Volume II (1970) - Flora of New Zealand Indigenous Tracheophyta - Monocotyledons except Graminae
Copy a link to this page Cite this record

Rhopalostylis H.Wendl. & Drude

RHOPALOSTYLIS Wendl. et Drude, 1875

Infl. below lvs, shortly stalked, much and densely branched, enclosed within 2 caducous, boat-shaped spathes of nearly equal size, the outer 2-winged; branches thick, divided several times, the ultimate divisions long and closely and deeply notched to accommodate sessile glomerules each of 2–3 fls subtended by a short bract. Fls unisexual, one ♀ between two ♂, or distally the ♀ aborting leaving two ♂ together. ♂ asymmetric, soon falling; sepals much narrower than obliquely ovate petals; stamens 6, filaments slender, inflexed at apex, anthers versatile; ovary narrow, ± columnar. ♀ smaller, globose-ovoid; sepals and petals broad; staminodes minute; ovary ovoid, 1-locular; stigmas terminal, recurved, ± persistent. Fr. symmetric, seated on chaffy per-remains; pericarp thin, fibrous within. Seed hard; hilum conspicuous, running from apical chalaza down to base. Trunk typically unbranched, not tapering, marked with lf-scars; conspicuous "crownshaft" formed by very large sheathing lf-bases; lvs in adult rather sharply ascending in "feather-duster" shape. Lvs regularly pinnate, without spines, axis clad in peltate scales, the pinnae subopp. and reduplicately inserted on axis (A-shaped in T.S.); each pinna long, narrow-lanceolate, acuminate, bearing peltate scales when young, midrib and us. one pair of lateral nerves prominent adaxially, margin not thickened; seedling lvs broad, 2-lobed. Three spp., one confined to N.Z. proper, one to Kermadec Is and one to Norfolk Id.

Key

1
Fr. ovoid-elliptic, c. 10 × 7 mm.
Fr. globose, c. 13 × 12 mm.

Eora O. F. Cook in J. Hered. 18, 1927, 409 was proposed on the false assumption that Rhopalostylis Wendl. et Drude was a later homonym of Rhopalostylis Klotzsch ex Baill. nom. nud. in Adansonia 5, 1864–65, 317; this latter name was intended only as a subdivision of Dalechampia (Euphorbiaceae) and was not validated by a description. For discussion see Franco in Bol. Soc. broteria 23, 1949, 174.

Click to go back to the top of the page
Top