The Lauraceae collected in Brazil by Ludwig Riedel—I

Pedro Luís Rodrigues de Moraes1

Abstract. The species of Lauraceae collected by Ludwig Riedel, excluding Ocotea, are commented and contex-
tualized according to the different itineraries he travelled in Brazil, from 1821 to 1836, indicating the localities
and dates of collections, whenever possible. To complete this work, two diaries of Riedel have been consulted
and the information from them cross-checked with the annotations found on specimen labels. An annotated list
of 48 entries provides information on the status of species names and their types, currently accepted names, and
collections found in different herbaria. Lectotypes for five names, Aydendron verrucosum var. attenuata, Ayden-
dron parviflorum, Mespilodaphne parviflora, Nectandra spicata, and Oreodaphne fasciculata, are designated.
The species of Ocotea collected by Riedel will be treated in part II of this series.
Resumo. As espécies de Lauraceae coletadas por Ludwig Riedel, excluindo Ocotea, são comentadas e contextu-
alizadas de acordo com os diferentes itinerários que ele percorreu no Brasil, de 1821 a 1836, indicando as loca-
lidades e as datas das coleções, sempre que possível. Para isso, dois diários de Riedel foram consultados e as
informações nos mesmos foram cruzadas com as anotações encontradas nas etiquetas dos espécimes. Uma lista
anotada de 48 entradas fornece informações sobre o status dos nomes das espécies e de seus tipos, nomes atu-
almente aceitos, e coleções encontradas nos diferentes herbários. Lectótipos de cinco nomes, Aydendron ver-
rucosum var. attenuata, Aydendron parviflorum, Mespilodaphne parviflora, Nectandra spicata, e Oreodaphne
fasciculata, são designados. As espécies de Ocotea coletadas por Riedel serão tratadas na parte II desta série.
Keywords: Brazil, collections, Ludwig Riedel, Lauraceae, nomenclature, repatriation

Among the many foreigners at the beginning and “I enter today in my 33rd year” (2 March
of the nineteenth century who came to Brazil, the 1823, already in Rio de Janeiro). Thus, Riedel
German naturalist Ludwig Riedel (1791–1861) was born in Berlin on March 2, 1791.
deserves prominence both for his long and In Braga (1993) and Komissarov (1994),
active stay in the Brazilian territory and his we are aware at this time of only two diaries
achievement of one of the most important written by Riedel. The first, under the title
early collections of Brazilian plants. His name “Diário de viagem” is a notebook of 91 leaves,
is rightly always connected to the expedition which was researched by the historian Moema
organized and lead by the German scientist Parente Augel. It contains Riedel’s notes
and Consul General of Russia in Brazil, Georg about his stay in Bahia, mainly in the region
Heinrich Freiherr von Langsdorff (1774–1852), of Ilhéus. Parente Augel demonstrated that the
also known in Russia as Grigorij Ivanovič manuscript contains information concerning
Langsdorff (Augel, 1979; Komissarov, 1994). economic, social and political issues. Within
The majority of authors who wrote about its pages, we find data on sugar production,
Ludwig Riedel have indicated his birthday in European immigration, indigenous peoples
the year 1790. However, Augel (1979: 49) drew and the fight for independence. However, it
attention to the fact that Riedel, in his diary of is a personal and colloquial diary of someone
Bahia, registered the date of his birthday three primarily concerned with the study of the
times, in three consecutive years: “day of my Brazilian flora. The second diary, dated 1827–
birth. The thirtieth of my life. Thirty years! and 1828, was written and included (leaves 31–44)
I am nothing yet” (2 March 1821); “day of my in a notebook of 114 pages, entitled “Luiz
birth. I enter in my 32nd year” (2 March 1822); Riedel/Apontamentos, 1827–1832” (Biblioteca
I thank Alexander Sennikov (H, LE) for the loan of specimens, and Astrid Scharfetter (GZU), Charo Noya Santos (MA),
Heimo Rainer (W), Juan Carlos Penagos Zuloaga (MO), Lucy Klebieko (NY), Melinda Peters (HUH), Serena Maner (OXF),
Thierry Deroin and Bérangère Offroy (P) for sending images of herbarium specimens. I am obliged to Flávio Macedo Alves
for confirming the identity of Mezilaurus. The assistance of “Coordenadoria de Acervo Especial, Fundação Biblioteca
Nacional” is specially acknowledged for permission to reproduce pages from Riedel’s diaries.
