Cephalotaxus mannii Hook.

Bisht, Sunita, Khuraijam, Jibankumar Singh & Singh, Rita, 2021, Revisiting the taxonomy of the names Cephalotaxus mannii and C. griffithii (Taxaceae), Phytotaxa 501 (1), pp. 189-194 : 190-192

Cephalotaxus mannii Hook. f. (1886: t. 1523)

Lectotype (Step I. Lang et al. (2013). Step II. designated here):— INDIA. Meghalaya: Khasi Hills, Lankhla Woods, July 1885, G. Mann s.n. ( K000288019 , digital image!; isolectotype CAL447046 !) ( Fig.1 ).

Residual syntypes:— INDIA. Meghalaya: Khasi Hills, Lankhla Woods, 01 November 1885, G. Mann s.n. ( DD!), ( CAL 447050 !), ( K000288007 , K000287675 , K001325156 , digital images!), ( A00003307 , digital image!), ( GH00003308 , digital image!), ( E00112582 , digital image!), (US00012030, digital image!), ( P00731282 , digital image!) , ( PH 00004039, digital image!).

Distribution:— India (Meghalaya, Nagaland, Manipur), China (Guangdong, Guangxi, Yunnan, Tibet), Northern Myanmar, Laos (Khammouan, Vientiane), Thailand, Vietnam.

Notes:— The species is distinguished from C. griffithii by several distinctive morphological characters. Leaves in C. mannii are borne 70º–90º to the branchlets where as it is 30º–45º in case of C. griffithii . Leaves of C. mannii are 1.5– 6 cm long, 2–4 mm wide and in C. grifithii leaves are 4–9 cm long and 4–7 mm wide. One of the main distinguishing character between the two species is the leaf base. Leaf base of C. griffithii is broadly rounded whereas C. mannii leaf have narrow base. Seeds of C. griffithii are 3.5–4.5 cm long and in C. mannii seeds are 1.8–2.8 cm long.

Second-step lectotypification:— In the protologue of C. mannii , the provenance was quoted as: “Khasia Mts., in Lankhla woods, about 5,000 ft., Gustav Mann ”. During the study, we have traced out multiple sheets of (thirteen specimens) this homogenous collection (by Gustav Mann) housed at different herbaria. Farjon (2010, 2017) and Lang et al. (2013) considered the specimen at Kew bearing “ 1 November 1885, G. Mann s.n.” as a holotype. Since there was not one specimen or illustration indicated or used by Hooker, there can be no holotype according to Art. 9.1 ( Turland et al. 2018). Nor can their use of “ holotype ” be corrected to “ lectotype ” under Art. 9.10, as they did not meet requirements of Art. 7.11 (Art. 9 Note 6), hence, their reference is therefore considered as effective first step lectotypification. So, the specimen selected here to be treated as second step lectotype.

Notes on conservation status:— Cephalotaxus mannii is listed as Vulnerable in the IUCN Red List ( Liao & Yang 2013). In the eastern Himalayan region of India, populations of C. mannii and C. griffithii are threatened by shifting cultivation and forest fire. In Mizoram state, the timber of C. griffithii is used for house building and making furniture ( Bhardwaj & Gakhar 2008). However, in most of the other states in Northeastern India, populations of C. griffithii ( Fig. 2A ) remained unexplored due to remoteness of location and limited accessibility of the habitat of this species ( Moirangthem et al. 2014).

Figures

FIGURE 1. Lectotype of C. mannii, K000288019! © The Board of Trustees of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. Reproduced with the consent of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew.

FIGURE 2. A. C. mannii branch bearing immature green coloured pollen cones, Meghalaya; B. C. griffithii foliage, Manipur (Inside picture: Pollen cones).