2 research outputs found
The poetic uses of Linnaean taxonomy from Erasmus Darwin to John Clare
No full textThis thesis challenges critical assumptions that Carl Linnaeus was a dulling if not malignant influence on Romantic poetry by exploring the ways in which Linnaean strategies of comparison and distinction, organisation and arrangement, enumeration and description find echoes in the poetry of Erasmus Darwin, William Wordsworth, and John Clare. As studies of Romantic science have proliferated in the last thirty years, research has investigated the gendered implications of the Linnaean system, as well as the imperial and commercial ramifications of botanyâs global networks. Other accounts of Linnaean botany and poetry have preferred classificatory slippages rather than taxonomyâs possibilities. By contrast, this thesis argues that Linnaeus often looked at the natural world through a poetic lens, and that works such as his Philosophia botanica (1751) pay close attention to questions of language, an attention magnified by translations such as the Lichfield Botanic Societyâs System of Vegetables (1783-5), which boasted Samuel Johnson as a consultant. Among the Lichfield Botanic Societyâs three members was Erasmus Darwin, who produced the first thoroughly Linnaean poem, The Loves of the Plants (1789). Yet the poemâs reputation as a work of literary artifice has fallen alongside Linnaeusâs own sunken currency as the author of an âartificialâ system. On the other hand, William Wordsworth and John Clare have been regularly positioned as ânaturalâ poets in opposition to the âpeepingâ botanistâs compulsion for prying and collecting. In doing so, critics have overlooked both poetsâ Linnaean engagements. Challenging allegations of the imaginative failure of Linnaeus and his system, this thesis offers a reappraisal of Linnaeus and his reception in eighteenth and early nineteenth-century Britain. By offering a reconsideration of the periodâs enthusiasm for Linnaeus and his system, it provides a more complex interpretation of Romantic responses to the natural world. </p
Prosthechea sessiliflora Higgins 1998
No full text<p> <i>Prosthechea sessiliflora</i> (Edwall) Higgins (1998: 380).</p> <p> ≡ <i>Epidendrum sessiliflorum</i> Edwall (1903: 194, t. 4). ≡ <i>Encyclia sessiliflora</i> (Edwall) Pabst (1967: 277). ≡ <i>Hormidium sessiliflorum</i> (Edwall) Pabst <i>et al.</i> (1981: 182). ≡ <i>Anacheilium sessiliflorum</i> (Edwall) Withner & Harding (2004: 115). (Figure 2).</p> <p> <b>Type:—</b> BRAZIL. S„o Paulo: [<i>habitat in silvis virgineis ad</i>] Serra Negra, January, <i>G</i>. Edwall s.n. (lost). Lectotype (<i>designated here</i>):— original line drawing reproduced in Edwall (1903: t.4). Epitype (<i>designated here</i>): — BRAZIL. Goiás: Refúgio de Vida Silvestre Serra da Fortaleza, Quirinópolis, fl. in cult., 30 April 2023, <i>I.L. de Morais 8245</i> (JAR!).</p> <p> <b>Description:—</b> Epiphytic <i>herb</i>, caespitose, 13.0–20.0 cm tall. Rhizome inconspicuous. <i>Pseudobulbs</i> ovoid to fusiform, 3.5–7.0 × 2.0– 2.5 cm, slightly compressed laterally, (1–)2-leaved. <i>Leaves</i> oblong-elliptic, 11.5–17.0 × 2.0– 2.8 cm, acute. <i>Inflorescence</i> racemose, 3.3–4.0 cm long including flowers, ca. 1.5 cm long peduncle and rachis, 2–5-flowered; spathe ovate, 1.2–1.8 × 0.6–1.2 cm long. <i>Flowers</i> non-resupinate, somewhat fleshy, overall cream to yellowish; pedicel + ovary claviform, triquetrous, ca. 10.0 × 4.0 mm long; <i>dorsal sepal</i> oblong-ovate, 10.0–11.0 × 5.0–7.0 mm, acute, margins entire, <i>laterals sepals</i> ovate, slightly asymmetrical, 10.0–11.0 × 5.0–7.0 mm, acuminate, margins entire; <i>petals</i> elliptic, slightly asymmetrical, ca. 8.0 × 4.0 mm, acute, margins undulate; <i>lip</i> adnate to the column for about half length of the column, inconspicuously 3-lobate in natural position, entire when flattened; free portion elliptic and markedly concave in natural position, with margins elevate from middle to distal portion, ovate when completely flattened, 5.0– 6.8 × 3.5–4.0 mm, obtuse in natural position, rounded when flattened; callus comprising 2 elevated parallel lamellae, extending until the midportion, ca. 2.8 mm long, glabrous. <i>Column</i> 4.0–5.0 × 3.0– 3.5 mm; clinandrium 3-dentate, teeth subequal, the midtooth ligulate, projecting over the anther, bearing a dorsal fleshy rounded appendage; anther not seen; pollinia 4. <i>Capsule</i> ellipsoid, 2.4–3.0 × 1.5–2.0 cm, triquetrous, pendant to subpatent.