Reevesia thyrsoidea Lindley, 1827

Feng, Hui-Zhe, Meng, Kai-Kai & Wang, Long-Yuan, 2022, Taxonomic studies on the genus Reevesia (Malvaceae: Helicteroideae) I: the identities of R. thyrsoidea, Phytotaxa 547 (1), pp. 1-19 : 2-16

Reevesia thyrsoidea Lindley (8 7:). Figs. &.

Type:— CHINA. J. Reeves s. n. [holotype: K000671657 (photo!); isotype: BM000645983 (photo!)] .

= Reevesia botingensis Hsue (1963:228) . syn. nov. Type:— CHINA. Hainan, Baoting , 1 December 1954, Diaoluoshan Exped. 2864 [lectotype designated here: IBSC0285830 (photo!); isolectotypes: PE00024236 (photo!), IBK00190740 (photo!); IBSC0264051 (photo!); CDBI0113680 (photo!); HITBC012868 (photo!)].

Note:

Reevesia botingensis Hsue has been described based on one collections Diaoluoshan Exped. 2864 (barcode IBSC– 0285830; Fig. 1), collected in Diaoluoshan, Hainan of China. Since the description, R. botingensis has been recognized by Hsue (1984) and Tang et al. (2007). In the protologue, the author has stated that this species is similar with R. thyrsoidea (Fig. 2), while it differs from the latter by its leaf blade oblanceolate and long 7–20 × 2–6 cm. After checking the isotypes of R. botingensis , we found the shape and length of leaf blades varied very much. Especially the leaf blade lanceolate or oblong-lanceolate in other two isolectotypes in IBSC (Fig 1 B, barcode 012868) and HITBC (Fig. 1 D, barcode-0264051) which is not consistent with the author’s description. Furthermore, while examining the specimen (barcode IBSC–0264051), one unpublished name “ R. salicifolia Hsue ” was found. Another specimen held at HITBC (barcode HITBC–012868) was identified as R. lancifolia by Zhou in 2004. So that, R. botingensis is not a good species that can distinguish from other species of Reevesia .

In the protologue of R. thyrsoidea , the author states as the following: “the leaves are alternate, [...]; and in size they vary from three inches to nearly six in length”, so the leaf blade size of R. thyrsoidea is ca. 7.6–15.2× 2.5–6 cm. But the size of leaf blade of R. botingensis and R. thyrsoidea not have significant difference (ca. 7–20 × 2–6 cm vs. ca. 7.6–15.2× 2.5–6 cm). In fact, both the field observation and the examination of herbarium specimens consistently confirm that R. botingensis has no differences from R. thyrsoidea . Therefore, we propose to reduce R. botingensis as a synonym of R. thyrsoidea .

In the protologue, Hsue (1963) has designated Diaoluoshan Exped. 2864 in IBSC as the type specimens of R. botingensis . We have located six original specimens in CDBI, HITBC, IBK, IBCS & PE. But there are two duplicates are found in IBSC from which the lectotype could be chosen. Since that one sheet (barcode IBSC–0264051) has been labeled “ Reevesia salicifolia Hsue ”, we designate another sheet in IBSC (barcode IBSC–0285830) with a blue printed tag “TYPE” as the lectotype, and the others as the isolectotypes.

= Reevesia formosana Sprague (1914: 325) . syn. nov. Type:— CHINA. Taiwan: South Cape, A. Henry 1970 [holotype: K000671647 (photo!); isotype: US 00102197 (photo!)]. = Reevesia formosana Hayata (1920: 8) . Type:— CHINA. Taiwan: Hiiranzan, July 1912, B. Hayata & S. Sasaki s. n. (Type, TI!, barcode no see.). ≡ Reevesia taiwanensis Chun & Hsue (1947: 330) . K000671647 (photo!); isotype: US 00102197 (photo!)].

