Ficus mexicana ( Miquel 1862: 415 ) Miquel (1867: 300)

Pederneiras, Leandro Cardoso, Mansano, Vidal De Freitas & Romaniuc-Neto, Sergio, 2017, Taxonomic synopsis of the Ficus sect. Pharmacosycea (Moraceae) from Colombia, Phytotaxa 313 (1), pp. 1-22 : 13

12. Ficus mexicana ( Miquel 1862: 415) Miquel (1867: 300) .

≡ Pharmacosycea mexicana Miquel (1862: 415) .

Type:— MEXICO. Guerrero: Coyuca, Coyuca-Ancon , Río Balsas , 21 Mar 1934, G. B. Hinton 5808 (neotype, designated here: GH!; isoneotype: US!). Original type: Mexicum, an orient.?, Schiede s.n. ( B †) .

Terrestrial trees, 8–20 m tall. Leaf blade 10–16 cm long, 4.0–8.0 cm wide, obovate to elliptic, base and apex acutes, face adaxial puberulent, face puberulent or hispid; secondary veins 13–15 pairs; petiole 2.0–4.0 cm long, hispid, periderm persistent; stipules caducous, 2.0–9.0 cm long, hispid, puberulent or glabrous. Syconia solitary; peduncle 3.0–8.0 mm long, hispid; lateral bracts absent; receptacle 1.5–2.0 cm in diam. when dry, hispid or puberulent, apex rounded (the apex raised when in dry state) ( Fig. 6D ).

Distribution and habitat in Colombia: — Cauca, Magdalena, and Valle del Cauca, in lowland rainforests at elevations of 5–250 m ( Fig. 5 ).

Selected specimens: — COLOMBIA. CAUCA: Río Micay, Anoanamito, Cuatrecasas 14228 (COL, F, US).— MAGDALENA: Santa Marta, El Cabo de San Juan de Guia, Taganga, Lopez 63 (COL, NY); Pueblito to Calabazo, Parque Nacional Tayrona, Kirkbride 2568 (COL, NY, US).— VALLE DEL CAUCA: Río Cajambre, quebrada Ordoñez, Cuatrecasas 17277 (COL, F); Buenaventura, Río Yurumangui, Cuatrecasas 16118 (COL, F); Buenaventura, Río Calima, Cuatrecasas 16851 (COL, F); Río Calima, region del Chocó, Cuatrecasas 16660 (COL, F).

Notes:— The type of Ficus mexicana was probably erroneously considered as “ Mexico, Hacienda de La Laguna, 43 Schiede (U, B)” by DeWolf (1960, 1965, 1967). When analyzing the protologue ( Miquel 1862: 414) and the collection of Schiede 43 (U, B) “Hacienda La Laguna,” we noted that the former differs from the latter by the length of the petiole (2.5–4.0 vs. 1.0– 1.5 cm), the leaf blade width (3.0–6.0 vs. 6.0–8.0 cm), and the length of stipule (4.0 vs. 1.5 cm). Moreover, Miquel did not know the exact provenance in Mexico for the collection citing “Mexicum, an orient.?”, but in the collection of Schiede 43 the provenance is clear: “Hacienda La Laguna.” These contradictions confirm that the collection of Schiede 43 is not of F. mexicana . DeWolf (1960, 1965, 1967) did not clarify whether he was proposing a neotype. If this was the case, this neotype should be annulled, as the Art. 9.19 of the ICNAFP suggests ( McNeill et al. 2012) in cases of clear disagreement with the protologue. We searched for other specimens collected by Schiede in the herbarium of Berlin that could fit with the diagnosis but none were found. These were probably destroyed during World War II. Therefore we believed it is necessary to designate a neotype. We have choses the specimen Hinton 5808 because it has twigs with puberulent leaves, petioles 2.0– 2.5 cm long, 3.0–5.0 cm leaf blade wide, and stipule 3.0–4.0 cm long, all characters that are consistent with the protologue, and a collection locality in Mexico where Schiede has collected.

Figures

FIGURE 5. Distribution of Ficus gigantosyce, F. insipida, F. macrosyce, F. maxima, F. mexicana, F. mutisii and F. pulchella in Colombia based on herbarium specimens.

FIGURE 6. Twigs with syconia and stipules. A, B. Ficus macrosyce (Cogollo 2647, Londono 80). C. F. maxima (Renteria 1829). D. F. mexicana (Cuatrecasas 16118).