Summary. Merostachys brevigluma, a new species from Brazil and the related species M. speciosa Spreng., M. neesii Rupr., and M. kunthii Rupr. are described, illustrated, compared and discussed. Sprengel (1825) described the species Merostachys speciosa; five years later Kunth (1830) took up Sprengel's name of which he said, "Although I have not seen Sprengel's plant I am sure that it is identical with one I have before me, which was sent to me by Beyrich". However, the specimen on which Kunth based his description of M. speciosa, although very similar to Sprengel's M. speciosa, was a different plant. According to Beyrich who collected it, the specimen came from a plant with the habit of Bambusa, and reached a height of 20 - 30 ft. Ruprecht (1839) recognised that the Beyrich collection was different from Sprengel's description of M. speciosa and described it as a new species, M. kunthii. A similar situation arose with Nees (1829), who took up Sprengel's name for an unidentified collection at Berlin. Once again, Ruprecht (1839) decided that this was not the same as Sprengel's plant, and described it as another new species, M. neesii. These were the initial steps in a series of misinterpretations centred around these three names. We have three species, M. speciosa Spreng., M. kunthii Rupr. and M. neesii Rupr. and the confusion over their taxonomy has persisted. These species were described and redescribed under different names. The use of imprecise and arbitrary terms such as 'ligule', 'numerous rootlets', 'cilia of the ligule', 'herbaceous beard' and 'cirrhose-ciliate ligule' for the oral setae, and 'crassitie pennae gallinaceae' and 'crassite pennae columbineae' for branch thickness, no doubt did much to create the mutual hostility which can be seen in their published polemics. Moreover, Nees (1829) mentioned in Note III (p. 531) the existence of another specimen in the Berlin Herbarium, collected by Sellow in Paraguay, at the summit of the mountain called Cabo do Butucaray. He wrote that "it was similar to this" and "that it could be a juvenile state of it (though it lacks flowers); it differs, however, in the culms being still rougher, the leaf sheaths herbaceously bearded at the mouth, the leaves glaucescent and very serrulate-scabrous on the margin". The species Nees quoted as "this", McClure (unpublished translations and notes on Merostachys) determined as M. speciosa Spreng. and says in his notes: "The reason why the plant
Read full abstract