Note:

Reevesia formosana Sprague has been first described based on one collections Henry 2970 (barcode K–000671647; Fig. 3), collected in Cape, Taiwan of China. Since its description, R. formosana has been recognized by Hsue (1984) and Tang et al. (2007). In the protologue, the author states that this species is similar with R. thyrsoidea that it can be distinguishable by its branchlets densely yellowish stellate puberulent when young and the densely flowered inflorescence also with yellowish brown puberulent.

The characters of branchlets and the stellate puberulent in inflorescence varied very much in different developmental stages. And after checking the types of R. thyrsoidea , we also found that this species was also with stellate puberulent in the branchlets and inflorescence without any difference (Fig. 4). And the number of flowers in inflorescence varied very much can hardly be quantitative analyzed in the different environments and years. We further checked the other specimens of R. formosana from Taiwan Province (Fig. 5, A) and R. thyrsoidea (Fig. 5, B) from Guangdong Province, suggesting that the number of flowers has not difference between these two species. Therefore, we draw the conclusion of reducing R. formosana as a synonym of R. thyrsoidea .

= Reevesia lancifolia Hui Lin Li (1944: 208) . syn. nov. Type:— CHINA. Hainan, Dongfang (=Ganen), 19 February 1934, X. R. Liang 64955 [holotype: A00057938 (photo!); isotypes: IBSC0004175 (photo!), KUN0472658 (photo!), PE00024237 (photo!) & IBSC0285830 (photo!)], N. K. Chun & C. L. Tso 44052 [syntypes: IBK00161762 (photo!), IBSC0004176 (photo!), IBSC0263928 (photo!), PE01304812 (photo!) & SN008356 (photo!)].

Note:

In the protologue, the author states that this species is similar with R. thyrsoidea but different from both in the much narrower lanceolate. Since its description, R. lancifolia has been recognized by Hsue (1984, 1987, 2005) and Tang et al. (2007). After consulting the original materials and checking the herbarium specimens of R. lancifolia and R. thyrsoidea . We find that the size of leaf blade of R. lancifolia and R. thyrsoidea has no significant difference (ca. 8–12 × 1.5– 2.5cm vs. ca. 7.62–15.24× 2.5–6 cm). R. thyrsoidea is widely distributed in China, and has complicated and various characters including the narrower lanceolate (Fig. 3 & Fig. 6 , 7 ). Therefore, we draw the conclusion that R. lancifolia should be proposed as a synonym of R. thyrsoidea .

= Reevesia lofouensis Chun & Hsue (1947:329) . syn. nov. Type:— CHINA: Guangdong (= Kwangtung), Luofushan (= Lo-Fou Shan ), Hua-Hsou Tai , 24 July 1930, N. K. Chun 41342 [lectotype designated here: IBSC0058501 (photo!); isolecotypes: IBSC0263932 (photo!), IBSC0004174 (photo!), IBK00161740 (photo!); Guangdong, Luofushan, Chonglingguan, 3 May 1930, N. K. Chun 40829; syntypes: IBK00161741 (photo!), IBK00161742 (photo!), IBK00161743 (photo!), IBSC0263933 (photo!), IBSC 0263937 (photo!), IBSC0004173 (photo!)].

Note:

Reevesia lofouensis Chun & Hsue has been described based on two collections N. K. Chun 41342, 40829 ( Fig. 8 & 9 ) that has been collected in Luofushan of Guangdong. In the protologue, the author states that this species is similar with R. thyrsoidea and R. longipetiolata Merr. et Chun , while they can be distinguishable from the latter twos by its densely stellate–tomenntose brancnlets and peduncles, thicker, fewer veined, cuneate leaves, and tomentose not petiole not dilated at both ends. Since this description, R. lofouensis has also been recognized by both Hsue (1984) and Tang et al. (2007).

