Table Of ContentFurther Nomenclatural Action the Cypresses (Cupressaceae)
for
David
de Laubenfels
J.
New
Department of Geography, Syracuse University, Syracuse, York 13244, U.S.A.
[email protected]
Chad Husby* and M.
E. Patrick
Griffith
Montgomery Botanical Center, 11901 Old Cutler Road, Miami, Florida 33156, U.S.A.
* Authors correspondence: [email protected]; [email protected]
for
Abstract. The relationships among cypress species Nguyen) D. P. Little [= Xanthocyparis
i
&
Adams
of the closely related genera Cupressus L., Callitropsis Farjon T. H. Nguyen]. et al. (2009), after
DNA
Oerst., and the recently described Hesperocyparis sampling and analyzing nuclear of several
&
Bartel R. A. Price were examined using morpho- species, concurred with the taxonomic separation but
&
new
genus
logical characters. Previous studies did not fully established the Hesperocyparis Bartel R.
New New
resolve World and Old World cypresses, the A. Price to include 16 species of the World
status of Cupressus duclouxiana B. Hickel, Cupressus cypresses, with the exception of C. nootkatensis (D.
benthamii Endl., and Cupressus funebris Endl. being Don) Oerst. ex D. P. Little, which was previously
in question. Cupressus duclouxiana is sister to handled by Little (2006). Similarly, de Laubenfels
Hesperocyparis and Cupressus benthamii is sister to (2009) also concurred with Little’s (2006) analysis
new
Callitropsis, while Cupressus funebris is considered a and established the genus Neocupressus de Laub.
basal taxon to all other Cupressus investigated. The with eight species and seven varieties. The two
intrusion of Hesperocyparis lusitanica (Mill.) Bartel synonymous genera, Hesperocyparis and Neocupres-
characters into the standard descriptions of Cupressus sus, were separated in priority by five months, with
torulosa D. Don ex Lamb, is examined in order to Hesperocyparis the prior name. To finish the
An
clarify the differentiation of the respective genera. taxonomic segregation initiated by Little’s (2006)
emended
description of Callitropsis constituting a study, several nomenclatural transfers and taxonomic
The new
grade of three species provided. considerations remain for the genus Hesperocyparis
is
combination, Callitropsis funebris (Endl.) de Laub. and are addressed herein.
&
Husby, provided for Cupressus funebris. Five Since the three genera Hesperocyparis, Cupressus
is
names new
at varietal rank are transferred to L., and Callitropsis are closely related, relationships
Hesperocyparis, as H. arizonica (Greene) Bartel var.
[= Adams New
nevadensis (Abrams) de Laub. Cupressus neva- tion. et al. (2009) treated every World
densis Abrams], H. arizonica var. montana (Wiggins) cypress taxon at the species rank. While de
[= montana
de Laub. Cupressus Wiggins], H. Laubenfels (2009) suggested that Cupressus bentha-
goveniana (Gordon) Bartel var. abramsiana (C. B. mii Endl. may belong in Callitropsis, the analysis of
Wolf) de Laub. [= Cupressus abramsiana C. B. Wolf], resolved Cupressus benthamii with
Little (2006) all
H. goveniana var. pygmaea (Lemmon) de Laub. [= the other New World species, placing with them in
it
Cupressus goveniana Gordon var. pygmaea Lemmon], the genus Callitropsis. Adams et (2009) did not
al.
and H. lusitanica var. lindleyi (Klotzsch ex Endl.) de later attempt to resolve the position of those several
[=
Laub. Cupressus lindleyi Klotzch ex Endl.]. species of intermediate morphological characters,
Key
words: Callitropsis, Cupressaceae, Cupressus, including Cupressus benthamii. Further, the feasibil-
New
and Old World
Hesperocyparis. of distinguishing cypresses
ity
cladistically with exclusively morphological charac-
Three recent publications have divided the species ters has not yet been demonstrated.
commonly known as cypresses into separate genera. Morphological data continue to provide useful and
Supported by a large data set based on morphological reliable phylogenetic resolution (Zander, 2003,
data, Little (2006) decisively demonstrated that a 2007b; Lee, 2006) for organismal taxonomies.
