A Note on the Genus Zalaccella (Palmae: Lepidocaryoideae)

Abstract

Beccari's reasons for creating the new genus Zalaccella were that the spikelike first-order branches (rachillae) bear flowers in six vertical series together with tomentum rather than distichously as is usual in Calamus; further, he described the secondary spathes (i.e. the rachilla bracts) as non-tubular, and flowers as occurring in threes with only the central flower being fertile. Beccari quite clearly stated that the leaf is indistinguishable from that of Calamus. Unfortunately the palm has never been recollected. I have searched the undetermined Indochinese collections in Paris but in vain, and furthermore, if the palm is assumed to be dioecious, I have not been able to match vegatatively any staminate material with the pistillate type. The type itself is sparse and rather poorly preserved and dissection of the rachillae would prove destructive. I can find no trace of triads of flowers; small scars which I assume to be those of already fallen sterile staminate flowers are, however, visible in some parts of the inflorescence, and occur in positions concordant with typical Lepidocaryoid dyads as seen in pistillate inflorescences of Calamus. I know of no other Calamus in which the pistillate rachilla has a condensed mass of flowers arranged in six ranks, but in C. sordidusJ. Dransf. (Dransfield 1980), although the pistillate rachilla has distichous flowers, the staminate rachilla is catkin-like and bears a dense spiral of flowers, analogous to the condensed pistillate rachilla ofZalaccella. From this evidence I do not believe Zalaccella to be distinct from Calamus, but regard it as an unusual species, probably belonging to ?Coleospathus (sensu Furtado). Thus I am reducing Zalaccella to synonymy within Calamus; there is no necessity to publish a new combination as the palm was initially described in Calamus.