1 Universidade Estadual Paulista “Júlio de Mesquita Filho,” Instituto de Biociências, Departamento de Botânica, Avenida
24 A 1515, C.P. 199, 13506-900 Rio Claro, SP, Brazil; pmoraes@rc.unesp.br

Harvard Papers in Botany, Vol. 17, No. 1, 2012, pp. 185–216.

© President and Fellows of Harvard College, 2012.
186 Harvard Papers in Botany Vol. 17, No. 1
Nacional of Rio de Janeiro, Manuscript Section:
localização 13,02,013; hereafter referred to
as “diary of Mato Grosso”). His first notes
are dated December 10, 1827, and the last on
April 23, 1828. On April 8, for instance, Riedel
made observations on the history, geography
and natural conditions of Mato Grosso. Other
notes only fix the itineraries of his expedition.
As a result, the diaries have significance for
historical and geographical research, since
Riedel was the first early nineteenth century
European scientist to explore the river system
of Rio Madeira toward the Amazon.
According to Augel (1979), the Manuscript
Section of the Biblioteca Nacional of Rio de
Janeiro holds an original codex by Ludwig
Riedel entitled “Diário de viagem e relação
de plantas [colhidas pelo Dr. Luiz Riedel, na
Bahia, de 1820 a 1823]” (Biblioteca Nacional:
localização 10,2,004; referência: C.E.H.B.
no. 11703; 182 pages; hereafter referred to as
“diary of Bahia”). The manuscript is written in
French and German, with marginal Botanical
annotations in Latin, comprising a daily record
of the journey undertaken by Riedel when,
having accepted Langsdorff’s invitation to
participate in the scientific expedition sponsored
by the Emperor Alexander I of Russia, he moved
from Russia to South America. Embarking from
Saint Petersburg, he casually arrived in Bahia,
since there was no ship that would take him
directly to Rio de Janeiro. Interested in the
Brazilian flora, Riedel did not miss the chance
of studying the region; he stayed for three
weeks in the capital of Bahia and then moved to
the south, staying in Ilhéus for about two years,
before heading to the Court in Rio de Janeiro,
and finally joining the Langsdorff group at the
diplomat’s farm known as Fazenda Mandioca.
It is, therefore, this period of almost three years
that this diary documents.
The diary of Bahia was handwritten in a
notebook, 35 x 22 cm, containing 91 leaves and
182 pages, showing no title or signature. The
title evidently was given by the cataloger, but the
authorship and authenticity of the manuscript can
not be doubted. The numbering of leaves (1–91)
also was done noticeably later (Augel, 1979). The
notes were made in two columns, of which the
left was used primarily for the diary itself, where
the author was setting his travel impressions and
documenting, briefly and almost schematically,
the herborizer work. The right column contains
botanical notes almost exclusively; it is the
“relação de plantas” referred to in the title of
the codex, however, upon examination, there
are different categories of notes. In some parts,
the plants are listed according to their specific
botanical groups, seemingly intended for
purposes of classification and study, followed
by a number, the common name of each plant
(sometimes in Portuguese and German), the
scientific name and description of the species (in
Latin), as well as indications of the locality and
date of collection. These are the plants pertaining
to Riedel’s herbarium. In other parts, succinct
lists appear, simply with the name of plants,
without obeying any order or systematic, perhaps
being the ones seen in his walks and excursions,
but not intended to be harvested (Augel, 1979).
As pointed out by Augel (1979), there seemed
to be some confusion of page order in the act of
binding the manuscript, since the notes really
start on leaf 8. Leaf 3 is just a continuation of
leaf 91, as the dates demonstrate. The botanical
notes start with a list of Pteridophyta which
are numbered from 76 to 114. On reverse of
leaf 11, a list of Glumaceae is given, and it is
numbered from 1 to 92. From the reverse of leaf
20 till the reverse of leaf 24, Riedel registered
an unnumbered list of species with vernacular
names in Portuguese and their Latin binomials.
