Miconia rosmarinifolia (Griseb.) M. Gómez

Bécquer, Eldis R., Bochorny, Thuane, Gavrutenko, Maria & Michelangeli, Fabián A., 2022, A revision of the “ basal-axile placentation clade ” of Miconieae, the newly erected Miconia sect. Liogieria (Melastomataceae: Miconieae) from the Greater Antilles, Willdenowia 52 (3), pp. 387-432 : 418-419

10. Miconia rosmarinifolia (Griseb.) M. Gómez in

Anales Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. 23: 68. 1894 ≡ Calycogonium rosmarinifolium Griseb., Cat. Pl. Cub. : 93. 1866.

– Lectotype (designated here): Cuba, [Prov. HolguÍn],

road to Pinal MayarÍ, 4 Aug (as appearing on specimen in GOET) 1860–1864, C. Wright 2480 (GOET 7893!;

possible isolectotypes: BM!, G-DC 317699 [photo!], GH

72012!, K 535734 [photo!], P 01903722 [photo!]; dubious isolectotypes: HAC ex HABA 822 !, NY 99413 [fragments!]). – Fig. 2E, K; 19.

= Calycogonium rosmarinifolium subsp. brachyphyllum Borhidi & O. Muñiz in Acta Bot. Acad. Sci. Hung. 17: 19. 1972. – Holotype: Cuba, prov. Oriente [HolguÍn], entre los Mulos 2100 pies y La Corea 2200 pies (camino de MayarÍ Abajo a Sierra de Cristal ), 27–28 Jul 1959, López-Figueiras UO 288 (HAC ex LS!; isotypes: HAJB 288 !, US 120730!).

= Calycogonium rosmarinifolium subsp. moanum Borhidi & O. Muñiz in Acta Bot. Acad. Sci. Hung. 17: 18. 1972 ≡ Calycogonium moanum (Borhidi & O. Muñiz) Borhidi & O. Muñiz in Bot. Közlem. 62: 26. 1975 ≡ Miconia moana (Borhidi & O. Muñiz) Bécquer & Michelang. in Brittonia 71: 105. 2018. – Holotype: Cuba, Prov. Oriente [Prov. HolguÍn], Moa, Mina Johnson, 20 Jul 1947, León LS-23198 (HAC ex LS!).

– “ Calycogonium rosmarinifolium var. mayarensis ” [sic] Kitanov in God. Sofiisk. Univ. Biol. Fak., 2 Bot. Mikrobiol. Fiziol. Biokhim. Rast. 64(2): 4. 1972, nom. inval. ( Turland & al. 2018: Art. 40.2).

– “ Calycogonium rosmarinifolium var. parvifolium ” Kitanov in God. Sofiisk. Univ. Biol. Fak., 2 Bot. Mikrobiol. Fiziol. Biokhim. Rast. 64(2): 4. 1972, nom. inval. ( Turland & al. 2018: Art. 40.2).

