Special thanks go to Mr. Norbert Kleinmichel, Librarian of German Cactus ... G. Untersuchungen zur Verwandtschaft der Gattungen GymnocaJycium Pfeiffer, ...
ISSN 0236-4700
•
CYKKYJIEHTbI SUCCULENTS bilingual
•
..
2001.Kg 1-2 (TOM/vol IV)
CYKKYJIEHTbI/SUCCULENTS bilingual 2001 Jfg 1-2 {roM / volIY> Acknowledgments I am grateful to Werntz Greuter (Berlin-Dahlem) IIIId Gea Zijlstra (Utrecht) for nomenclatural
comments. Special thanks go to Mr. Norbert Kleinmichel, Librarian of German Cactus Society, for providing necessary old cactus literature for study. References AUGUSTIN, K. Weingartia Werdermann - mAine, av§ak take nepoznane II Ka1ctusy. 2000. Special I . S. 1-32. BACKEBERG, C. Weingarlia neocumingii Baclalberg II Kakteen Sukk. 1950. Bd 2. H. 1 S. 2. BACKEBERO, C. Die KaIcteenlexikon. Jena, 1966. BRANDT, F. Die Glieden.mg derGattung Weingartia Werdermann II Kakt.-Orch. Rtmdschau. 1983. Bd 8. H. I. S. 1-3. BRI1TON, N. L. , ROSE,]. D. TheCaclaceae. Vols 3-4. Washington, 1922-1923. 258+318 p. GREUTER, W., McNEILL, 1., BARRIE, F. R., BURDET, H. M., DEMoULIN, V., FILOUEJRAS, T. S., NIOOLSON, D. H., Sn..VA, P. C., SKOG, J. E., TREHANE, P., TURLAND, N. J., HAWKSwoR11I D. L. Intanatiooal code of botanical DOIIIeDClature (Saint Louis Code) adopted by the Sixteenth International Botanical Congress St Louis, Missouri, July-August 1999. Knnigstein, 2000. (Regnum Veg. 138). HENTzscHEL, G. Untersuchungen zur Verwandtschaft der Gattungen GymnocaJycium Pfeiffer, Weingartia Werdermann UIId Sukorelnltia Backeberg II Gymnocalycium. 1999. Bd 12. H. 2 S. 287-290. HUNT, D. R. CITES Cactaceae chccldist, ed. 2. Milbome, 1999. ITO, Y. Explanatory Diagram of Austroechinocactinae. Japan, 1957. SALM-DYCK, 1. DE. Cacleae in Horto Dyckensi cultae anno 1849. Bonn, 1850.267 p.
RE-CLASSIFICATION OF RHIPSAUDEAE, A POLYPHYLETIC TRIBE OF mE CACTACEAE DURANDE DEUNEATIO ET REVISIO CRlTlCA. TRlBUUMRHiPSALIDEAEDC ETHYLOCEREEAEF. Bwm. (CACfACEAE)
Alexander B. Doweld National Institute of Carpology (Gaertnerian Institution), Moscow The classification and phylogeny of the Rhipsalideae, usually treated as a distinct tribe or subtribe within the Cactaceae, is still in a search ofa more adequate solution of our knowledge about these plants. Buxbaum (1958) reduced this group of plants to a subtribe of the strongly widened tribe Hylocereeae including other epiphytic cereoid taxa. This approach was criticized by Volgin (1983, 1986, 1988) on the grounds of floral anatomy. Volgin (1986) re-raised the group to the tribal level, and even instituted several subtribes to accommodate known genera in different suprageneric groupings, Pfeifferinae and Schlumbergerinae namely. Barthlott (1987) published a new revolutionary treatment of the group: reduced a priori the number of the accepted genera to 4 only [Lepismium, Hatiora, Rhipsalis, and Schlumbergera). He borrowed and grossly exaggerated Volgin's (1986: 562-563) early ideas on the possible phylogenetic value of the type ofbranching (though till remaining varying within some rbipsalidean representatives). As a result, a monstrous system of classification appeared with a promise to reduce in further a number of accepted genera by submerging of Pfeiffera into Lepismium (I.c.: 97). Later Barthlott (1988) supplemented his pure nomenclatural treatment by a brief; undocumented report of seed morphology application to cactus systematics. The seed morphology becomes an instrument of supporting of the former new lumping systematics. In the early 90th, I made a preliminary study of the seed morphology of the Rhipsa/ideae and came to quite contrary solution. Seed morphology did not support Barthlott's treatment. Due to the lack of seed materials at that time, I postponed ' studies for better times. Preparing systematic seed review anticipated my phylogenetic system of classification in a forthcoming book, Classification and phylogeny of the Cactaceae (Minilexicon of the Caciaceae), herewith I critically revise the taxonomy of the tribe including its putative closest relatives - the tribe Hylocereeae. Additional data on seed micromorphology were obtained from the recently published treatise on seed morphology of subfam. Cactoideae Eaton (Barthlott, Hunt, 2000). Yet Buxbaum (1970) pointed out that rhipsalidean plants are heterogeneous by its seed micromorphology some genera possess peculiar and specialized interstitial pitting, others - do not. It is necessary to emphasize that this type of a pitting is characteristic to all members of hylocerean clade, and in addition has been noticed in other cereoid