On leaf 25, a new numbered list of species starts
from 1 to 150 (on leaf 38). On reverse of leaf
38, a new list of species of Cryptogams is given,
numbered from 1 to 75 (on leaf 43). On leaf 44,
the list that was interrupted on leaf 38 continues
from number 151 to 180, encompassing species
of Asteraceae. From the reverse of leaf 52 until
the reverse of leaf 57, the list is written in two
columns of numbered plants up to the number
390. On the reverse of leaf 57, the list of
Glumaceae continues from number 93 to 149 (on
reverse of leaf 58). On leaf 59, the general list of
plants continues, in two columns, from number
391 to 600, on the reverse of leaf 64, where the
list of Cryptogams continues from number 115
to 133 (on leaf 65). On the reverse of leaf 65, the
general list continues from number 601 to 703,
on leaf 70, where the list of Glumaceae continues
from number 150 to 168. The general list
continues, with an insertion of new Cryptogams
(on reverse of leaf 71) numbered from 134 to 156,
and it is finished on leaf 75 with the collection
number 808. On the same leaf, in the second
column, another three Cryptogams are numbered
from 157 to 159, and a numbered list of “Filices
in Capitania Rio de Janeiro collectae” is given
2012 de Moraes, BRAZILIAN LAURACEOUS COLLECTIONS OF RIEDEL 187
from number 1 to 30 (on reverse of leaf 76), and
the unnumbered register of “Gramitis lanceolata/
Mand.[ioca] Oct. 1822” appears on leaf 77. On
leaf 90, Riedel gives a list of plants collected
in 1822, numbered from 1 to 210, ending on
leaf 91. Thus, the 1025 species that Riedel had
numbered in the diary, from collections in Bahia,
perfectly agrees with the estimation given by
Urban (1894) of about 1000 numbers.
Riedel arrived in Ilhéus, Bahia, on 8 February
1821, where he settled down and started botaniz-
ing and touring. The tours were almost daily,
some were quite long. He often visited different
groups of foreign settlers with whom he had
friendly relations. From early February 1821 to
early November 1822, Riedel stayed in southern
Bahia. By taking advantage of permission
to travel aboard the schooner on which the
“envoys of the Cachoeira of Bahia” were heading
to the Court. Riedel left Ilhéus in the early hours
of 7 to 8 November, arriving in Rio de Janeiro
in November 15. He went immediately to the
Russian diplomatic representation, where he
was received by the vice-consul Piotr Alexander
Kielchen and not by Langsdorff who was at
his country house, in Fazenda da Mandioca.
Riedel came in contact with the Prussian consul
Theremin, with the consul of Sweden, with
Freyreiss, and with the botanist Heinrich Karl
Beyrich, who was sent by the court of Prussia in
order to collect specimens for the Garden of Plants
in Berlin. He visited the main points of the capital
of the very recently declared Empire of Brazil,
and departed to Porto da Estrela on November
20. At the Fazenda da Mandioca, he finally met
not only with Langsdorff, but also with Johann
Moritz Rugendas, Néster Gavrílovitch Rubtsov,
and Edouard Charles Ménétriès, who were
members of the group that would soon leave for
the tropical jungle. At this point, the diary became
even more cursory, restricted to the registration
of day-to-day activities: weather conditions;
mention of the routine of classifying, treating
and packing the plants; records of visits made
and received. The notes continue until December
30, 1823, when they were finished, ending in
the middle of leaf 91, with a broad dash drawn
under the last annotation, indicating that they
had been intentionally completed (Augel, 1979).
Regarding the diary of Mato Grosso, Augel
(1990) was aware of its existence and at that time
she still had the will to restart the translation and
its publication. This diary, however, remains
unpublished. It was written by Riedel in
Latin, French, and Portuguese, and it contains,
among other things, annotations about natural
products, translation of indigenous words (from
Bororos and Caripunas) to Portuguese, and a
list of collections of plants numbered from 1201
to 1612. A third diary written by Riedel, also
unpublished, seems to have passed unnoticed by
Augel (1990), Braga (1993), and Komissarov
(1994), since they did not mention it. It is
currently also at the Manuscript Section of the
Biblioteca Nacional of Rio de Janeiro under the
given title “Descrição de uma viagem científica
pelo Brasil iniciada em 9 de setembro de 1825,
no Rio de Janeiro, seguindo para São Paulo e
Cuiabá” (localização: II-31,22,008), written in
German and French, with an annex of a list of
items of natural history sent to Saint Petersburg.