</p> <p> <b>Distribution and ecology:</b> —Endemic to Brazil. Although <i>P. sessiliflora</i> was described from the Atlantic Forest domain, in the region of Serra Negra, state of S„o Paulo, it was never recollected again on the domain. Pabst and Dungs (1975) cited the species to the states of S„o Paulo and Minas Gerais, the latter partially within the Cerrado domain. The recent rediscoveries of the species are in the Cerrado domain as well, in the municipalities of Quirinópolis, Goiás, and Chapadad„o do Sul, Mato Grosso do Sul (Barros <i>et al.</i> 2018, Paiva-Neto & Barros 2021), both sites within the Parnaíba River Basin (Figure 3). The specimens were found in gallery forest vegetation as epiphytes. There is no information about which pollinators are related to the species. Flowering from December to May, fruits in December.</p> <p> <b>Etymology</b>:—The specific epithet refers to the very short inflorescences.</p> <p> <b>Nomenclatural notes:</b> — Most of Edwall’s collections from Brazil are related to his work as member of the “Comiss„o Geográfica e Geológica do Estado de S„o Paulo”, whose majority of type materials are currently deposited at SP, with duplicates spread in some European herbaria (Stafleu & Mennega 2000). Regarding Edwall’s orchid types specifically, they are divided between SP and BR herbaria, since materials were sent to Alfred Cogniaux for the development of his taxonomic treatment of Orchidaceae for the <i>Flora Brasiliensis</i> (Cogniaux 1893 –1896, 1898–1902, 1904–1906). However, <i>Epidendrum sessiliflorum</i> (= <i>P. sessiliflora</i>) was described after (Edwall 1903) the publication of the volume including <i>Epidendrum</i> (Cogniaux 1898). Notwithstanding, there are Edwall’s orchid collections from Brazil deposited in BR dating until 1905, what indicates a continuous influx of materials being sent at that period. Later, Cogniaux (1906) included the species in the addenda volume of Orchidaceae, where the type was cited without herbarium indication, what suggests he did not see the material. Unfortunately, there is no sign of <i>P. sessiliflora</i> type material in SP, BR, or any of the herbaria revised by the authors, and its whereabouts remains unknown suggesting that it was likely lost.</p> <p> Herein, the necessary nomenclatural adjustments are provided, including the lectotypification of the original illustration presented in the protologue, and the indication of the material <i>I.L. de Morais 8245</i> (JAR) as epitype.</p> <p> <b>Specimens examined:</b> — BRAZIL. Goiás: Quirinópolis, Refúgio de Vida Silvestre Serra da Fortaleza, fr., 15 December 2021, <i>I.L. de Morais 6870</i> (JAR); <i>ibid</i>, fl. in cult., 30 April 2023, <i>I.L. de Morais 8245</i> (JAR).</p> <p> <b>Taxonomic discussion:</b> —Although <i>P.sessiliflora</i> has a vegetative morphology typical for the genus, with fusiform pseudobulbs somewhat laterally compressed bearing two oblong-elliptic leaves apically, its floral morphology is quite particular, especially in relation to the Brazilian species of the genus. The lip is concave, but not in a showy way as in other concave lip species such as <i>P. cochleata</i> Linnaeus (1763: 1351) Higgins (1998: 377) or <i>P. fragrans</i> Swartz (1788: 123) Higgins (1998: 377). It gives the impression of being 3-lobed in natural position, since the margins become elevate only at the distal portion of the lip, turning it into a concave shape, whereas the basal portion of the lip blade is not elevated (see Figure 2G). However, the outline shape of the lip becomes clearly entire when flattened. Another peculiar aspect of the lip is the callus morphology, consisting of two parallel and elevated lamellae, a morphological character not common in <i>Prosthechea</i>, where the callus is generally an entire and oblong pad-like elevation.