CYKKYJIEHThIlSUCCULENTS bilingual 2001 Ng 1-2 (TOM / vollY) tribes of the cactus family (Buxbaum, 1970; Barthlott, Hunt, 2000). Reviewing the clades of the Cactaceae, I noticed that interstitial pitting is a derived structure (indicative of a specialized derivation of the taxon) within the family, and that the most primitive one is a smooth seed sculpturing which is occurred in archaic subfamily Pereskioideae Engelm., tribes Cacteae Reichenb., Echinocereeae F. Buxb., etc. The lack of such a pitting in the Rhipsalideae might refer this clade of the family into the series of archaic clades of the family, which is clearly confirmed by their floral anatomy and morphology (Volgin. 1982, 1986, 1988). The lack ofinterstitial pitting within the genus Rhipsalis (its type, in particular) indicates of the naturalness of the grouping around Rhipsalis s.m. related genera with no pitting, because it is a highly improbable scenario that the anatomical character of seed-coat might vary within taxa pressed by extremal exteranl conditions of its habitats. The morphogeny of the seed coat with pitting and non-pitting is distinct from each other, and might not be confused within putatively constructed phyletic lines. The most probable evaluation of such a character, noticing its occurrence in cereoid tribes, that interstitial pitting is a character of tribal level, and might not vary in cactus phylads. The genera and other taxa with interstitial pitting, recently placed into Rhipsalideae (Bartblott, Taylor, 1995), should be excluded from the tribe and referred to its closest relative Hylocereeae which is characterizing by such a specific pitting, as it has been done in the system of classification by Buxbaum (1970). Following a new additional criterion for the tribal circumscription, the tribe Rhipsalideae is limited to the following genera (with no interstitial pitting): Rhipsalis, Erythrorhipsalis, Lepismium, Hatiora, Rhipsalidopsis, Epiphy/lopsis, and Epiphyllanthus. The other, anomalous by seed structure, rhipsalidean genera are excluded.
Resurrection of Pfeifferinae The oligotypic genus PfeijJera has a traditionally OOIltroversial position within the cactus family. Berger (1926) referred it to the cereoid tribes of his system, noticing differences in vascular system ofovmy, and ftmicular organization. Backeberg (1959) agreed with such a judgment. In contrast, Buxbaum (1958, (970) placed Pfoiffera and its closest ally - the genus Acanthorhipsalis - into his subtribe Rhipsalidinae in the rank of a distinct 'line'. He even noticed the occurrence of the interstitial pitting in seeds of these genera, but grouping rbipsalidean plants along with hylocerean forms into a single tribe, this placement seems might be explained by a status a connecting link between cereoid forms of hylocerei and higher, specialized Rhipsalidinae. However, this idea has no support in the floral anatomy (Volgin, 1982, 1986), and both mentioned genera might not be associated with the rhipsalidean plants due to the most archaic and specialized vascular system of ovmy resembling in part the structural features found in hylocerOOid Dlsocactus. The lumping of these genera together with Hanora, Lepismium, and Rhipsalis (Gibson, Nobel, 1986) into Rhipsalts s. lanss. or Lepismium s. lanss. including Lymanbensonia, subg. Phyllorhipsalis sensu F. Buxb. p.p. and subg. Ophiorhtpsalis K. Schmn. (Barthlott, Taylor, 1995) has DO support in seed anatomy and micromorphology. The seeds of Pfeiffera have interstitial pitting, form and structure of bilar-micropylar zone resembling those of other hylocereoid genera. The anomaly of PfeijJera within Rhipsalideae has been recently detected by molecular analysis (Nyffeler, 2000). The genera are transferred into the tribe Hylocereeae and treated there as a distinct amplified subtribe Pfoifferlnae (including 3 genera: Acanthorhipsalis, Pfeiffera, and Lymanbensonia), established by Volgin (1986) as a monotypic one after thoroughful studies of the floral anatomy and morphology. The Pfeifferlnae as a distinct phyletic lineage is affJ.liated with archaic elements of the subtribe Hylocereinae, and has a parallel standing in the tribe with another former rhipsalidCan subtribe Schlumbergerlnae.
