The delimitation, infrageneric subdivision, ecology and distribution of BomareaMirbel (Alstroemeriaceae)

Abstract

The genus Bomarea (Alstroemeriaceae) was revised for the last time by Baker (1888). Since then the number of validly published names has increased from 75 to recently 280. A revision is urgently needed. Extended field studies in Peru (A. H.) revealed the experience to start this project. In the present paper the taxonomic history of the genus is described and the delimitation of Bomarea to the closely related genus Alstroemeria is analysed. Among the most important differences between the two genera are the fruit structure and the basic chromosome numbers, in Alstroemeria x = 8 and in Bomarea x = 9. The three known subgenera of Bomarea are redefined, mainly on ovary and fruit characters, and a fourth subgenus is added. The members of subgen. Bomarea s.str. (c. 100 species) have an inferior ovary and a dehiscent capsule, in subgen. Sphaerine (c. 15) the plants are always not twining, they have an inferior ovary and indehiscent and strikingly coloured fruits. In subgen. Wichuraea (c. 15) the ovary is semi‐inferior, and the fruit is a dehiscent capsule. In Baccata Hofreiter subgen. nov. (3) the plants are twining, the ovary is inferior and develops into an indehiscent fruit with a thick fleshy pericarp. A key to determine the subgenera is given in English and Spanish. For each subgenus the typical growth forms and their variability, habitat preferences and general distribution are discussed. Field studies in Peru revealed a high variability within the populations of Bomarea. Based on these experiences the systematic value of different characters is discussed. In general, the vegetative characters were found to be most variable, while selected generative characters are appropriate to characterise systematic groups. The greatest amount of character variability was found in subgen. Wichuraea, the most constant characters are found in subgen. Sphaerine.

Flora of Guaramacal (Venezuela): Monocotyledons

“…Alzate et al (2008aAlzate et al ( , 2008b; Baker (1888); Garbiso and Estrada (2001); Hofreiter (2006); Hofreiter and Tillich (2002).…”

“…Baker (1888) proposed a classification of Bomarea based on morphology in which he recognized three subgenera. Hofreiter and Tillich (2002) added a fourth subgenus, also based on morphology. However, Alzate et al (2008a) recovered three clades in a molecular phylogenetic analysis of the genus, none of which correspond to the subgeneric groupings based on morphology.…”