After consulting the original materials and carefully checking the herbarium specimens of R. lofouensis and R. thyrsoidea . The typus designed by Chun & Hsue and collected on July with fruits and the branchlets is old and not densely with yellowish stellate–tomenntose. We also checked the flowering paratypes of R. lofouensis (N. K. Chun 40829: IBK–00161741!, IBK–00161742!, IBK–00161743!, IBSC–0263933!, IBSC–0263937!, IBSC–0004173!) and the brancnlets with yellowish stellate–tomenntose the same as R. thyrsoidea and R. longipetiolata (Fig. 10). The leaf blades of the two species are learhery with 6 not obvious lateral veins on each side of midrib (Fig. 11 & 12). And the size of leaf blade R. lofouensis is very similar to R. thyrsoidea (ca. 10–15× 3.5–5.5 cm vs. ca. 7.6–15.2× 2.5–6.5 cm). Therefore, we draw the conclusion that R. lofouensis should be reduced as a synonym of R. thyrsoidea .

Chun & Hsue (1947) has clearly cited one gathering (N. K. Chun 41342) in IBSC as the type in the protologue. We locate two duplicates in IBSC from which the lectotype could be chosen and other two in IBK. We designate the fruiting specimen in IBSC (barcode IBSC0058501) as the lectotype, as it has been better preserved and others as isolectotypes.

= Reevesia longipetiolata Merrill & Chun (1934:40) . syn. nov. Type:— CHINA: Hainan, Manyin, Tungshan-ling , 5 April 1932, X. R. Liang (= H. Y. Liang) 61505 [holotype: A00057939 (photo!); isotypes: NY00222360 (photo!), US00512943 (photo!), K000671648 (photo!), IBSC0004171 (photo!), IBSC0004172 (photo!)].

Note:

Reevesia longipetiolata has been described based on one collection H. Y. Lang 61505 (IBSC; Fig. 13), which is collected from Dongshanling (=Tungshan-ling), Hainan of China. Since its description, R. longipetiolata has been recognized by Hsue (1984, 1987) and Tang et. al.(2007). The author states that Reevesia longipetiolata is very similar to R. thyrsoidea but differs by having larger, differently shaped, more numerously nerved leaves, longer petiole, and larger flowers. Since its first description,

After checking the hebarium specimens, we found that the delimitation was not clear enough between R. longipetiolata and R. thyrsoidea by the leave blades (ca. 7–15 cm × 4.5–6 cm vs. 7.62–15.24 cm × 3–6 cm), petiole (long ca. 2.5–4.5 cm vs. 1–3 cm), calyx (8–9 mm vs. ca. 6 mm) and fruit (long ca. 3 vs. 4 cm). The author also states that R. longipetiolata possesses more lateral veins on each side of midrib than R. thyrsoidea (8–12 vs. 5–7 lateral veins), while after checking the lectotype of R. longipetiolata , we found that the number of lateral veins have not been obviously more than R. thyrsoidea , and the shape of blade both of the two species is the same, with large overlapping (Fig. 13 & 14). Therefor, we here propose to reduce R. longipetiolata as a synonym of R. thyrsoidea .

= Reevesia macrocarpa Hui Lin Li (1943:366) . syn. nov. Type :— VIETNAM: Sai Wong Mo Shan (= Sai Vong Mo Leng) Lomg Ngong Village , Dam-ha, Tonkin, 1 September 1940, W. T. Tsang 30473 [holotype: A00057945 (photo!); isotypes: B_10_0278643 (photo!), E00031280 (photo!), G00358528 (photo!), IBSC0058502 (photo!), K000671652 (photo!)].

Note:

The author state that R. macrocarpa is distinguishable in this small genus by its rather large entirely glabrous leaves and large fruits (Fig. 15). The author also states that R. macrocarpa is similar to R. thyrsoidea (= R. longipetiolata ) but differs by its vegetative characters as well as in its larger fruits. However, after chacking the hebarium specimens, we found that the delimitation of boundaries was not clear between R. macrocarpa and R. thyrsoidea by the leave blades (ca. 13–18 cm × 4.5–6 cm vs. 7.6–15.2× 3–6 cm) and petiole (long ca. 2.5–4.5 cm vs. 1–3 cm). Based on the original materials of R. thyrsoidea , both surfaces of the leaf blade are glabrous. In addition, the size of fruit of R. macrocarpa and R. thyrsoidea also have no obvious difference (long ca. 5 vs. 4 cm) (Fig. 16). R. thyrsoidea with the big fruit is widely distributed in South China (Fig. 17). Therefore, we propose to reduce R. macrocarpa as a synonym of R. longipetiolata , which is also the synonym of R. thyrsoidea .