Further delimitation of Lepis",;"m The exclusion of Pfeiffora, Acanthorhtpsalis, and Lymanbensonia from the recently amplified genus Lepismium (after Barthlott, Taylor, 1995) delimited the latter genus as consisting of3 distinct subgenera: Houllena, Lepismium, and Ophiorhipsalis. The latter of them, Ophiorhipsalis, has seeds with interstitial pitting, and therefore is excluded from the genus and transferred into a newly established hylocereoid subtribe Hylorhipsalidinae (see further discussion below Wlder C pe6paMH, QIIeTO.1IIICTHI c MHOfOllY'IKOBOH HllHCpB8lUfCH, ~'11W1 -rpy6Ka c JY6qHKOBH,IlIIWMH CTaMHHO,lI;BlIMH. T H n: Rhipsalidopsis Britt. et Rose. BII,I\bI,
Epiphy/lanthus, H8MB HC1JIIO'IeHY H3 POAB Schhlmbergera (Schillmbergerinae-Hylocereeae), mropYit B OfJDl'llle Rhipsaltdopsidinae xaparrepmyeTCJI ceMeH8MB C NelkltJleTO'lBblNH ~. 3HrOMop4>HOCTh UBe'IlCOB Epiphy/lanthus, DOOBOJll:BIII8lI BCClIe,llOB8TeJIJIM puee OObe,lllllWTb:mIT POll C POIlON Schlumbergera (Barthlott, Taylor, 1995), B CBeTe BOBHlt,ll,BllllhlX crpoeHBII ceMlIJI COCTaBJUllOUUIe POll
Of PO,l\OB DOJITPH6hl
paCCNBpHB8eTClI UJ[ J[oHBepreHl'llhlIL DpH3H8IC. 06be,l\HHeHHe C BhlCOJ[OCDeUHIUIIDHpOB8HHhlM po,llOM Hatiora POAOB Rhipsa/idopsis H Epiphyllopsis B COCTaBe OfAOJU>BOro DO,llpOAB Rhipsa/idopsis (Barthlott, 1987) Be no~ABeTCJI crpoeHBeM ceMJIH H ~OB. C6mIJI:eBBe :mIX TUCOHOB C MOHOTllllllhlN po,llOM PseudozygocQCtus (Schlumbergerinae-Hylocereeae) DO CXO,l\CTBY BereT8THBHOro no6era, 06meIlICOHCIpyICInIH 3HrONop4lBOro nscmca onposepraeTCJI lIlUtB'IIIeM Y ,II,BBHOro POAB MelIClClleTO'IIIhlX cllaBeoJl H8 DOBepXllOCTB ceMllli, YU3hlB8JOmero H8 HC1JIIO'IIITelJbHO 1I:ORBepI"C1mIIoIIl xaparrep DO,l\06HOro CXO,l\CTB8. C Dpll3HllHHeM Of,I\eJJhIIhIX POIlOB Rhipsa/idopsis H Epiphy/lopsis H8MB BOCCTaHOBJIeH Ne»cpO,l\OBOIL nIDpBII RhipsapJryllopsls. J[oropYit
06L1'1110 'IlUII;e DpHC}'TCTBYeT B J[oJIlleDJ;llllX OOrallJl1lecDIX C8,11OB H mo6H1'eJ1ell JUlJ(1)'COB, 'leN ero PO,I\IITeJJbCJaSe TUCORW.