There, Riedel gives detailed information about
the places he visited, and also about plants
observed/collected without numbers (Fig. 1).
As a result, at least for the numbered
collections, it is possible in many cases to
pinpoint their places of origin, based mainly
on Urban (1894, 1906: 89–91), who provided
an elaborate list of Riedel’s itineraries from
1821 to 1836. Urban tracked the travel routes
of Riedel from the labels of his collections
of Aquifoliaceae, Malvaceae, Leguminosae,
and Melastomataceae. According to him, the
collections sent by Riedel to Russia are classified
in six groups: (1) corresponding to the period in
Bahia, from early 1821 to late 1822, with about
1000 species; (2) unnumbered, of the state of
Rio de Janeiro, from November 1822 to April
1824; (3) corresponding to the trip to Minas
Gerais, from April 1824 to February 1825, with
c. 1500 numbers; (4) corresponding to the trip
through the states of São Paulo, Mato Grosso,
Alto Amazonas and Pará, from September 1825
to February 1829, with c. 1600 numbers; (5) of
Rio de Janeiro, April 1829 to May 1830, small
unnumbered collection; and (6) corresponding
to the trip through the states of Rio de Janeiro,
São Paulo, Goiás, and Minas Gerais, from
October 1831 to January 1836, with over 3000
numbers. Thus, the indication given by Nevling
(1965: 238) that the two earliest Brazilian
collections by Riedel were not numbered, and
his subsequent collections (four excursions)
were each independently numbered, is partially
true. Further information on the itineraries of
the Langsdorff Expedition can be found, for
instance, in Faldermann (1831, 1832), and in
Bertels et al. (1981).
188 Harvard Papers in Botany Vol. 17, No. 1

Figure 1. Pages from Riedel’s diary from November 9th to 12th, 1825. Manuscript preserved in the Biblioteca
Nacional of Rio de Janeiro. © Fundação Biblioteca Nacional.

The herbarium compiled by Riedel with
Langsdorff, which is the result of his activities
from 1821 to 1829, contains more than 100,000
specimens, of about [8,000-] 12,000 species, and
remains preserved at the Botanical Institute
of the Russian Academy of Sciences (St.
Petersburg; LE) (Komissarov, 1994; Alonso,
2010). Duplicates have been distributed to major
museums and several private herbaria (Urban,
1894). Riedel is known to have collected at
least 92 species of Lauraceae in Brazil. Here are
presented 48 of them, excluding 44 belonging
to Ocotea, which will be treated in a subsequent
article.
Carl Daniel Friedrich Meissner was the
first botanist to study Riedel’s Lauraceae.
The spelling of his name is adopted here as it
appeared in de Candolle’s Prodromus [“Auctore
C. F. Meissner. prof. Basil. (olim incorrecte
Meisner)”] (see Kostermans, 1986), in
Martius’s Flora Brasiliensis and in Meissner’s
death certificate (see Nevling, 1959: 269–270
for further details). However, Brummitt and
Powell’s (1992) use of the spelling Meisner
(abbreviation “Meisn.”) is followed for the
authorship of plant names.
This study is based on herbarium material
from the herbaria A, AWH, B, BC, BM, BR,
C, CGE, E, F, G, G-DC, GH, GOET, GZU,
HAL, HBG, IAN, JE, K, KIEL, KR, L, LD,
LE, LINN, M, MA, MEL, MICH, MO, NY,
OUPR, OXF, P, RB, S, SBT, SP, STR, TUB, U,
US, VT, W, and WRSL (herbarium acronyms
according to Holmgren & Holmgren, 1998).
