Sciaphila secundiflora
Content
Description
Erect herb, 6-33 cm high, sometimes somewhat ascending, mostly branched, but often one of the twigs at a ramification broken off.
Leaves oblong to ovate, acute, c. 1.5-3 (-4) by c. 0.5-1.5 (-2) mm, sometimes semi-amplexicaul, appressed or patent to 25°.
Flowers c. 3-35, more or less all around.
Stamens 2-3, c. 0.5-0.6 mm;
Distribution
Asia-Tropical: Borneo present (Sabah present, Sarawak present); Malaya present; New Guinea present, Atjeh present, Ceylon present, Japen and Mios Num Is present, N. Sumatra present, New Britain present, New Ireland present, San Cristobal present, Solomons present, W. & E. Kalimantan present
Ceylon, Hongkong; in Malesia: N. Sumatra (Atjeh), Malaya (all parts), Borneo (Sarawak, Sabah, W. & E. Kalimantan), New Guinea (N. & SE. parts, Japen and Mios Num Is.), New Britain, New Ireland, Solomons (San Cristobal).
Notes
Fresh plant white (when young), red, pale mauve or purplish; flowers white, mauve red or purple (perianth segments sometimes with dark borders), anthers white, fruits red.
PETCH (1923, see above) regarded S. inornata as 'most closely allied to 5. secundiflora' and 'resembling S. sumatrana' but, knowing about the characters he Used distinguishing between his species and the two others and from his description of S. inornata (though I did not see the type), I think it safe to combine them.
With regard to several species here combined, which were still kept apart by GIESEN, his own key even does not work.
I did not see the type of S. astehas RIDL., but I did see RIDLEY 16312 which, according to GIESEN, is almost cotypical with the type.
PETCH (1923, see above) regarded S. inornata as 'most closely allied to 5. secundiflora' and 'resembling S. sumatrana' but, knowing about the characters he Used distinguishing between his species and the two others and from his description of S. inornata (though I did not see the type), I think it safe to combine them.
With regard to several species here combined, which were still kept apart by GIESEN, his own key even does not work.
I did not see the type of S. astehas RIDL., but I did see RIDLEY 16312 which, according to GIESEN, is almost cotypical with the type.
Citation
ALSTON 1931 – In: Fl. Ceyl.: 299
GIESEN 1938 – In: Pfl. R. Heft: 63
GIESEN 1938 – In: Pfl. R. Heft: 61
HEMSL. 1907 – In: Hook., Ic. Pl. 29: t. 2850: f. 1-6
Merr. 1921: En. Born.: 38
GIESEN 1938 – In: Pfl. R. Heft: 59
J.J. SMITH 1927 – In: Nova Guinea: 325
Ridl. 1907 – In: Mat. Fl. Mal. Pen. (Monoc.): 126
GIESEN 1938 – In: Pfl. R. Heft: 61
GIESEN 1938: p. 63. – In: Pfl. R. Heft: f. 14: 12-15
BTH. 1898 – In: Trimen, Fl. Ceyl. 4: 368
HOOK. f. 1893 – In: Fl. Br. India: 558
RENDLE 1901 – In: J. Bot.: 178
Ridl. 1915 – In: J. Fed. Mal. St. Mus.: 188
Ridl. 1917 – In: J. Fed. Mal. St. Mus.: 119
MAKINO 1905 – In: Bot. Mag. Tokyo: 141
ALSTON 1931 – In: Fl. Ceyl.: 298
Miq. 1856 – In: Fl. Ind. Bat.: 232
J.J. SMITH 1927 – In: Nova Guinea: 325
GIESEN 1938: p. 60. – In: Pfl. R. Heft: f. 14: 1-3
THW. 1861: En. Pl. Zeyl.: 294
J.J. SMITH 1927 – In: Nova Guinea: 325
GIESEN 1938: p. 61. – In: Pfl. R. Heft: f. 14: 8-11
GIESEN 1938: p. 60. – In: Pfl. R. Heft: f. 14: 4-6
J.J. SMITH 1927 – In: Nova Guinea: 325
GIESEN 1938: p. 61. – In: Pfl. R. Heft: f. 14: 7
HEND. 1939 – In: J. Mal. Br. R. As. Soc.: 82
Ridl. 1924 – In: Fl. Mal. Pen.: 364
GIESEN 1938 – In: Pfl. R. Heft: 67
Ridl. 1924 – In: Fl. Mal. Pen.: 365
J.J. SMITH 1927 – In: Nova Guinea: 325