The species constituting the genus Epiphyilanthus were excluded from the genus Schlumbergera (SchlumbergerinaeHylocereeae), which is characterized by seeds with interstitial pitting in conttast to species of the subtribe Rhipsalidopsidinae. The zygomorpby of flowers of Epiphyilanthus, serving as a feature supporting congeneric treatment with the genus Schlumbergera (Bartblott, Taylor, 1995), is regarded as a convergent character. The unification of RhipsaJidopsis and Epiphy/lopsis with Hanora does not have any support from seed (this study) and floral (Volgin, 1986, 1988) anatomy andmorpbology. The relationship of them to monotypic genus Pseudozygocactus (Schlumbergerinae-Hylocereeae) with a similar vegetative shoot and structure of zygomorpbic flower disproves by interstitially pitted seeds. l. Epipbyllantbus A. Berger, 1905, Ann. Rept. Missowi Bot. Gard. 16: 84. T y pus: E. obtusangulus (K. Scbwn.) A. Berger (= E. microsphaericus (K. Scbum.) Britt. et Rose). 2 species: E. microsphaericus, E. opuntioides (Lofgren et DusBn) Moran. 2. Rbipsalidopsis Britt. et Rose, 1923, Cact. 4 : 209. == Hanora subgen. Rhipsolidopsis (Britt. et Rose) Barthlott, 1987, Bradleya, 5 : 100. T y pus: Rh. rosea (Lagerbeim) Britt. et Rose. Monotypic. 3. EpipbyUopsis A. Berger, 1929, Kakt. : 341. == Epiphyllum subgen. Epiphy/lopsis A. Berger, 1929,l.c. : vi, 97. T y pus: E. gaertneri (Regel) A. Berger. Monot)'Pic.
4. x Rbipsapbyllopsis Werderm. 1933, Kakteenk. 3 : 10 (Epiphyl/opsis A. Berger x Rhipsalidopsis Britt. et Rose). x Rh. graeseri Werdenn. (Epiphyllopsis gaertneri (Regel) A. Berger x Rhipsalidopsis rosea (Lagerbeim) Britt. et Rose).
n. Tribus Hylocereeae F. Buxb. 1958, Madroco, 14,6 : 179. T Ypus: Hylocereus (A. Berger) Britt. et Rose. TpH6a pacwupeaa 38 C'leT aHOMaJlbHbIX PHDCaJlHCOBfWIWX PO.AOB, 06pa:JylO~ or.AeJ1hHYe DO;opH6w Pfoifforinae, &hlumbergerinae H Hylorhipsa/idinae, 06aaPYlfCHBlUOuure .AOBOJlbHO 6moxoe PO.ACTBO c DO;opH6aMH Epiphyllinae (po,AW Pseudorhipsalis H Epiphyllum) H HeKoroplolMH npo,ABHlfYTWMH npe,ilCT88HreJllll\lH Disocacnnae, HMCIOIIQOOf CXO,llHWe JIHCTOBWe
31
CYKKYJIEHThI/SUCCULENTS bilingual 2001 Ng 1-2 (roM I vol IV) CTe6JUf. TIIIOKe B rpn6y 8IOIIO'Iellll rpynn.a PO.AOB Harrisia, Eriocereus H COOTIICTCTBYIOmHC 11M HOTOpo.llY B paare Of.ACJI&HOii: no.A1pn6101 Eriocereinae, KOTOplole no C1pOCIUUO cel\VlH 06p83yKIT ecrec::TaeHlllolii: 3neNCHT ntnOQCPCYC08lolX. no C1pOCIUUO ceNJIH rpn6a 06118py)1CH118CT PO.ACTBO C rpn60ii Trichocereeae, JIB1IlICTClI .AOBOJlbHO .AaneKOH B fjlHJJOreHe1'H'IecKON DJJaHe Of npe.ACTaBHTeneii: rpH6101 Leptocereeae F. Buxb. H8H60nee npHMKI'HllHlolN 3neNCHI'ON lIBJllICTClI nO.A1pH6a Weberocereinae. The tribe is widened by anomalous formerly rbipsalidean genera, herewith constituting distinct subtribes Pfeijforinae, Schlumbergerinae