= Reevesia parvifolia Hsue (1963:274) . syn. nov. Type:— VIETNAM. without detailed location. H. D. Zeng 29754 [holotype: IBSC0264002 (photo!)]

Note:

Reevesia parvifolia Hsue (1963:274) has been first described based on one collection H. D. Zeng 29754, which is collected from Vietnam without detailed location. Since its description, R. parvifolia has been recognized by Lê (2003).

In the protologue, the author states that Reevesia parvifolia is similar to R. thyrsoidea Lindl. , but is different by the smaller flower and leave blades. After checking the original materials of R. parvifolia and R. thyrsoidea , we found these differences was not obvious (Pedicels 6 mm vs. 3–5 mm; Calyx ca. 6 mm vs. 6 mm; Petals long ca. 11 mm vs. 10 mm; Leave blade 2.5–5 × 1.5–2.5 cm vs. 5–7 × 2.5–3 cm) (Fig. 18). In the protologue, the author states that R. parvifolia is also similar with R. formosana Sprague (non Hayata), while it was distinguishable due to the branchlets of latter species densely with yellowish stellate puberulent when young. However, the stellate puberulent on the branchlets is variable, as we have discussed on R. formosana . Therefore, we propose to reduce R. parvifolia as a synonym of R. thyrsoidea .

= Reevesia pycnantha Ling (1951:205) . syn. nov. Type :— CHINA. Fujiang: Jiangle, 280 m, 10 July 1945, L. G. Lin 594 [holotype: AU015100 (photo!); isolectotype: PE00024234 (photo!)); Sanyuan to Jikou, 22 May 1945, L. G. Lin 256 (paratype: PE00024233 (photo!); FJSI025920 (photo!)].

Note:

In the protologue, the author states that this species is similar to R. formosana Sprague (non Hayata) but with the smaller flower (Fig. 19). After checking the original materials of R. formosana and R. pycnantha , we found that the flower of the two species have no significant difference in size (pedicels 2–3 mm vs. 2–3 mm; calyx ca. 5 mm vs. 3 mm; petals long ca. 7 mm vs. 7 mm).

The author also states that Reevesia pycnantha is similar to R. thyrsoidea while it has the smaller flower, longer pedicel, densely thyrse and bigger leaves than the latter. After checking the original materials of R. thyrsoidea , these characters present large overlapping between the twos and show little difference (pedicels 2–3 mm vs. 3–5 mm; calyx ca. 5 mm vs. 6 mm; petals long ca. 7 mm vs. 10 mm; leave blade 8–12 × 2.5–5 cm vs. 7.6–15.2 cm × 3–6 cm). In fact, the number of flowers in inflorescence changeable very much in the living condition and the different years for R. pycnantha . Therefore, we here propose to reduce R. pycnantha as a synonym of R. thyrsoidea .

= Reevesia shangszeensis Huse (1963:274) . syn. nov. Type:— CHINA. Guangxi: Shangsi , 15 May 1933, H. D. Zeng 22370 [holotype: IBSC0264050 (photo!); isotypes: A00057940 (photo!); BM000645981 (photo!); IBK00190746 (photo!)].

Note:

The key characteristic of Reevesia shangszeensis is that the inflorescence of this species densely with multi–flowers (Fig. 20). But the number of flowers in inflorescence varied very much in the living condition and the different years also can hardly be quantitative analyzed, for example one isotype of R. shangszeensis (Fig. 20 C) was less than other typus. In the protologue, the author stated that this species has puberulent petals, which was the same as R. thyrsoidea , after checking some materials and specimens of R. thyrsoidea (Feng 1984, Tang et al. 2007). Therefor we made the conclusion to reduce R. shangszeensis as a synonym of R. thyrsoidea .