Morphological description — Shrubs 1–2 m tall, branched, evergreen. Indumentum of sessile or stalked stellate trichomes c. 0.1 mm long, light brown to ferruginous, on young branches, leaves, inflorescences, flowers and hypanthium. Young branches terete, slightly flattened, densely ferruginous tomentose. Mature branches with grey to whitish and fissured bark. Petiole 0.1–0.42 cm long, terete, densely ferruginous tomentose; leaf blade (0.7–)1.3–4.5 × (0.1–)0.25–0.7(–1) cm, linear to narrowly elliptic to oblong-lanceolate or ovate to elliptic to oblong-elliptic, coriaceous, base cuneate, apex rounded or obtuse to apiculate, margin strongly revolute, entire; adaxial surface flat to wrinkled, densely ferruginous tomentose when young, later glabrescent; abaxial surface densely ferruginous tomentose, later trichomes mostly turning light brown, sometimes veins becoming pubescent to glabrescent. Venation with 1 pair of secondary veins, marginal, inconspicuous to almost obscure, symmetric, basal to slightly suprabasal, placed 1–1.6 mm above base; midvein deeply impressed adaxially and prominent abaxially, secondary veins slightly impressed adaxially and visible abaxially, tertiary and quaternary veins mostly inconspicuous to obscure. Mite domatia absent. Inflorescence 0.5–0.9 × 0.7–0.9 cm, a cyme, sessile or with a peduncle 0.3–1.5 cm long, with (1–)3–5 flowers; sometimes with 2 pairs of branches, pseudopedicel absent or 0.3–0.4 cm long; bracts 2.5–6 mm long, subulate, early caducous, bracteoles 0.5–1 mm long, triangular to subulate, usually persistent. Flowers 4-merous; pedicel (0.5–) 1.4–1.6 mm long. Hypanthium 2–2.2 mm long, campanulate, free portion 1–1.5 mm long, external surface tomentose, internal surface glabrous. Calyx tube 0.4–0.5 mm long; calyx lobes 1–2 × 1.5–2 mm, not extended, broadly triangular, internal surface glabrous; calyx teeth (0.2–) 0.5–2.3 mm long, terete, obtuse, fused with and parallel to calyx lobes. Petals 4–5.5 × 2.5– 3.6 mm, obovate to spatulate, light pink to purple, glabrous, base decurrent, apex rounded to truncate or obtuse to acute. Stamens 10, deflexed in 2 groups on both sides of flower at anthesis, 3 or 4 on same side as style and 6 or 7 on opposite side, deflexed backward and filaments turning pink to red with age, falling together with petals. Filaments 2.5–3.9(–4.5) × c. 0.3 mm. Anthers 2–2.8(– 3.5) × 0.6–0.8 mm, oblong-elliptic, obtuse; connective lanceolate, projecting below thecae 0.1–0.2 mm; thecae smooth, with a ± apical pore. Ovary 2- or 3(or 4)-locular, free portion rounded, furrowed, apex deeply depressed at insertion of style, forming a ring around style; placentation axile-basal. Style 6–9 mm long, glabrous. Berries 0.4–1 × c. 0.7 cm, cylindric to globose, ≤ 20-seeded. Seeds 2–2.3 mm long.

Phenology — Flowering specimens have been collect- ed in April, May, July, October and November, fruiting specimens in May.

Distribution and ecology — Miconia rosmarinifolia is endemic to E Cuba ( Fig. 20), where occurs in Sierra de Nipe (HolguÍn), Sierra de MÍcara and Sierra Cristal (HolguÍn / Santiago de Cuba), Cerro Galano on the serpentine hills near the city of HolguÍn, the serpentine hills and coastal lowland surrounding the city of Moa, Sierra de Moa (HolguÍn) and S toward Cuchillas del Toa and Cupeyal del Norte (HolguÍn / Guantánamo) and Meseta del Guaso (Guantánamo). It grows in semi-arid montane serpentine shrub woods and dry lowland xeromorphic serpentine shrub woods ( Borhidi 1996) at 75–1300 m.

Informal conservation status — Miconia rosmarinifolia (as Calycogonium rosmarinifolium subsp. rosmarinifolium ) was preliminarily assessed in the Red List of Cuban flora as Threatened, but without a specific category, the same as the other two entities belonging to the M. rosmarinifolia complex (as C. moanum and C. rosmarinifolium subsp. brachyphyllum ) (see González-Torres & al. 2016). The EOO of M. rosmarinifolia (as broadly defined here) is estimated to be 5607 km 2 (within the limit for Vulnerable status under sub-criterion B1) and its AOO to be 39 km 2 (within the limit for Endangered under sub-criterion B2). It is known from 39 localities representing 31 locations sensu IUCN (2012), 12 included in protected areas (National Parks Alejandro de Humboldt, La Mensura-Pilotos and Pico Cristal and Protected Area with sustainable use of natural resources Cuchillas del Toa). Although there is a decline in extent and quality of habitat, and in the number of individuals in various locations due to intentional fires, felling of associated timber species, deforestation, mining and invasion of exotic species, the number of locations does not allow the species to be assessed as threatened. We have no data to estimate population size, but the species is considered to be uncommon. The populations of M. rosmarinifolia are not considered severely fragmented. Therefore, due to the lack of more precise data on the status of this species, we assess M. rosmarinifolia as Least Concern (LC).

