Skip to main content
Log in

Preliminary synopsis of the genus Hebecarpa (Polygalaceae)

Kew Bulletin Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

As traditionally circumscribed, the genus Polygala has been shown to be non-monophyletic, and most of the necessary generic combinations have been made for the New World species. The genus Hebecarpa, though, still needs to be addressed, as only eight species have been transferred. Even though over 65 names within Polygala are referable to Hebecarpa, preliminary study indicates that more than half the names are likely not worthy of taxonomic recognition, but careful revisionary study is necessary for fully sorting out the species and accurate synonymisation. To make the most accurate names available for modern workers, we here transfer 11 names (and associated synonyms) which we think most likely reflect discreet evolutionary lineages (species), bringing the total number of Hebecarpa species to 19. Forty-one additional names in Polygala that are attributable to Hebecarpa are enumerated but left for synonymisation or transfer after more study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abbott, J. R. (2009). Revision of Badiera (Polygalaceae) and phylogeny of the Polygaleae. Dissertation, University of Florida, Gainesville.

  • ____ (2011). Notes on the disintegration of Polygala (Polygalaceae), with four new genera for the flora of North America. J. Bot. Res. Inst. Texas 5(1): 125 – 137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barneby, R. (1970). New phanerogams from the arid Neotropics. Rhodora 72: 66 – 71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, A. W. (1895). J. Bot. 33: 108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentham, G. (1840). Plantas Hartwegianae I: 58. W. Pamplin, London.

  • ____ (1843). Plantas Hartwegianae Q: 113. W. Pamplin, London.

  • ____ (1844). The botany of the voyage of H.M.S. Sulphur. Smith, Elder & Co., London.

  • Bernardi, L. F. (2000). Consideraciones taxonómicas y fitogeográficas acerca de 101 Polygalae Americanas. Cavanillesia Altera 1: 1 – 456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blake, S. F. (1916). A revision of the genus Polygala in Mexico, Central America, and the West Indies. Contr. Gray Herb. 47: 1 – 122.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1924). Polygalaceae. North American Flora 25: 305 – 379.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandegee, T. S. (1911). Plantae mexicanae purpusianae 3. Univ. Calif. Publ. Bot. 4: 177 – 194.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1912). Plantae mexicanae purpusianae 4. Univ. Calif. Publ. Bot. 4: 269 – 281.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1917). Plantae mexicanae purpusianae 8. Univ. Calif. Publ. Bot. 6: 363 – 375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castro, S., Silveira, P., Coutinho, A. P. & Paiva, J. (2007). Heterosamara sect. Villososperma comb. nov. (Polygalaceae) from eastern Asia. Nordic J. Bot. 25: 286 – 293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chodat, R. H. (1891a). Monographia polygalacearum, 1. Mém. Soc. Phys. Genève 31, suppl. 7: 1 – 143.

  • ____ (1891b). Sur la distribution et l’origine de l’espèce et des groupes chez les polygalacées. Arch. Sci. Phys. Nat., sér. 3, 25: 695 – 714.

  • ____ (1892). Polygalaceae. In: T. Durand & H. Pittier, Primitiae florae costaricensis. Bull. Soc. Bot. Belgique 30: 298 – 305.

  • ____ (1893). Monographia polygalacearum, 2. Mém. Soc. Phys. Genève 31: 1 – 500.

  • ____ (1895). Polygalaceae novae vel parum cognitae 3. Bull. Herb. Boissier 3: 121 – 135.

  • ____ (1896). Polygalaceae. In: A. Engler & K. Prantl (eds), Die natürlichen Pflanzenfamilien 3 (4): 323 – 345. W. Engelmann, Leipzig.

  • ____ (1914). Polygalaceae novae. Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 12 (Beibl. 115): 70 – 85.

  • ____ (1917). Verh. Bot. Vereins Prov. Brandenburg 58: 148.

  • De Candolle, A. P. (1824). Prodromus systematis naturalis regni vegetabilis 1: 331. Treuttel & Würtz, Paris.

  • Eriksen, B. (1993). Phylogeny of the Polygalaceae and its taxonomic implications. Pl. Syst. Evol. 186: 33 – 55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ____, Ståhl, B. & Persson, C. (2000). Polygalaceae. In: G. Harling & L. Andersson (eds), Flora of Ecuador 65. Botanical Institute, Göteborg University, Göteborg.

  • Forest, F., Chase, M. W., Persson, C., Crane, P. R. & Hawkins, J. A. (2007). The role of biotic and abiotic factors in evolution of ant-dispersal in the milkwort family (Polygalaceae). Evolution 61: 1675 – 1694.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, A. (1852). Plantae wrightianae texano-neo-mexicanae part 1. Smithsonian Contr. Knowl. 3(5): 1 – 46.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1861). Enumeration of a collection of dried plants made by L. J. Xantus, at Cape San Lucas, etc., in Lower California, between August 1859 and Feb. 1860. Proc. Amer. Acad. Arts 5: 153 – 173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunth, K. S. (1823). In: F. W. H. A. von Humboldt, A. Bonpland & K. S. Kunth, Nova genera et species plantarum 5: 407. Sumtibus Librairie Graeco-Latino-Germanicae, Lutetiae Parisiorum.