Description of Reevesia thyrsoidea

Trees, evergreen; bark gray-brown. Branchlets brownish black when dried, sparsely stellate puberulent. Petiole 1–6 cm, swollen at both ends; leaf blade oblong to elliptic, 2.5–18 × 1.5–6 cm, leathery, both surfaces glabrous, lateral veins 5–7 on each side of midrib, base rounded or obtuse, apex acute or acuminate. Inflorescence cymose– corymbose, densely flowered, puberulent. Calyx campanulate, ca. 6 mm, abaxially stellate puberulent, adaxially hairy on upper part, 5–lobed, lobes ca. 2 mm, apex acute. Petals 5, white, spatulate, slightly extending outward, ca. 10 mm. Androgynophore 2–3 cm. Ovary globose, 5–celled, hairy. Capsule on ca. 4.5 cm stipe, oblong–pyriform, 5–angular, ca. 3 cm, puberulent. Seeds ca. 2-4 cm including wing.

Phenology:—Flowering from March to April; fruiting from September to December.

Habitats:—Forested slopes or stream banks; 500–1500 m.

Distribution:— China (Guangdong Guangxi, Guizhou, Jiangxi, Taiwan, Yunnan), N Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia.

Additional specimens examined:— CHINA. Guangdong: Huiyang country, W. T. Tsang 25734 ( IBSC) ; Xinfeng country, L. Deng 8016 ( IBSC) . 24 July 1931, X. P. Gao 51712 ( KUN) . Boluo, Y. Q. Wang 554 ( IBSC) . Conghua, Lutian, 26 November 1981, W. X. Wang & C. G. Zhang 8255 ( IBK) . Dapu, 29 July 1932, T. W. Tsang 21301 ( PE) . Fengkai, Yue 304 ( IBSC) , Yue 74 ( IBSC) . Gaoyao, Dinghushan, 5 October 1957, W. L. Shi 643 ( IBSC) ; 20 September 1977, G. L. Shi 13170 ( IBSC) ; 25 September 1980, G. L. Shi 13964 ( IBSC) ; 15 March 1977, G. L. Shi 12612 ( IBSC) ; 5 September 1978, W. L. Shi 13700 ( IBSC) ; 11 April 1965, G. Q. Ding & G. L. Shi 2299 ( IBSC) . Fengshun, 630 m, 3 September 2009, X. F. Zeng 8111 ( CZH) . Guangzhou, Forest School, 14 April 1998, L. X. Qin & C. X. Zeng 3447 ( SZG) . Haifeng, Meihuashan, 280 m, 20 April, 2007, X. F. Zeng ZXF4477 ( CZH) . Longmen, 13 October 1956, X. G. Li 200236 ( IBSC) . Heyuan, 16 April 1981, S. Q. Chen 238 ( IBSC) . Huangshan, 30 July 1958 C. Huang 164660 ( PE) . Huangcheng, 30 July 1958, C. Huang 164657 ( KUN) . Huidong, 17 November 1982, B. Q. Chen & B. H. Chen 140 ( IBK) ; 4 August 1958, Z. F. Wei 121141 ( PE) ; Dayeshan, 1977 Exped. Xin 0238 ( SN) ; Longyandong, 18 April 1979, B. H. Chen 18566 ( IBSC) . Huizhou, Luofushan, 36–6 Exped. 3107 ( FJSI) ; 18 May 1930, N. G. Chen 41043 ( PE) ; 20 September 1978, Yue –78 Exped. 6108 ( IBSC) ; 25 April 1978, Yue –78 Exped. 