Urgineopsis, , Compton, 1930

Martínez-Azorín, Mario, Crespo, Manuel B., Alonso-Vargas, María Á., Dold, Anthony P., Crouch, Neil R., Pfosser, Martin, Mucina, Ladislav, Pinter, Michael & Wetschnig, Wolfgang, 2019, New combinations in the tribe Urgineeae (Asparagaceae subfam. Scilloideae) with comments on contrasting taxonomic treatments, Phytotaxa 397 (4), pp. 291-299 : 295-296

Combinations in Urgineopsis

The genus Urgineopsis was described for a single species “differing from Urginea in the gamophyllous perigone, from Drimia in the erect perigone segments and non-connivent stamens, and from Rhadamanthus in the erect flowers lacking connivent stamens” ( Compton 1930). These differences are still valid when Drimia and Urginea are considered in a narrow sense. Whereas Speta (1998a, b, 2001) accepted Urgineopsis based on morphological and phylogenetic data, Manning & Goldblatt (2018) proposed to place it in synonymy together with Geschollia Speta (2001: 169) under Drimia sect. Ledebouriopsis ( Baker 1873b: 284) Manning & Goldblatt (2018: 24) . They established this section to accommodate 11 species despite their different flower, fruit and seed morphologies. Our fieldwork combining morphological and corological studies supports the acceptance of Urgineopsis and Geschollia as distinct genera, in agreement with our phylogenetic results (Fig. 3 in Martínez-Azorín et al. 2018b).

During a field trip to Namibia in August 2016, an undescribed species of Urgineopsis was encountered in the Luderitz Peninsula (M. Martínez-Azorín et al. MMA1659, ABH74040!). It shows a single, leathery, terete leaf, tepals fused for ca. 3–4 mm to form a cup; spreading tepal tips, stamen filaments arising at the mouth of the perigone tube and slightly incurved, and with a distinctly puberulous perigone tube within. The study of herbarium collections at NBG revealed that it is conspecific with a plant collected and subsequently illustrated in 1977 by M. Bayer (Bayer 1013 NBG121176!), from south of Alexander Bay (Northern Cape, South Africa). Bayer identified it as Urginea sp. nov. This species has been recently described by Manning & Goldblatt (2018) as Drimia barbata J.C.Manning & J.M.J.Deacon in Manning & Goldblatt (2018: 47). Below we provide the necessary combination of the latter taxon into Urgineopsis . The population of U. barbata from Luderitz represents the first record of this genus for Namibia.

In establishing Urgineopsis, Compton accepted only one species, Urgineopsis salteri Compton (1930: 107) , a small taxon restricted to the mountains of the Cape Peninsula. Speta (1998a, b, 2001) later also recognised it as monotypic. Our studies evidence the existence of 5 additional taxa, originally described in Urginea , but which fit the flower, fruit and seed morphology profile of Urgineopsis . We here provide the necessary combinations in this genus. Notably, further studies are needed to resolve the taxonomy of this group, the taxa of which presently exhibit large morphological variability, including within populations.

Urgineopsis arenosa (Adamson) Mart. -Azorín, M.B.Crespo, M. Pinter & Wetschnig comb. nov. ≡ Urginea arenosa Adamson (1942: 239) , basionym. Type: ― SOUTH AFRICA: Western Cape, Simonstown (3418): ‘ Cape Peninsula, Red Hill’, (–AB), Salter 8321 (holotype, BOL!; isotypes, NBG!, K!).

Urgineopsis barbata (J.C.Manning & J.M.J.Deacon) Mart. -Azorín, M.B.Crespo, M.Pinter & Wetschnig comb. nov. ≡ Drimia barbata J.C.Manning & J.M.J.Deacon in Manning & Goldblatt (2018: 47), basionym. Type: ― SOUTH AFRICA: Northern Cape, Oranjemund (2816): Boegoeberg, S of Alexander Bay, (–DA), only materials in flower ex hort. on 1 February 1980, M. Bayer 1013 (holotype, NBG121176! [2 cross referenced sheets following Art. 8.2 Ex. 4 of the ICN, Turland et al. (2018)]).

Urgineopsis dregei (Baker) Mart. -Azorín, M.B.Crespo, M.Pinter & Wetschnig comb. nov. ≡ Urginea dregei Baker (1897: 467) , basionym. Type: ― SOUTH AFRICA: Western Cape, Worcester (3319): ‘Worcester Div., Dutoitskloof ’, (–CC), 1840, Drège 1501 (lectotype designated by Manning & Goldblatt (2018), K!; isolectotype, S [only the four fruiting specimens]).

Urgineopsis exilis (Adamson) Mart. -Azorín, M.B.Crespo, M. Pinter & Wetschnig comb. nov. ≡ Urginea exilis Adamson (1942: 240) , basionym. Type: ― SOUTH AFRICA: Western Cape, Simonstown (3418): ‘ Cape Peninsula, De Klip’, (–AD), February 1940, Salter 8312 (holotype, BOL!; isotypes, NBG!, SAM).

Urgineopsis gracilis (A.V.Duthie) Mart. -Azorín, M.B.Crespo, M. Pinter & Wetschnig comb. nov. ≡ Urginea gracilis Duthie (1928: 12) , basionym. Type: ― SOUTH AFRICA: Western Cape, Cape Town (3318): ‘Stellenbosch flats, in low-lying, clayey area’, (–DD), March 1925, A. Duthie 1446a (holotype, NBG!; isotype, BOL!).

Urgineopsis pedunculata (Adamson) Mart. -Azorín, M.B.Crespo, M.Pinter & Wetschnig comb. nov. ≡ Urginea pedunculata Adamson (1944: 134) , basionym. Type: ― SOUTH AFRICA: Western Cape, Simonstown (3418): ‘ Cape Peninsula, Kalk Bay Mountains’, (–AB), M. R. Levyns sub Adamson 3483 (holotype, BOL!).