All species names and their taxonomic
treatment were checked in the classical
taxonomic monographs about Lauraceae,
such as those by Nees von Esenbeck (1833,
1836), Meissner (1864, 1866), and Mez
(1889), as well as in the more recent published
revisions: Aiouea and Aniba (Kubitzki &
Renner, 1982), Beilschmiedia (Nishida, 1999),
Cassytha (Weber, 1981), Cinnamomum (Lorea-
Hernández, 1996), Cryptocarya (Kostermans
1937, 1938a; Moraes, 2007), Dicypellium,
Phyllostemonodaphne, Systemonodaphne and
Urbanodendron (Rohwer, 1988), Endlicheria
(Chanderbali, 2004), Licaria (Kurz, 2000),
Mezilaurus (van der Werff, 1987), Nectandra
(Rohwer, 1993), Ocotea (Rohwer, 1986),
Persea (Kopp, 1966), Pleurothyrium (van
der Werff, 1993), and Rhodostemonodaphne
2012 de Moraes, BRAZILIAN LAURACEOUS COLLECTIONS OF RIEDEL 189
(Madriñán, 2004). The diaries of Riedel at the
Biblioteca Nacional of Rio de Janeiro were
consulted for all the gatherings of Lauraceae
annotated (mainly as “Laurus sp.”) by him. The
information from the diaries was cross checked
with the annotations by Riedel on the original
labels of the specimens. For convenience, the
species are presented in alphabetic order from
current accepted names. Accepted names
appear in boldface italics, synonyms in italics.
An annotated list of species of Lauraceae,
excluding Ocotea, collected by Riedel
1. Aiouea laevis (Mart.) Kosterm., Recueil
Trav. Bot. Néerl. 35: 84. 1938.
Basionym: Cryptocarya laevis Nees ex Mart.,
Flora 21(2, Beibl.): 64. 1838. TYPE:
BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro, “Crescit in
sylvis Caa-poera dictis ad Sebastianop.,”
12 Jun. 1817, Martii Herbar. Florae
Brasil. no. 237 (Holotype: BR 8686169
[annotated by Nees as “Cryptocarya
pyriformis levis N. ab. E.”]; Isotypes,
AWH 28362, AWH 28363, B† [F neg.
3782], BM 000894059, BR 8685834, E
00259412, G, G 00021045, G 00021046,
G 00021047, G-DC 00200460, GH
00041126, HAL 101918, JE 00004805
[and probably JE 00000523, ex
Herbar. Bernhardi, Anonymous s.n.],
K 000512712, K 000512713, K
000512714, KR, L 0035524, L 0035525,
LE 00000096, LE 00000135, LZ†, M
0111049, M 0111050, M 0111051, M
0111052, MO 145001, NY 00354800, P
00128383, P 00128384, W†, WRSL).
Synonyms: Aiouea brasiliensis Meisn. var.
attenuata Meisn. in DC., Prodr. 15(1):
83. 1864; ibid. in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2):
170. 1866. TYPE: BRAZIL. Loco haud
indicato, s.d., L. Riedel s.n. (Holotype: LE;
Isotypes, B† [F neg. 3788], G 00020674,
GOET [2 sheets], K 000601965, L
0035527, LE [2 sheets], NY 00354799).
Aiouea riedelii Mez, Jahrb. Königl. Bot.
Gart. Berlin 5: 37. 1889, nom. illegit.
superfl. Specimen: BRAZIL. Bahia, Ilhéus,
“ad ripas fluvi Itahype” [Rio Itaípe], Mar.
1822, L. Riedel 688 (LE n.v.).
For a complete list of synonyms, see Kubitzki
and Renner (1982).
I have not seen the specimen Riedel 688 at
LE, but I could analyze three sheets of Riedel
s.n. from that herbarium, with one of them being
annotated by Meissner as “Aiouea Brasiliensis
δ attenuata Meissn.” From this and from what
is available in literature, a plausible explanation
is given as follows: in the protologue of Aiouea
brasiliensis Meisn. in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 83.
1864, Meissner seemingly had treated the
specimens by Riedel at LE as two different
gatherings, since he cited “In Brasiliæ prov.
Bahiensi et Rio Jan. (Blanch. N. 3191 ! Riedel n.
688 !). …,” in the description of the species, and
“In Brasilia (Riedel !)” under the description of
variety attenuata. Later, Meissner (1866: 170)
cited “Habitant formae α. et β. in silvis prov.
