Rubus quinquefoliolatus Yu & Lu (1982: 306)

Xiong, Xian-Hua, Liu, Chao, Pu, Yu-Qing & Liu, Mei, 2025, Rubus inopertus var. echinocalyx, R. pentagonus var. eglandulosus and Spiraea japonica var. pinnatifida, three synonyms of Rosaceae, Phytotaxa 697 (2), pp. 206-212 : 207-211

Rubus quinquefoliolatus Yu & Lu (1982: 306)

Type:— CHINA. Yunnan: Jinping , 13 May 1956, Yunnan Complex . Exped. 1437 (holotype PE!; isotypes IBSC!, KUN!) .

— Rubus pentagonus Wallich ex Focke (1911: 145) var. eglandulosus Yu & Lu (1982: 306) . syn. nov. Type:— CHINA. Xizang: Motuo, 2000 m, 10 August 1980, Plateau Group Inst. Bot. Acad. Sin. 14142 (holotype PE!; isotype PE!).

Notes: — Yu & Lu (1982) published Rubus pentagonus var. eglandulosus on the basis of the collection Plateau Group Inst. Bot. Acad. Sin. 14142 from Motuo, southeastern Xizang, China ( Fig. 2A ), and described it as differing from R. pentagonus var. pentagonus in having palmately 5-foliolate leaves and plants without stalked glands. However, variety eglandulosus was not compared with R. quinquefoliolatus Yu & Lu (1982: 306) , a species simultaneously published by them based on specimens collected from Yunnan and southwestern Guizhou. Rubus pentagonus var. eglandulosus and R. quinquefoliolatus both have 5-foliolate leaves and non-glandular hairs. Based on evidence from carefully comparing the morphological characteristics of specimens (including type specimens) and fieldwork, we found that R. pentagonus var. eglandulosus ( Figs. 2A & 3 ) is significantly different from R. pentagonus var. pentagonus ( Fig. 2B ) in the following morphological characteristics: leaves palmately 5-foliolate (vs. palmately 3-foliolate); petioles, pedicels and abaxial surface of the calyx without glandular hairs (vs. usually with glandular hairs); abaxial surface of the calyx unarmed (vs. with needle-like prickles); aggregate fruit and base of style villous (vs. glabrous). Whereas there is almost no morphological difference between R. pentagonus var. eglandulosus and R. quinquefoliolatus ( Fig. 2C ), suggesting these two taxa are identical. Our findings based on macromorphological characters were confirmed to some extent by pollen micromorphology data. Pollen micromorphology analyses ( Xiong et al. 2019) showed that R. pentagonus var. eglandulosus is palynologically similar to R. quinquefoliolatus instead of to R. pentagonus var. longisepalus : R. pentagonus var. eglandulosus and R. quinquefoliolatus both have striate-perforate ornamentation, while the pollen ornamentation of R. pentagonus var. longisepalus is assigned to perforate. We therefore reduce R. pentagonus var. eglandulosus to synonymy under R. quinquefoliolatus .

Rubus quinquefoliolatus is also morphologically similar to R. alpestris Blume (1826: 1108) ( Fig. 2D ), a species distributed in Malaysia and Indonesia, but differs from the latter by the following key characteristics: petioles and pedicels without glandular hairs (vs. with glandular hairs); aggregate fruit and base of style villous (vs. glabrous).

Distribution:— China (Guizhou, Yunnan and Xizang; Lu & Yu 1985, Lu & Boufford 2003).

Additional specimens examined: — CHINA. Guizhou, Anlong, Z.S. Zhang & Y.T. Zhang 4436 (PE). Xizang, Motuo, W.L. Chen 10700, 14582 (PE), X.H. Xiong 981, 1405, 1406 (CDBI), B. Xu & X.H. Xiong YLZB1151, YLZB1174 (CDBI). Yunnan, Shuangjiang, G.S. Sin 794 (PE); Wenshan, K.M. Feng 22342 (KUN).

Figures

FIGURE 2. Type specimens of Rubus pentagonus var.eglandulosus and related taxa.A.R.pentagonus var.eglandulosus, B. R. pentagonus var. pentagonus, C. R. quinquefoliolatus, D. R. alpestris.

FIGURE 3. Rubus pentagonus var. eglandulosus in the wild (China, Xizang, Motuo).A & B. Habitat, C & D. Leaves, E–G. Inflorescences, H. Flower. Scale bar: 1 cm.