New
division would be appropriate and assigned the Morphological character states include important
World cypresses to the genus Callitropsis Oerst. along information about organisms that can augment
&
with the Old World C. vietnamensis (Farjon T. H. molecular markers used in phylogenetic analyses
Novon 22: 8-15. Published on 10 July 2012. 10.3417/2010056
doi:
Novon
wonder that Endlicher (1847: 57) indicated “Butan et In 1968, Franco correctly specified the lectotype of
He
Nepalia” as the habitat for C. torulosa. Cupressus torulosa. did not give a description of
Wallich, who assembled the specimens cited by the species but did append a of the specimens
list
many
Don, also sent seed the same year that Cupressus consulted, of which were, in fact, Hesperocy-
modem
1830” among
torulosa was published “in 1824, and again in paris lusitanica. Only Shrestha (1974),
(Loudon, 1854: 2479). Soon young plants were under authors, restricted his brief description to characters
cultivation in Europe. In 1842, Loudon illustrated appropriate to C. torulosa. In treating the Gymno-
what is clearly the correct taxon for C. torulosa, sperms of Nepal, Shrestha presumably inspected
calling “[t]he Bhotan, or twisted, Cypress,” an actual living wild trees.
it
error, for torulosa does not refer to a twisted form Farjon (2005: 223) continued the taxonomic
(cf.
monograph
Loudon, 1854: 2479, 2329-2331; Loudon, confusion in his of the Cupressaceae,
figs.
1869: 1076, 2000). More collections of diverse describing Cupressus torulosa with the branchlets
fig.
cypresses were rapidly being delivered from India, often with drooping ends, the leaves monomorphic,
Nepal, and Bhutan, leading Lindley (1853: 168) to and the cotyledons (two)three or four(five). There is
no mention and
question whether there might be more than one of distichousness, this description
cypress native India based on differences among would encompass Hesperocyparis lusitanica. Even
to
He Eckenwalder
the specimens raised in England. presented an (2009: 231), in his recent Conifers of
same
oversized illustration (1853: 167, 105) of a plant the World, treated C. torulosa essentially the as
fig.
cultivated from Himalayan seeds described with Farjon with characters preponderant for H. lusitanica.
glaucous foliage not at all flattened, which clearly Finally, the monograph of Silba (2005) would go so
identifies this as Hesperocyparis lusitanica, although far as to treat C. torulosa as a subspecies of H.
Masters macrocarpa lusitanica. However, C. torulosa is an important tree
(1896) attributed this to C.
in India and Nepal, and the taxon needs careful
Hartw. ex Gordon.
distinction from H. lusitanica.
Various compilations in the 19th century gave
Camere
descriptions for Cupressus torulosa. (1855:
118) referred to drooping branchlets, glaucous foliage,
and glaucous seed cones, but never mentioned
la. Branchlets distichous; leaves dimorphic; cotyle-
Gordon
flattening, Hesperocyparis lusitanica.
i.e.,
(1858: also referred drooping branchlets and
69) to
glaucous leaves, which suggested H. lusitanica.
lb. Branchlets not distichous; leaves monomorphic;
Gordon “weeping
further referred to C. torulosa as the
cypress of travellers,” and he noted two cotyledons as
well as the “Twisted or Bhotan Cypress.” In spite of
Lindley’s admonition, all Himalayan cypresses were Relationship of Cupressus duclouxiana. The
Even Camus who
mistaken
as similar. (1914), whole of the characters examined resolves Cupressus
published a monograph on cypresses, repeated the
duclouxiana B. Hickel as sister to the eight species
same
critical traits as Caniere. analyzed for Hesperocyparis. Cupressus duclouxiana
It may seem remarkable that Cupressus torulosa and differs from the Old World Cupressus primarily by
Hesperocyparis lusitanica could be so unquestionably shoots that are not distichous and foliage that not
is
combined, but specimens of the two species are, in dimorphic, in marked contrast to the rest of Cupressus
fact, quite similar. They both have scale leaves and (and a large part of Cupressaceae). On the other hand,
X
same 12-20
seed cones of about the size (C. torulosa C. duclouxiana does have cotyledon characters like
mm
X
12-18 12-20 12-20 mm). The
vs. H. lusitanica Callitropsis that are not found in Hesperocyparis but
dimorphism
of C. torulosa Cupressus. This character combination
i
when
specimens is not obvious. Distichous branchlets places with Juniperus, which either sister to a
it is
pressed require close observation: glaucousness larger cypress group or in a polytomy with cypresses
generally disappears on dried specimens, and cotyle- 2006). This character suite also shared by
(Little, is
dons are rarely available. Hill and de Fraine (1908) Widdringtonia Endl., and this genus would likely
number
reported that the cotyledon is three to five for have a similar position as Juniperus had been
it
C. torulosa, which is an error, but this was repeated by included in Little’s (2006) analysis. The seed cones
&
subsequent authors (Elwes Henry, 1910; Camus, of Juniperus are more or less fleshy and do not open
1914; Ouden, 1949; Silba, 2005). Because H. when mature, and there usually one wingless seed
is
lusitanica was commonly cultivated under the name per fertile bract. The seed cones of Widdringtonia are
many
C. torulosa, the confusion is not surprising. reduced to four bracts, like of those in
