A Synopsis of the Genus Hydriastele (Arecaceae)

Abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. Summary. As a result of recent molecular systematic research, generic delimitation within a clade of four palm genera in subtribe Arecinae (Arecaceae: Arecoideae: Areceae) is reappraised. Due to the polyphyly of Gulubia and Gronophyllum, and the position of Siphokentia and Hydriastele within the clade, the four genera are here reduced to a single, more broadly defined genus, Hydriastele. The rather uniform morphology of the group supports this taxonomic change. A synopsis of the 48 currently accepted species is provided, including 34 new combinations, two new names and one new species, H. boumae W.

A classification of Selaginella (Selaginellaceae) based on molecular (chloroplast and nuclear), macromorphological, and spore features

“…For example, Sprengel (1817), Reichenbach (1828), Greville & Hooker (1831), and Kunze (1834) included all species of Selaginella in Lycopodium L. (Lycopodiaceae). The infrageneric classification of Selaginella has been notoriously contentious (Spring, 1840(Spring, , 1850Baker, 1883Baker, , 1884Baker, , 1885Baker, , 1887Kuntze, 1891;Warburg, 1900;Hieronymus & Sadebeck, 1902;Walton & Alston, 1938;Rothmaler, 1944;Tryon & Tryon, 1982;Jermy, 1986Jermy, , 1990Kung, 1988;Soják, 1993;Tzvelev, 2004;Weakley, 2012). The first comprehensive infrageneric classification that included plants now treated as Selaginella was conducted by Greville & Hooker (1831) who divided Lycopodium …”

“…Two years later, Spring (1840) Baker's (1883Baker's ( , 1884Baker's ( , 1885Baker's ( , 1887 system and replaced S. subg. Selaginella with "S. subg.…”

“…Selaginella). Walton & Alston (1938) accepted Baker's (1883, 1884, 1885, 1887 classification but also used "S. subg. Euselaginella" to replace S. subg.…”

“…6 (Baker, 1885) after the subgenus was established (Baker, 1883). Therefore, Jermy's (1986) designation of S. heterostachys as the lectotype of this subgenus is not redundant.…”

“…Heterostachys comprised the species with dimorphic, resupinate sporophylls (Baker, 1883(Baker, , 1887Warburg, 1900;Walton & Alston, 1938;Jermy, 1986Jermy, , 1990. Our expanded S. subg.…”