and Hylorhipsa/idinae, revealing close relationships with the subtribes Epiphy//inae (Pseudorhipsa/is and Epiphy//um in particular) and advanced Disocactinae, possessing somewhat similar leafy shoots. The genera Harrisia, Eriocereus and corresponding nothogenera are also included into the tribe as a distinct subtribe Eriocereinae on the basis of its similar seeds with interstitial pitting and peculiar tubercu1ate seed papillate sculpturing. Subtrib. 1. Webt!1'ocereinae Doweld, subtrib. nov. - Plantae epiphyticae, caulibus tenuibus, scandentis, teretibus, floribus injUndibulato-campanulatibus, ovario tuberculato, spinifero vel setifero, raro squamis lo/iaceis instructo, semina obavoidea, non oblonga, omamentatione cuticulari striatis,laveolis interstitialibus. T y pus: Weberocereus Britt. et Rose. nO.A1pn6a ~er aan60nee apxftHqHlole PO.llY I"HJIOQCpCyCOBIoIX, xapaKTepft3YIO~ClI HeBlllTlllfYlHMH, 06pamollih1eBH.lI.ID>lMH ceNeHaMH co crpyii:qaroH JCYTRKYnllpHOH CKYJlbmypoH H NCJICKJleT01IHhIMH fjlaaeonaNH. )l(mHClUlhle fjlopMhl Of He60JlbWIIX 3nmi>HTIIIoIX n83l1IQHX. H CTe1IlIIIUIXClI XYCTapIlH'UCOBIWIIoIX uepeo~ cJIopM (Weberocereus) .AO 3DHfjlRI'OB C JUfCTOO6p83H101NH nepHCTOpacce'lelUlhlMH &eT8IINlI (Chiapasophy//um). The subtribe consists of most archaic genera of hylocerei, characterizing by non oblong (somewhat rounded), obovoid seeds with a striate seed cuticular sculpturing and interstitial pitting. 1. Weberocereus Britt. et Rose, 1909, Contr. US Natl. Herb. 12, to : 431. == Cereus subgen. Weberocereus (Britt. et Rose) A. Berger, 1929, Kakt. : vi, 119. T Y pus: W. tunilla (F. A. C. Web.) Britt. et Rose. 4 species: W. tunilla, W. bio//eyi (F. A. C. Web.) Britt. et Rose, W. estrellensis (F. A. C. Web. ex Werckle) Doweld 2. Werddeocereus Britt. et Rose, 1909, Contr. US Natl. Herb. 12, 10 : 432. == Cereus subgen. Wercldeocereus (Britt. et Rose) A . Berger, 1929, Kakt. : vi, 118. T Y pus: W. tonduzii (F. A. C. Web.) Britt. et Rose. 2 species: W. tonduzii, W. glaber (EicbJam) Britt. et Rose. 3. Eccremocactus Britt. et Rose, 1913, Contr. US NatI. Herb. 16, 9 : 261. == Eccremocereus Fri~ ex Kreuzing. 1935, Verz. Amer. Sukk. Rev. Syst. Kakt. : 17,nom. iIIegtt. T y pus: E. bradei Britt. et Rose. 3 species: E. bradei, E. imitans (Kimnach et P. C. Hutch.) Kimnach, E. rosei Kimnach.
4. Chiopasophyllum Doweld, gen. nov. - Mamiera Baekeb. 1950, Cad. Succ. Joum. (Los Angeles), 22, 5 : 153, Plantae epiphyticae, ramis valde ascendentis. Caules planati, pinnatisecti, ad 30 em lat., sursum curvati, apice angustatique, profunde lobati (13-15 em 19., ad 4 em lat.). Areolae in lacunis ramealibus incisuralibus insertae, cum 2-3 aculeis. Flores infundibulifonnes, albi, magni, 32 em Ig., 20 em lat. Ovarium tuberculatum, spiniferum. Semina
excl. typo, p.p.
