Myoxanthus reymondii

Rojas-Alvarado, Gustavo, Blanco, Mario A. & Karremans, Adam P., 2021, A taxonomic synopsis and morphological characterization of Myoxanthus (Orchidaceae: Pleurothallidinae), Phytotaxa 507 (3), pp. 211-258 : 248

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.11646/phytotaxa.507.3.1
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/0E3EF64D-FF82-8531-FF26-FD8CFA49FAC0
treatment provided by	Marcus
scientific name	Myoxanthus reymondii
status

Treatment

42. Myoxanthus reymondii View in CoL (Rchb.f.) Luer (1982a: 49). (Fig. 17K,L)

Basionym: Duboisia reymondii Karsten (1847: 394–395) , nom illeg.

Homotypic syononyms: Pleurothallis reymondii (H.Karst.) Reichenbach (1852: 520) View in CoL .

Dubois-reymondia palpigera Karsten (1848: 397‒398) . nom. illeg. superfl.

Humboltia reymondii View in CoL (Rchb.f.) Kuntze (1891: 668), as “ Humboldtia View in CoL ”

Dubois-reymondia reymondii View in CoL (Rchb.f.) Brieger (1977: 43). “ Dubois-raimondia raimondii ”

Pleurothallis palpigera (H.Karst.) Schlechter (1919: 63) View in CoL . nom. illeg.

TYPE:— VENEZUELA. “Caracas”: forest of Petaquire , 6000 ft., 1 Dec.1850, Wagener s.n. (holotype: W!).

Distribution: — Colombia, Ecuador and Venezuela.

Notes:— Even though the genus Duboisia Karsten (1847: 394) is an illegitimate homonym, Duboisia reymondii is both valid and legitimate according to articles 23.4 and 55.1 ( Turland et al. 2018). Additionally, when Duboisreymondia Karsten (1848: 397) was published as a substitute genus for the illegitimate Duboisia , the author used the same type as that for Duboisia and proposed the replacement name Dubois-reymondia palpigera for Duboisia reymondii , but the new name was superfluous and illegitimate. Since the combination by Reichenbach ( Pleurothallis reymondii ) can be considered as a replacement for the Duboisia reymondii under article 58.1, the correct name for this species is Myoxanthus reymondii (Rchb.f.) Luer.

Myoxanthus reymondii is similar to M. cimex but can be distinguished by the generally obtuse dorsal sepal that is not completely open vs. dorsal sepal acute, completely open and reflexed, covering the ovary and pedicel, apex of the petals round, thickened vs. ovate, thickened and lip with small acute lateral lobes vs. oblong, without lateral lobes.