  • McNeill, J., Barrie, F. R., Buck, W. R., Demoulin, V., Greuter, W., Hawksworth, D. L., Herendeen, P. S., Knapp, S., Marhold, K., Prado, J., Prud'homme van Reine, W. F., Smith, G. F., Wiersema, J. H. & Turland, N. J. (eds) (2012). International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (Melbourne Code) adopted by the Eighteenth International Botanical Congress Melbourne, Australia, July 2011. Regnum Veg. 154. Koeltz Scientific Books, Koenigstein.

  • Miller, P. (1768). The gardeners dictionary Ed. 8. [unpaged], Polygala n. 7. London.

  • Paiva, J. A. R. (1998). Polygalarum Africanarum et Madagascariensium prodromus atque gerontogaei generis Heterosamara Kuntze, a genere Polygala L. segregati et a nobis denuo recepti, synopsis monographica. Fontqueria 50: 1 – 346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pastore, J. F. B., Cardoso, D. B. O. S. & Aymard, G. A. (2010). A synopsis, new combinations, and synonyms in Acanthocladus (Polygalaceae). Novon 20: 317 – 324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ____ (2012). Caamembeca: Generic status and new name for Polygala subgenus Ligustrina (Polygalaceae). Kew Bull. 67: 435 – 442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ____ & Abbott, J. R. (2012). Taxonomic notes and new combinations for Asemeia (Polygalaceae). Kew Bull. 67: 801 – 813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ____ & Moraes, P. (2013). Generic status and lectotypifications for Gymnospora (Polygalaceae). Novon 22(3): 304 – 306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Persson, C. H. (2000). In: C. Persson, B. Stahl & B. Eriksen, Flora of Ecuador 65: 10. Botanical Institute, Göteborg University, Göteborg.

  • ____ (2001). Phylogenetic relationships in the Polygalaceae based on plastid DNA sequences from the trnL-F region. Taxon 50: 763 – 779.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Presl, C. (1835). Reliquiae Haenkeanae 2 (2). J. G. Calvae, Pragae.

  • Reichenbach, H. G. (1823). Iconographia botanica seu Plantae criticae 1. Lipsiæ.

  • Riley, L. A. M. (1923). Contibutions to the Flora of Sinaloa: I. Bull. Misc. Inform., Kew 1923, No. 3: 103 – 115.

  • Robinson, B. L. & Greenman, J. M. (1894). Further new and imperfectly known plants collected in Mexico. Proc. Amer. Acad. Arts 29: 382 – 394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, J. N. (1905). Studies of Mexican and Central American Plants 4. Contr. U.S. Natl. Herb. 8: 281 – 339.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1906). Studies of Mexican and Central American Plants 5. Contr. U.S. Natl. Herb. 10: 79 – 1322.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1911). Studies of Mexican and Central American Plants 7. Contr. U.S. Natl. Herb. 13: 291 – 312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schultes, J. A. (1819). In: J. J. Roemer & J. A. Schultes, Systema vegetabilium 5. J. G. Cottae, Stuttgardtiae.

  • Watson, S. (1882). Contributions to American botany X. Proc. Amer. Acad. Arts 17: 316 – 382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wendt, T. L. (1978). A systematic study of Polygala section Rhinotropis (Polygalaceae). Dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.

  • ____ (2001). Polygalaceae. In: W. D. Stevens, C. U. Ulloa, A. Pool & O. M. Montiel (eds), Flora de Nicaragua,. Monogr. Syst. Bot. Missouri Bot. Gard. 85: 2154 – 2167.

  • Willdenow, C. L. (1803). Species Plantarum 3: 889. Impensis G. C. Nauk, Berolini.

  • Wood, J. R. I. & Beck, S. G. (2013). Una revisión de Polygala L. sensu lato en Bolivia. Revista Soc. Boliv. Bot. 7: 5 – 53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wooton, E. O. & Standley, P. C. (1913). Descriptions of new plants preliminary to a report upon the flora of New Mexico. Contr. U.S. Natl. Herb. 16: 109 – 196.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Special thanks to Dr Barbara S. Carlsward (EIU) for assistance with composing the plate, and to Dr Kurt M. Neubig (SIU) for molecular lab work and phylogenetic analysis of DNA sequences that shed some light on our taxonomic understanding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. Richard Abbott.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Abbott, J.R., Pastore, J.F.B. Preliminary synopsis of the genus Hebecarpa (Polygalaceae). Kew Bull 70, 39 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12225-015-9589-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12225-015-9589-2

Key Words

Navigation