Descripcion
Distribucion y Habitat
From Tierra del Fuego north to Peru. Erroneously cited from Ecuador (see notes) [83 BOL PER 85 AGS AGW CLC CLN CLS].
Sinónimos
Carex melanocystis E. Desv.
-
Carex incurva Lightf. var. melanocystis (E. Desv.) Kük. var. melanocystis (E. Desv.) Kük. Pflanzenr. 4, Fam. 20 (Heft 38): 114. 1909
Carex misera Phil. Fl. Atacam. : 53. 1860 nom. illeg., non Carex misera Buckley (1843).
Carex psammogaea Steud. Syn. Pl. Glumac. 2: 187. 1855
Carex oligantha Phil., hom. illeg. Anales Mus. Nac. Chile, Secc. 2, Bot. 8: 80. 1891 nom. illeg., non Carex oligantha Steud. (1855).
Ejemplares de referencia
Colector | N° Colect. | Especie | Departamento | Provincia | Imagen |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
1782 | b | Iglesia | San Juan | |
|
1782 | b | Iglesia | San Juan | |
|
1782 | b | Iglesia | San Juan | |
|
1782 | b | Iglesia | San Juan | |
|
1782 | b | Iglesia | San Juan | |
|
1782 | b | Iglesia | San Juan | |
|
1782 | b | Iglesia | San Juan | |
|
1782 | b | Iglesia | San Juan | |
|
3 | Santiago | Metropolitana |
|
Nombre Vulgar y Usos
Tipo y Observaciones
Material Tipo: Holotype: CHILE: Chili, C. Gay (P-032665 digital image!).
Observaciones: Iconography: Figures 1A, 2A, 3A. Additional figures in Gay
(1854: tab. 73, fig. 5), Barros (1935: 179, as Carex incurva
and C. incurva var. melanocystis), Barros (1947: tab. 174, as
C. incurva, C. incurva var. melanocystis and Carex incurva
var. misera), Wheeler (2009: 330, fig. 295, as C. maritima),
Jiménez-Mejías et al. (2020, as C. maritima).
Etymology: From the Greek melano, black, and kystis,
bladder, presumably in reference to the darkened ripe
utricles that some populations of this species may
develop.
Notes: Jørgensen, Nee & Beck (2014) considered
C. ruthsatziae G.A.Wheeler to be a synonym of
C. maritima. Despite the striking resemblance of
the two taxa, they belong to different taxonomic
groups, with C. ruthsatziae being a member of section
Abditispicae in subgenus Carex, as supported by
recent molecular results (Martín-Bravo et al., 2019).
The two species can be distinguished by the characters
mentioned in the key. See also Jiménez-Mejías et al.
(2020) for additional comments on the differences
between the two species.
The citation of C. maritima from Ecuador
(Jørgensen & León-Yánez, 1999) is erroneous. After
the study of detailed digital images of the material on
which the citation is based (ECUADOR: Chimborazo,
Laegaard 52718, QCNE-26066) we concluded that it is
C. ecuadorica beyond any doubt.