Discussion — The Miconia rosmarinifolia complex has until now been recognized as three distinct subspecies of Calycogonium rosmarinifolium or as two species, one of them with two infraspecific taxa (see taxonomic history above). All of these taxa have 4-merous flowers and small, mostly linear to narrowly elliptic leaves with the abaxial surface densely tomentose. Borhidi & Muñiz (1971) separated these three entities, taking into account differences in the width and length of the leaves, the length of the inflorescence peduncle and the position of the fruit (sessile vs pedicellate). However, all the measurement ranges of these characters, given in the key, overlap or have continuous values. In specimens at the extreme ranges of these characters, it is possible to observe certain morphological differences, e.g. C. rosmarinifolium subsp. moanum has the longest and narrowest leaves of the three entities, with inconspicuous basal venation (vs leaves with the pair of secondary veins emerging above the base and visible in the remaining entities), pedunculate inflorescences with 1–3 flowers and minute external calyx teeth. The specimens identified as C. rosmarinifolium subsp. brachyphyllum usually have the shortest leaves in the complex, wider than in C. rosmarinifolium subsp. moanum , and mostly sessile inflorescences of 1–3 flowers. The typical specimens identified as C. rosmarinifolium subsp. rosmarinifolium have longer leaves than in C. rosmarinifolium subsp. brachyphyllum , the largest inflorescences of the three entities (pedunculate cymes of up to 5 flowers) and the largest external calyx teeth of the three entities. However, there are several specimens (in HAJB) with intermediate characters from the following gatherings: Álvarez & al. HFC-57629; Bässler & al. HFC-61197, 61406; Bisse HFC-50786; Bisse & Köhler HFC-6859, 6919, 5887; Bisse & Rojas HFC-3555, 4255; Bisse & al. HFC-49778.

Borhidi & Muñiz (1971) separated these three entities as geographically isolated: Calycogonium rosmarinifolium subsp. rosmarinifolium from Sierra de Nipe, C. rosmarinifolium subsp. brachyphyllum from Sierra de MÍcara and Sierra Cristal and C. rosmarinifolium subsp. moanum from Sierra de Moa. However, Borhidi (1996) presented a distribution map for this complex with points of presence for C. rosmarinifolium subsp. brachyphyllum in Sierra de Nipe and S of Sierra de Moa and C. rosmarinifolium subsp. rosmarinifolia in Moa. Hence there is no strict geographical isolation of these entities, and reproductive isolation may be incomplete. In addition, the delimitation between the entities is unclear or cryptic, which allows us to define them as a species complex ( Duminil & al. 2012). We consider it prudent to define the complex as Miconia rosmarinifolia s.l. until it can be evaluated in more detail.

It should be noted that two representatives of this complex were included in the phylogenetic analyses, one that could be assigned to the typical subspecies and one that matches the characters of the type of Calycogonium rosmarinifolium subsp. moanum . These two accessions are not resolved as sister to each other ( Fig. 1), but rather the typical one is resolved as sister to Miconia yamanigueyensis while the second one is resolved at the base of the clade that includes all Cuban endemics except M. javorkana and M. uninervis . However, there is no support for the position of any of these three terminals, and a sister relationship between the two specimens of M. rosmarinifolia cannot be discounted at this time. If anything, this result emphasizes the need for a careful analysis of this complex.

In the protologue of Calycogonium rosmarinifolium, Grisebach (1866) did not specify the herbarium for the type gathering. Here we designate the specimen of Wright 2480 in GOET (7893) as the lectotype because it was seen by Grisebach for his description of the species. The lectotype has the label type 7 ( Howard 1988), the same as the specimens in BM, G-DC (317699), GH (72012), K (535734) and P (01903722), so these are considered to be possible isolectotypes . However, the specimens in HAC (ex HABA 822 ) and NY (99413) do not have the original labels that Asa Gray designated for the Charles Wright materials, so they should be considered as dubious isolectotypes .