forms occur occasionally in west-central Pará, Amazonas, Mato Grosso, and Piaui, and the lateral nerves in these leaves as well as in ovate-elliptic leaves of the same regions tend to be flat and nearly invisible when dry. Nearly invisible lateral nerves have also been seen from Maranhão and Bahia.

    The petiole is usually 1.5-3.5 mm long but in west-central Pará, central Amazonas, and Mato Grosso it may be up to 4.5 or occasionally 5.0 mm long.

    Yellow petals have been reported once from the island of Marajo, Pará, twice from Maranhão, and once from Minas Gerais. White to pink petals also occur in Maranhão and probably on Marajo and in Minas Gerais although label data are lacking to verify such an assumption. Whether the yellow petals are truly regional or may be expected anywhere, whether they are locally exclusive of other colors, or even if they are consistent from year to year on the same plant, is yet to be established.

    Of all the variables, the most instructive is that of ovary size, as an indication of locule and ovule number. The locules and ovules vary respectively from 2-5 and from 9-33, and the differences are reflected rather accurately in the outside diameter of the ovary. This convenient parameter, when measured on dried material, varies from 1.0-2.2 mm. The smallest ovaries, and therefore the most reduced and specialized, occur in the Guianas, and larger sizes are found as one goes farther away from this center, especially toward the interior. The pattern resembles that of leaf form and venation and petiole length but is more precise. The differences in size appear to be generally clinal in nature, although great diversity is found in some regions; if sharp breaks exist, I have not found them. French Guiana appears to be near the center of size reduction. Specifically, sizes are as follows: French Guiana, 1.0-1.2 (8 collections); Surinam, 1.2-1.3 (2 colls.); Guyana, 1.0-1.8 (3 colls.); Venezuela, 1.2-1.9 (4 colls.); Trinidad, 1.2 (1 coll.); in Brazil, Amapá, 1.0-1.2 (1 coll.), Maranhão, 1.3-1.7 (4 colls.), Piaui, 1.3-1.6 (3 colls.), Ceara, 1.3-1.8 (3 colls.), Bahia, 1.4-1.6 (3 colls.), Minas Gerais, 1.6 (2 colls.), Rio de Janeiro, ca 1.4 (1 coll.), interior Pará, 1.5-2.0 (6 colls.), Amazonas, 1.2 (Rio Branco)-2.2 (3 colls.), Mato Grosso, 1.5-2.0 (6 colls.). The apparent correlation of this distribution at least in part with climatic differences has been discussed earlier under the topic of variation patterns.

    The major bases for the segregation of M. ulei by Pilger were an ovate-elliptic leaf and a 5-locular ovary which was nearly truncate at base. However, the leaf form is common in M. guianensis, and whenever the locules are 5 and the ovules relatively numerous they expand the lower part of the ovary more than when fewer, producing a sharper break at the ovary base and thus making it appear nearly truncate. Truncation is therefore a matter of degree if the locule and ovule numbers vary widely, as they do in M. guianensis. Ducke accepted M. ulei as valid. However, I do not find consistent differences to demarcate such a species, and regard the type collection, Ule 5915, as a member of M. guianensis with relatively large leaves and flowers and with an ovule number at the maximum of the normal range for the species.

    The ripe fruit colors of purple-black and black are reported to date only from Guyana and Surinam, elsewhere being orange to red. However, color information is lacking from many regions; the dark forms may be more widespread, and it is too soon to conclude that this feature is correlated with the small ovaries of the Guianas.

    This character reminds one of M. myrtilloides subsp parvifolia, which also has dark-fruited forms in a limited area of its range.

    The discovery of M. barinensis in Venezuela, which resembles M. guianensis except for its much larger fruits and seeds, emphasizes the importance of these parts, and tells us that the taxonomy of the group will not be secure until both flower and fruit are known over the entire range.

    One collection from near Tototobí in the basin of the Rio Demeni, Amazonas, Brazil (Prance et al 10354) is doubtfully placed in M. guianensis. It is in fruit only ; the leaves are small, tend to be elliptic, are brown when dry and the lateral nerves do not show, and are very hard to cut with a razor blade even when boiled, much of which is unusual for the species. The anatomy, however, agrees with M. guianensis.

    Distribution and Ecology: The southeast half of Venezuela, specifically in Amazonas, Bolivar, Monagas, and Delta Amacuro; in Trinidad; through the three Guianas; south through Brazil in the east half of Amazonas as far as the region of Corumbá in Mato Grosso, and south through the central and eastern states as far as Rio de Janeiro. Moist secondary and apparently primary forests, savannas, open places, and sea shores, usually near water as at the edges of marshes, swamps, streams and lakes, often low and subject to flooding as in the Brazilian varzea and igapó; reported on sand and clay soils, and from sea level to ca 300 m elevation. A Guilding collection of M. guianensis from St. Vincent (OXF) is undoubtedly from a cultivated plant; a similar specimen at GH without collector is probably a duplicate of the first.

  • Common Names

    Cascarito, cameture, cometura, cometure, Wilde kers, spikrie hoedoe, pomikie, Cruirií, urury, Socoro, Criviry, criviri miudo, criuri, creolin, cruieli, Cruily, curiry, creoly

  • Distribution

    Amazonas Venezuela South America| Bolívar Venezuela South America| Monagas Venezuela South America| Delta Amacuro Venezuela South America| Guyana South America| Suriname South America| French Guiana South America| Amazonas Brazil South America| Pará Brazil South America| Mato Grosso Brazil South America| Goiás Brazil South America| Maranhão Brazil South America| Piauí Brazil South America| Ceará Brazil South America| Alagoas Brazil South America| Minas Gerais Brazil South America| Rio de Janeiro Brazil South America| Trinidad and Tobago South America|