Ophiopogon bockianus Diels (1900: 254)

Gan, Xin-Jun, Feng, Hui-Zhe, Chen, Huan-Jin, Zhong, Ping-Sheng & Fan, Qiang, 2024, Taxonomic studies on the genus Ophiopogon (Asparagaceae) I: - identity of O. albimarginatus and O. pseudotonkinensis, and a new species O. guangzhouensis from Guangdong, China, Phytotaxa 662 (2), pp. 121-136 : 122-126

Ophiopogon bockianus Diels (1900: 254) ( Figs. 1 & 2 )

Type:— China. Sichuan: Nanchuan (belonged to Chongqing after 1997) County, Chang ling kang, 28 August 1891, C. Bock & A.v. Rosthorn

641 (syntype, VO-2014558 photo!); Talu chih, IX. C. Bock & A. v. Rosthorn 984 (syntype, n.v.). = O. mairei Merrill (1913: 493) . ( Fig. 3 ). Type:— China. Yunnan: Zhaotong City , Qiaojia County, bord des torrents sous bois à Ku-Long-Tchang (fiợ场), 800 m, E. E. Maire s.n .

(holotype, P 00753592 photo!; isotype, E 00115769 photo!, E 00061625 photo! & PE 00036182!) [Note 1]. = O. pseudotonkinensis D. Fang (1998: 100) , syn. nov. ( Fig. 4 ). Type:— China. Guangxi: Hechi city, Nandan County, Chehe , on the limestone hillslopes, 19 september 1977, Nandan Exped. 4–5–333

(holotype: GXMI 051112!) [Note 2].

Note 1:— Ophiopogon bockianus was described based on two collections: C. Bock & A.v. Rosthorn 641 and C. Bock & A.v. Rosthorn 948. We have found only one sheet of the former in VO ( Fig. 2 ). In the protologue, the authors stated that O. bockianus was most closely related to O. jaburan G. Loddiges (1832 : t. 1876), but differs by its shorter peduncle. Since it was described, O. bockianus as a species has been recognized by Handel-Mazzetti (1936), Dai & Chen (1978), Chen (1988), Li (1997), Chen and N. Tamura (2000). These authors all stated that the anthers of O. bockianus are connate. Wang & Tang (1978) also described O. bockianus var. angustifoliatus F.T. Wang & Tang (1978: 252) ( Figs. 5 & 6 ). However, this variant was later evaluated as an independent species, O. angustifoliatus (F.T. Wang & Tang) S.C. Chen (1988: 141) by Chen, because it has dense nodes and stolons, which easily distinguish itself from O. bockianus .

O. mairei H. Léville (1913: 493) ( Fig. 3 ) was described on the basis of the single collection, E.E. Maire s.n., from Ku-Long-Tchang (fiợ场) in Qiaojia County, Zhaotong City, Yunnan Province, China. O. mairei as a species has been recognized by Dai & Chen (1978), Yang & Li (1990), Dai & Liang (1991), Li (in Wu 1997), and Chen & N. Tamura (2000); all of these authors stated that the anthers of O. mairei are separated. But, according to the surveys of several specimens of this plant group, Handel-Mazzetti (1936) and Averyanov et al. (2015) considered that this species is a synonym of O. bockianus in which the anthers of O. mairei is free, but very closely situated side by side, which is very close to O. bockianus . In addition, the Vietnamese specimens are somewhat large, the blades are narrower and longer, and the anthers are free ( Fig. 3 D ).

Note 2:— Ophiopogon pseudotonkinensis D. Fang (1998: 100) ( Fig. 4 ) was described based on one collection, Nandan Exped. 4–5–333 (GXMI051112!), from Nandan County, Hechi City, Guangxi, China. In the protologue, the author stated that this species is most closely related to O. tonkinensis L. Rodriguez (1928: 998) and O. marmoratus Pierre ex L. Rodriguez (in Rodriguez 1929: 997), but differs by its tepals usually recurved at the apex and anthers connate. However, it is worth noting that in O. pseudotonkinensis the reflexed tepals and connate anthers are also characteristic of O. bockianus and O. angustifoliatus . We did not know why the author considered O. tonkinensis and O. marmoratus to be similar to O. pseudotonkinensis and did not choose O. bockianus for comparison in the protologue. O. pseudotonkinensis is most similar to O. bockianus in having strongly recurved tepals and connate anthers, which are very different from O. tonkinensis and O. marmoratus . Based on the holotype, only the blade of O. pseudotonkinensis is broader than O. bockianus . But some specimens in Sichuan also have broad blades (Anonymous 3634, SM722203918 photo!; Z.Y. Zhu et al. 441, PE00291658!). Therefore, all the characters used by Fang (1998) to distinguish O. pseudotonkinensis from other species are not diagnostic.