</p> <p> It is interesting to point out that the specimen maintained in cultivation (<i>I.L. de Morais 8245</i>) coming from the material collected in the Refúgio de Vida Silvestre Serra da Fortaleza, presented an abnormal development of its leaves, with only one leaf fully developed. In contrast, the other leaf could not fully develop on the newest and flowering sympodium (see Figure 2A).</p> <p> <b>Phylogenetic positioning:</b> —In a recent molecular phylogenetic reconstruction of the genus, Vieira <i>et al.</i> (in press) recovered <i>P. sessiliflora</i> as an early divergent lineage of a clade that also includes two essentially Mesoamerican species, <i>P. cochleata</i> and <i>P. trulla</i> Reichenbach f. (1856: 214) Higgins (1998: 381), as sisters, which in turn is sister to a clade including <i>P. pygmaea</i> Hooker (1833: t. 3233) Higgins (1998: 380), <i>P. pseudopygmaea</i> Finet (1889: 121, t.3) Higgins (1998: 380), and <i>P. rhynchophora</i> Richard & Galeotti (1845: 20) Higgins (1998: 380), whose are also essentially Mesoamerican, except by <i>P. pygmaea</i> that is widespread distributed in the Neotropical region. That would be explained by two potential hypotheses, one considering a long-distance dispersal event of a potential Mesoamerican common ancestor, or another considering a Neotropical widespread common ancestor, with <i>P. sessiliflora</i> representing a species that evolved from relictual populations of this putative widespread common ancestor.</p> <p> <b>Preliminary conservation assessment:</b> —Based on the known records, <i>P. sessiliflora</i> has estimated EOO and AOO values of 264,264 km 2 and 20 km 2, respectively. However, it is important to mention that three of the five known records represent historical collections that do not have associated vouchers anymore (lost materials), with the most recent of those dating from 1970, without further recollections on those locations. Additionally, the region where the recent rediscoveries were found, the northeast portion of Mato Grosso do Sul and southwest portion of Goiás, are in an expanding agricultural and cattle ranching frontier within the Cerrado domain, where landscape has been dramatically modified, while the original vegetation severely reduced and fragmented (Strassburg <i>et al.</i> 2017, Renon <i>et al</i>. 2020, Morais <i>et al</i>. 2021, Colli-Silva & Morais 2022, Renon <i>et al</i>. 2023, Soares <i>et al</i>. 2023, Sousa Silva <i>et al</i>. 2023). Just to illustrate the situation of the region, the location where the specimen <i>Paiva-Neto 18</i> (SP) was recently found in Mato Grosso do Sul (gallery forests within <i>Fazenda Salto do Indaiá</i>, in the municipality of Chapad„o do Sul) was flooded after the installation of a dam (V.B Paiva-Neto pers. comm. 2021) to subsidize agricultural activities. Therefore, we are evaluating and assessing <i>P. sessiliflora</i> as an endangered species (EN) based on criteria B1 (<500 km 2 of AOO), and its conditions ‘a’ (≤ 5 known locations) and ‘b’ [observed and projected continuing decline of EOO (i), AOO (ii), extent of habitat (iii), and number of locations (iv)] of IUCN.</p> <p> Both recent rediscoveries of the species, <i>Paiva-Neto 18</i> (SP) and <i>Morais 6870</i> (JAR), also provided material for cultivation. The former has been maintained in cultivation at Orquidário Frederico Carlos Hoehne of Instituto de Pesquisas Ambientais, in S„o Paulo, whereas the latter specimen at the second author (ILM) private collection in Quirinópolis, Goiás. Efforts for <i>in situ</i> and <i>ex situ</i> conservation of the species should be encouraged, including <i>in vitro</i> germination, cultivation, and propagation.</p>Published as part of <i>Vieira, Tiago L., Morais, Isa Lucia De & Berg, Cássio Van Den, 2023, Rediscovery of Prosthechea sessiliflora (Orchidaceae, Laeliinae) in the Brazilian Cerrado domain provides valuable taxonomic data and allows nomenclatural adjustments, pp. 94-100 in Phytotaxa 620 (1)</i> on pages 96-99, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.620.1.9, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/10010983">http://zenodo.org/record/10010983</a>