obovoidea, non oblongae, papillata, omamentatione euticulari striatis, faveolis interstitialibus. T y pus: Chiapasophyllum chrysOCQI'dium (E. J. Alexander) Doweld, comb. 'nov. == Epiphyl/um chrysocardium E. J. Alexander, 1956, Cact. Succ. Jown. (Los Angeles), 28, I : 4. ==Mamiera chrysocardia «((chrysocardiu11J»)) (E. 1. Alexander) Backeb. 1959, Cact. 2 : 737. == Selenicereus chrysocardius «((chrysocardium») (E. J. Alexander) Kimnacl1, 1991, Bradleya, 9 : 91. Genus monotypicum. Habitat in Chiapas, Mexico. 3DHfjlKllOole pacreHHll CCKJlbHO BOCXO.AlllJUlMH BCTBlINH. Cre6JD1 ynno~eHHWe, nepHCTO-p8lXe'leHHIIIC, .AO 30 eN DIHp., K8Cpxy 38KpyqClUlhle H C}')KCHHhle K KO~, C rny60KHMH .AOJlllNH (13-15 CM .An., .AO 4 CM 1IIHp.). ApeonY pacnoJlO3HOH '111CTH CCMeHH, COBMe~HHWM
py6'1HKOM c MHiCpOl1HJIe, 06paJyIOIItHMH KpynHWe B03.D;YXOHOCHWe ROJIOCTH B caMOM CCMeHH, Mexacnero'lHWMII cna6ocTpyii'laroH JIMB OTMC'laeTClI 6om.moe CXO.llCTBO B CTpOCHHH cre6neii, B '18C'111OC'n1 HX IjlH.KCHpoBaHHOH MHOrorpaHHOCTH (y npopoc11Ie HJIH YpDyrOJlI>HI>Ie, HHOr.lla oKpyr.l1He, Q,lICTIDI O,llHHO'lHl>le, BOOJIIOOIIOm;ue K3 onymeHIIYX apeoJJ, 38Bl13H norpYJKCtulhle, cre6JIH npopocTKOB 06h1'1HO 4-yrom.HI>Ie, ceMeH8 c Me>KKJIC1'O'I1IHMH IjloBeOJI8MH. T H n: H pentaptera (A. Dietr.) Doweld. 8 species: H j/occosa (Salrn-Dyck ex Pfciff.) Doweld, H monteazulensis (F. Ritter) Doweld, H rugulosa (Lem.) Doweld, H. tngonoides Doweld, H pentaptera, H. pacheco-Ieonis (LOfgren) Dowcld, H paradoxa (Salm-Dyck ex Pfeiff.) Dowcld, H sulcata (F. A. C. Web.) Doweld. Sect. I. Polygonorhipsalis Doweld, sect. et nom. BOV. == Rhipsa/is ser. F1occosae Britt. et Rose, 1923, Cact. 4 : 221 , in c/. = Rhipsa/is ser. Dissimiles Britt. et Rose, 1923, I.c. : 221 , in c/. - Coules polygoni. T y pus: H j/occosa (Salm-Dyck ex Pfeiff.) Doweld.Hylorhipsalisjloccosa (Salm-Dyck ex Pfeiff.) Dowcld, comb. Bova. == Rhipsa/isj/occosa Salrn-Dyck ex Pfeiff. 1837, Enum. Cact. : 134. == Hanotaj/occosa (Salm-Dyck ex Pfeiff.) Lem. 1839, Cact. Gen.
Nov. Sp. Nov. : 75. ==Lepismiumj/occosum (Salm-Dyck) Backeb. 1936 (1935), Kakt. ABC: 155. a) ssp.f1occosa b) ssp. pittieri (Britt. et Rose) Doweld, comb. et stat. BOV. == Rhipsa/is pittien Britt. et Rose, 1923, Cact. 4 : 233. == Lepismium pittierl (Britt. et Rose) Backeb. 1959, Cact. 2 : 692. c) ssp. pllivinigera (G. A. Lindberg) Doweld, comb. et stat. nov. == Rhipsalis puivinigera G. A. Lindberg, 1889, GarteDfl. 38 : 182. = Rhipsa/is fona/is var. minor Pfeiff. 1837, Enum. Cact. : 135. = Lepismium pulvinigerum (G. A. Lindberg) Backeb. 1936 [1935], Kakt. ABC: 155. d) ssp. hohenauensis (F. Ritter) Doweld, comb. et stat. nov. == Rhipsa/is hohenauensis F. Ritter, 1979, Kakt. Siidamer. 1 : 248. e) ssp. tucumanensis (F. A. C. Web.) Doweld, comb. et stat. BOV. == Rhipsa/is tucumanensis F. A. C. Web. 1892, Rev. Hortic. (Paris), 64 : 426. == Hanota tucumanensis (F. A. C. Web.) O. Kuntze, 1898, Rev. Gen. PI. 3, 2 : 107. == Leptsmium tucumanense (F. A. C. Web.) Backeb. 1936 [1935], Kalet. ABC: 155. - N e 0 t Y pus ( (F. A. C. Web.) Backeb. 1936 (1935), Kakt. Monteros nach Tafi del VaUe, ostl. Tafl del Valle, s.d., F. Ritter 40 (Soo 125556!) - Doweld, hic design .