Additional specimens examined of Ophiopogon bockianus (including O. mairei ):— CHINA. Sichuan: Hongya, Honyya Exped. 305 (SM722203915 photo!); Emeishan, S.Y. Chen et al. 3630 (SM22203914 photo!), F.T. Wang 23161 (PE00036137!). Lushan, Lushan Exped. 78-0636 (SM722203891 photo!). Chongqing: Nanchuan, G.F. Li 62517 (KUN1222903!). Jiangjin, Z.Y. Liu et al. S-2825 (IMC0051422 photo!). Shizhu, Z.Y. Liu 0621 (IMC0016582 photo!). Dashanhe, Z.Y. Liu 2033341 (IMC0016572 photo!). Guizhou: Fanjingshan, Qianbei Exped. 2106 (PE00330547!). Yunnan: Shuifu, Z.Y. Liu 2020694 (IMC0016571 photo!).

Ophiopogon mairei . CHINA. Guizhou: Suiyang , P. Wang 0643 ( ZY0004358 photo!). Hubei. Xanen, H. J. Li 3393 ( PE00291424 !). Hunan:Sangzhi, Beijing Exped.2055 ( PE01340118 !).Fenghuang, Wuling Exped.1215 ( ISBC0644244 !). Yongshun, D. G. Zhang zdg9909 ( JIU04406 photo!). Chongqing: Fengdu, Anonymous 0225 ( SM722204223 photo!). Pengshui, Anonymous 1398 ( SM722204231 photo!). Wulong, F. D. Pu & Y. L. Cao 0531 ( PE01340116 !). Hubei: Hefeng, Y. M. Wang 5714 ( PE01340115 !). Sichuan: Pingshan, Anonymous 0778 ( PE00291434 !) . VIETNAM. Son La Prov.: Van Ho Distr., Xuan Nha Municipality, Muong An village , territory of Xuan Nha natural reserve, 16 November 2013, L. V. Averyanov, T. H. Nguyen, K. S. Nguyen, N. D. Thang & L. D. Qui CPC7217 ( LE01049269 photo!; LE01049360 photo!) ; Muong An village , 15 August 2016, L. V. Averyanov CPC7070 a/13273 ( LE 01049410 photo!) ; Moc Chau Distr., Chieng Son comm., about 1 km to NE from Chieng Son Village , 27 September 2016, L. V. Averyanov, T. H. Nguyen, K. S. Nguyen, et al. CPC8076 ( LE01077636 photo!) . LAOS. Xiangkhouang Prov.: Peak Distr., Oran village , 2 April 2015, T. H. Nguyen, L. V. Averyanov, K. S. Nguyen et al. LA-VN875 ( LE01077624 photo!) ; Khoang village, Pa Khao mt., 3 March 2015, T. H. Nguyen , L. V. Averyanov, K. S. Nguyen et al. LA-VN932 ( LE01077614 photo! & LE01077613 photo!) .

Figures

FIGURE 1. Ophiopogon bockianus. A–N from E'mei Shan, Sichuan. O–T from KUN, cultivated, original locality unknown (photo by X.X. Zhu). A, O: Habit. B, C, D, E, I, P: Inflorescence. F: Flower, longitudinally sectioned. G: Flower, tepals romoved. H: Flower, some tepals romoved. J: Flower, views from side. K: Stamens; L: Flower, cut crosswise at stamens. M: Flower, cut crosswise at ovary. N: Flowers, front view. Q, R, S, T: Rhizome.

FIGURE 2. Paratype of Ophiopogon bockianus.

FIGURE 3. Ophiopogon mairei. A, B: Isotypes. C: Holotype. D: Vietnam, Son La, Xuan Nha Municipality, Muong An, L.Averyanov, N.T. Hiep, N.S. Khang, N.D. Thang & L.D. Qui 7217 (LE01049349).

FIGURE 4. Holotype of Ophiopogon pseudotonkinensis.

FIGURE 5. Ophiopogon angustifoliatus. A: Holotype. B: China, Chongqing, Chengkou, T.L. Dai 105801 (PE00036141). C, D: China, Sichuan, Tianquan, X.L. Jiang & J.H. Xiong 35272 (C: IBK00139512 & D: PE00036140).

FIGURE 6. Ophiopogon angustifoliatus. A: Habit. B: Flower, front view. C: Inflorescence and one flower longitudinally sectioned. D: Inflorescence, adaxial. original from Shennongjia, Hubei, China, photo by W. Du (WU).