5861 ( IBSC) ; 15 October 1977, 2366 Exped. 3107 ( IBSC) . Jiaoling, 6 September 1986, Nanling Exped. 2385 ( IBSC) . Jieyang, Huangmanzai, 610 m, 23 April 2017, Z. X. Feng ZXF24784 ( CZH) . Jiexi, Dabeishan, 27 April 2017, Z. X. Feng ZXF25061 ( CZH) ; Chao, an, 30 July 2017, Z. X. Feng ZXF30401 ( CZH) ; Peiyinshan, 4 April 2010, X. F. Zeng 9390 ( CZH) ; Dapeishan, 24 November 2009, X. F. Zeng 8819 ( CZH) ; Guangtou, 3 May 2007, 700 m, X. F. Zeng ZXF–4795 ( CZH) . Lianshan, 15 May 2000, H. G. Ye 3744 ( IBSC) . Jinjiling, 6 May 2000, H. G. Ye 3413 ( IBSC) . Lufeng, 19 August 1958, Z. F. Wei 121330 ( KUN) ; 20 August 1958, Z. F. Wei 121357 ( KUN) . Pingyuan, 400 m, 17 November 2009, X. F. Zeng 8590 ( CZH) . Raoping, 17 April 1931, N. G. Chen 42706 ( IBK) . Shenzhen, Longgang, 1 September 1989, F. W. Xing & Y. X. Zhang 11078 ( IBSC) ; Sanzhoutian, 17 November 1996, 350 m, Shenzhou Exped. 165 ( SZG) ; Qiniangshan, 15 September 2005, S. Z. Zhang 4078 ( SZG) ; Huanong Exped. 012431 ( SZG) ; Shenzhen Exped. 2006 ( SZG) ; 20 October 1982, S. P. Chen 52 ( IBSC) ; Yantian, 27 October 1990, D. Y. W. ang & F. J. Chen 1615 ( SZG) ; Nan, ao, 29 April 2005, S. Z. Zhang & L. Q. Li 0862 ( SZG) ; Meishajian, 8 March 2005, Flora of Shenzhen Exped. 013197 ( SZG) ; Shatoujiao, 24 October 1992, 150 m, J. F. Chen 2324 ( SZG) ; Bijiashan, 200–250 m, 2 June 2005, S. Z. Zhang & L. Q. Li 2206 ( SZG) ; Wutongshan, Shenzhen Exped. 001224 ( SZG) . Wuhua, 23 September 1986, Nanling Exped. 3027 ( IBSC) . Zengcheng, Nankunshan, 2 May 1931, T. Tsang 20399 ( AU) . Zhaoqing, Qixinyan, 24 October 1972, C. J. Xiao 51565 ( CSFI) . Xinyi, 24 July 1931, X. P. Gao 51712 ( IBSC) ; 15 June 1929, H. Y. Chen 2730 ( IBSC) . Yangchun, 6 November 1935, Z. Huang 38681 ( IBSC) ; 23 October 1957, S. Q. Chen 31012 ( WUK) ; 18 April 1991, N. Liu 1378 ( IBSC) . Yingde, 28 April 1931, D. L. Wu 60663 ( IBSC) . Jiexi, 19 February 2000, H. G. Ye 4450 ( IBSC) . Zengcheng, 6 November 1958, Z. F. Wei 122044 ( IBK) . Zhuhai, 23 December 1990, B. H. Chen 844 ( IBSC) . Guangxi: Babu, 23 September 1979, Q. H. Lu 05024 ( IBK) ; 10 September 1958, K. Y. Li 401659 ( IBK) ; 18 September 2012, 289.3 m, Q. B. Wu 451102121129033LY ( GXMG) ; Guposhan, 17 July 2003, 620 m, Y. Liu & S. X. Yu H0046 ( IBK) . Cenxi, 880 m, 6 November 1983, Q. N. Wu & Y. Q. Huang 1101 ( IBK) . Nanning, Liangfeng, 20 June 1982, 80 forest Exped. 801–02 ( CSFI) . Jiangmen, 9 August 2008, Gudoushan Exped. 