37
CYKKY JIEHTbl/SUCCULENTS hilillJ.,'lw/ 20QJ Xl! J -2 (TOM f---.Y.QllYJ
Lepismium cruciforme lIy/orhip.~a/i.~ monleazu/en.~is
(F Ritter) Doweld, comb. nova.
== Rhip.wll.\· monteazulem'is F. Ritter. 1979, Kakt. Sudamer. I
2X2. lIy/orh;psali.~ rugu'o.~a
(Lcm.) Dowcld. comb. nova.
== UhiJlsalis mgulosa Lem. IX61. lIIuSlr. Hortic. X : anlc pI. 293 PI. =
I.epismilim dissimilc G . A. Lindberg. JX90. Gartenll J!) . 152 . == Rhipsalis dlssimilis (G . A. Lmdberg) K. Schum . IlI90. in Mart . FI. Brasil. 4. 2 . 2X6. C~ Hariota rugosa 0 Kuntze. I H9 I. Re\. Gen. PI. I . 263. - N eo I y pus (H COT H n): Brazil. Rio de Janeiro. Arraial do Cabo. s.d .. F. Rlttcr 12('J (SGO I 25(,(J5 ' ) (sub nom . Rhipsalis dis.\lmilis) - Doweld. hie dcsign a) ssp. rugu/osa b) ssp. epiphyl/anlhoiJes (Baekcb) Dowcld. comb, et stat. nov, JOUrll. (Los Angeles). 23. I . 1(,.
== l.epl.\·mlllm epiphyllanthoides Baekeb. 1951. Cact. Suee.
H.JI'()rhip.~a'h Irig(}noiJes Dowcld, sp. nova, == Uhipsalis trigona allett. non Pfciff. IlI37. Enum. Caet. : 133 : K. Schum I X90, in Mart . Fl. Brasil. 4. 2 . 2113 (l/uoad deser. /.01. I). ejusd. I X9R. Gcsamlbcsehr. Kakl. . (,32 ~ G. A. Lindberg. I lI9 I. GartcnO . 40 . JlI~
Brilt. cl Rosc. I'>n , Caet. 4 . 237 (cllm 011('1. Ptelln. == Hariow trigona (Pfeiff) 0 Kuntzc. Rcy Gen. PI . I 263 . == I.epismium trlgonl/m (Pfeiff.) Baekeb. l(n6 119351. Kakl. ABC 156. - Rami nl/mero.l"/. trigonl. einerco-viridi. areo/is lanOlis . .flores alhi. laterale.\·. hractcoLcpali.l" /0 . .l"tlgmati.l" 5. semina javcolihlls interstitialihlls . ... Hoi 0 I Y pus (r 0 .1 0 T H n) : Brazil. Sao Paulo. Munieip. Calia. 2X II 1930. F. C Hoehne s.n. (SP 25257 1. K. iso) fl pH M e 'I a H l! (,;' HeorHnHI~HKaLUtJI 8IUa /'epismillm trigonl/m PfcitT. (Barthlolt, Taylor. 1995 : 54) HaMH OTBCpraCTeli KaK HaXO.~lIwalieli 1\ CCpbCJHOM npoTH80pe'lHH c npOTO,10roM : 81U nljJaHI~epa 118.111CTeli HCCOMHCHHblM npe.!l.CTa8HTCJleM pO.!l.a I~epismillm B eOOT8CTeT8HH C npH8e,leHHbl\IH H:\,t xapaKTepHcTHKaMH apeo,l H cTe6.111 (areolac 2--4 lin. dislanles IMC~' apco,laMH 4-X MMJ) . IlI~aHI~cp (Pfeiffer. I.e) caM YKa:3bIBa.l 0 8O:3\tO)l(HOH npHHll,:l.lC)I(HOCTH lToro paCTCHHII K ncnHeMH)'MaM (Num forsan Lepismli spccics',' 1He BIU !lH .1cnHC\tHHla') I) . rIm.lHee ~IHOrO'tHe.leHHble aBTOpbt npHHII.1H lTOT 81U080H 1nHTeT .l.!UI coaepweHHo .ap~TOro 'Thl' ncotyplli.:at\(ln " I' J,"I'IHlIlIllIIlriw,mml PtCill. (Barthlott. Ta,lor. 1')95 54) is rcjected here hecause "rlhe serious conflict with the protologuc of Ihc Sp