200808745 ( SN) . Rongxian, 8 September 1955, D. M. Lei & Z. Y. Wei 4051108 ( IBK) . Ningming, Aidian, 11 October 1958, Z. Q. Zhang 12312 ( IBSC) . Tongmian, 850 m, H. Z. Lu, X. D. Nong & X. Y. Huang 451422120908080LY ( GXMG) . Shangsi, 25 July 2013, 336 m, H. W. He & J. C. Yang Yang XF 0428 ( KUN) ; Denglong, 2 September 1934, W. T. Tsang 24186; Nianban, 25 May 1966, J. J. Wang 4990 ( IBK) ; Shiwandashan, 29 July 1933, J. L. Zuo 23480 ( IBK) . 26 July 1937, X. R. Liang 69849 ( PE) ; 24 March 1944, S. Q. Chen 4771 ( IBSC) . Baishiya, 6 November 1932, C. I. Lei 204 ( PE) ; 19 April 2013, L. Wu & Y. Tong 3310 ( BNU) ; Hongqilinchang, 11 June 1985, R. B. Wei 14010 ( GXMG) , 19 September 1980, S. Q. Lin L00035 ( IBK) . Hainan: Baoting country, Diaoluoshan Exped. 2403( IBK) , Diaoluoshan Exped. 2315 ( IBK) , Changjiang country, X. R. Liang 64161 ( IBK) . Diaoluoshan Exped. 2403 ( IBK) , Diaoluoshan Exped. 2574 ( IBK) , Z. K. Hou 70271 ( IBK) . Lingshui country, Z. Hunag 36698 ( IBK) , Z. Hunag 35125 ( IBSC) J. L Zu & J. N Chen 43763 ( IBSC) . Sanya (= Ya country), J. C. Chen & Z. K. Hou 70271 ( IBSC) , Z. K. Hou 71103 ( IBK) , Z. Huang 33943 ( IBK) . 30 October 1932, N. G. Chen 43982 ( IBK) . Baisha, 14 April 1936, X. Q. Liu 26332 ( KUN) ; 19 April 1936, Y. X. Liu 26332 ( PE) ; 31 March 1931, X. Q. Liu 25986 ( KUN, SN) . Baoting, 31 August 1935, Z. K. Hou 73566 ( IBSC) . Chengmai, 6 November 1932, C. L. Lei 204 ( AU) ; 6 November 1932, C. I. Lei 204 ( IBSC) . Ding, an country, X. R. Liang 64745 ( IBK, KUN) , Z. Huang 35977 ( IBK) , Z. Huang 35967 ( IBK) , Z. Huang 35916 ( IBSC) ; X. R. Liang 64355 ( IBK) . Lingao, 11 June 1928, E. D. Merrill 647 ( AU) . Lingshui, J. L. Zuo & N. J. Chen 44355 ( IBSC) ; Diaoluoshan, 500 m, 18 January 1980, L. S. Xie & M. Cai 678 ( KUN) ; 500–700 m, W. Z. Gao & J. Chen 2403 ( PE) ; 23 February 1955, Y. Z. Gao & C. Jie 2403 ( IBSC) ; Wuzhishan, 14 January 1934, Z. Huang 36698; 3 October 1932, N.G Chen 43982 ( SN) . 3 October 1932, J. L. Zuo & N. G. Chen 43982 ( IBSC) . Shanya (= Ya country), 1800 m, 2 March 1933, Z. K. Hou 70271 ( KUN) ; 1956, K. Z. Hou 70271 ( PE) ; 16 December 1933, Z. Huang 34282 ( IBSC) . Tonghua. 7 January 1934, X. R. Liang 67092 ( IBSC) ; March 1932, Z. K. Hou 70271 ( SN) . Wanning, Nanwang, 16 May 1995, F. W. Xing 6216 ( IBSC) . Wenhua, 29 August 1932, N. G. Chen 45763 ( IBK) . Zha nzhou, 1 October 1930, N. J. Chen 41780 ( KUN) . Jianfengling, 11 December 1978, K. S. Chow etc. 78387 ( PE) ; 6 April 1934, S. K. Lau 3689 ( IBSC) . Hong Kong: 26 April 1929, J. L. Zuo 20221 ( IBSC) . 19 May 1930, J. L. Zuo 21684 ( IBSC) . 28 April 1929, J. L. Zuo 8635 ( IBSC) ; 18 April 1930, T. N. Liou s.n. ( PE) . Bot. & Zoological Garden, 28 January 1992, S. Y. Hu 20027 ( KUN) . Lantau Island , 11 February 1973, H. Y. Shiu 12857 ( PE) . Lu Kai Dau, 18 April 1928, Y. Tsiang 0234 ( PE) . Datantang, 24 October 1927, H. Y. Chen 5092 ( IBSC) . Victoria Island , 3 May 1969, H. Y. Shui 7213( PE) ; Victoria Island , 18 August 2000, S. Y. Hu & B. Paul 23456 ( KUN) ; 20 November 1971, H. Y. Shiu 11247 ( PE) . Kowloon Reservoir Forest Station , 24 November 1972, H. Y Shiu 12514 ( PE) . Huangnigou, 26 April 1927, H. C. Chen 1740 ( SN) ; Wong Nei Chong Gap, 20 April 1928, Y. Tsiang 295 ( AU) ; King Shan, 28 April 1929, C. L. Tso 20250 ( AU) . Ma On Shan , 11 May 1969, H. Y. Shiu 7294 ( PE) . Tai Po Kau, 6 December 1969, H. Y. Shiu 9086 ( PE) . Xingjie, Lianhuashan, N. G. Chen 21003 ( IBSC) . Jiangxi: Longnan , 27 June 1970, 236 Exped. 1349 ( PE01304868 ) . Ningdu, 4 August 1979, D. C. Wu 79–0129 ( PE) . Macau: 9 April 2003, H. G. Ye 8137 ( IBSC) ; 20 August 2003, H. G. Ye & F. W. Xing 8995 ( IBSC) . Yunnan: Cha –li Hsion, 1800 m, September 1936, C. W. Wang 78462 ( LGB) . Jinping, 16 May 1956, Sino – Soviet Exped. 1522 ( PE) . Jingdong, 6 October 1956, B. Y. Qiu 5276 ( WUK) . Menghai, P. Y. Mao 7189 ( WUK) . Ping –pin Hsien, 30 August 1934, H. T. Tsai 61726 ( PE) . Xishuangbanna, Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden, M. Y. Xia 165( HITBC) . VIETNAM. Tonkin, M. E. Poilane 152358 ( IBSC) . Nui han pre Nhtrang, n.s. 4910 ( IBSC) . 3 July 1964, W. T. Tsang 29794 ( IBSC) .

Figures

FIGURE 6. Holotype (A), isotypes (B: IBSC0004175) and syntype (C: PE01304812) of R. lancifolia.

FIGURE 7. Specimens of R. thyrsoidea with lanceolate leaves. A. China, Macau, H. G. Ye & F. W. Xing 8995 (IBSC0264174). B. China, Guangdong, Zhaoqing, G. L. Shi 12612 (IBSC0264079). C. China, Guangdong, Guangzhou, B. H. Chen 18566 (IBSC0264072). D. China, Guangdong, Jiexi, H. G. Ye 4450 (IBSC0264082).E. China, Guangxi, Nanning, C. C. Huang 13920 (GXMG0022619). F. China, Guangxi, Shangsi, S. Q. Lin L00035 (IBK00314484).

FIGURE 8. Lectotype (A) and isolectotype (B: IBSC0004174) of Reevesia lofouensis.

FIGURE 9. Paratypes of Reevesia lofouensis. A. China, Guangdong, Luofu, N. K. Chun 40829 (IBSC0263937). B. China, Guangdong, Luofushan, N. K. Chun 40829 (IBK00161742).