Bahiensis, e. gr. ad flum. Itahype: M.; …,” thus
mistakenly attributing to Martius the collection
of Riedel 688 from Rio Itaípe, and “Forma δ.
in Brasilia, loco non indicato: Riedel,” which
is related to his variety attenuata. The holotype
of Aiouea brasiliensis Meisn. var. attenuata
Meisn., and also the isotype at NY, corroborate
this interpretation since they have been
annotated by Meissner with “Riedel (sched.
nulla aderat.),” hence bearing no information
given by Riedel on that sheet. Mez (1889: 37–
38) treated the specimens Riedel 688 and Riedel
s.n. as being the same collection since he cited
Aiouea brasiliensis var. attenuata Meisn. in the
synonymy of Aiouea riedelii Mez, and quoted
“Hab. in Brasilia ad flumen Itahype: Riedel n.
688. Floret Martio. (V. s. in herb. Berol., Boiss.-
Barbey., Goetting., Kew., Petrop.)/Obs. Species
a cl. Meissner cum A. Brasiliensi confusa
differt inflorescentia, tubo perianthii, antheris
obtusis et praecipue staminodiis seriei interioris
perlonge stipitatis.” The holotype of Aiouea
brasiliensis var. attenuata was also annotated by
Mez with “Ajouea Riedelii n. sp.” Kostermans
(1938a: 83–86, ), in his revision of Aiouea, has
clearly treated the specimens by Riedel at LE
as belonging to Aiouea riedelii Mez [≡ Aiouea
brasiliensis var. attenuata Meisn.; Riedel s.n.]
and Aiouea laevis (Mart.) Kosterm. [Riedel
688], claiming that the former species is like
the latter, “but for its flower characters.” Riedel
wrote in his diary of Bahia: “688, Laurus
cupularis ? fol. lanceolato-ovatis acuminatis,
panicul. terminalib. Cal. cupularif. ex septis. ♄.”
190 Harvard Papers in Botany Vol. 17, No. 1
2. Aiouea saligna Meisn. in DC., Prodr. 15(1):
82. 1864; ibid. in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 169.
1866. TYPE: BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro, Magé,
“ad viam inter Jozé Dias et Mand[iocca]”
[Langsdorff’s Fazenda da Mandioca], Jan. 1824,
L. Riedel s.n. (Holotype: LE; Isotypes, G, GH
00041129, GOET [2 sheets], K 000601982, L
0035528, LE, NY 00354813, OXF 000003159,
S [R-7250], W†). Specimen: BRAZIL. Loco
haud indicato, “iter Brasiliense 1824–29,” ster.,
L. Riedel 796 (LE n.v., NY 00459707).
Synonym: Aiouea elliptica Meisn. in DC.,
Prodr. 15(1): 83. 1864; ibid. in Martius,
Fl. Bras. 5(2): 171. 1866. TYPE:
BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro, Magé, “in sylv.
Mand.[iocca]” [Langsdorff’s Fazenda
da Mandioca], Jan. 1824, L. Riedel s.n.
(Holotype: LE 00000098; Isotypes, B†
[F neg. 3783], G, GH 00041123, GOET
[2 sheets], K 000601977, L 0035522, LE
00000097, LE 00000099, NY 00354803);
Specimen: BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro,
Magé, “Mandiocca,” s.d., L. Riedel s.n.
(NY 00459696); BRAZIL. Loco haud
indicato, “iter Brasiliense 1824–29,” fl.,
L. Riedel 834 (LE n.v., NY 00459708).
For a complete list of synonyms, see Kubitzki
and Renner (1982).
The holotype of Aiouea saligna bears an
original label stating “Cal. turbinatus 6 fidus.
Stam. 12. Arbor 15–20 ped. foliis oblongo
lanceolatis nitidiss.: florib. subpaniculatis
lateralib. axillarib. asque flores extus glauci.
Cal. clausus,” which was transcribed almost
literally by Meissner on the label of the isotype
at NY. The specimens of A. elliptica at LE bear
labels annotated as “Arbor 20–30 ped. florib.
paniculatis viridis.” However, the holotype
also bears a mixed label annotated as “Frutex
arborescens./494/Cor. minima rubra, nutans
fol. lanceolatis coriaceis/in sylvis umbrosis pr.
Castel Novo. Novbr. 1821,” thus referring to
a not-Lauraceous shrub with red flowers (see
Kostermans, 1938a), which was also transcribed
and indicated by Meissner on the label of the
isotype at NY, and mistakenly indicated by
Kubitzki and Renner (1982) as the locality of
the type. Mez (1889, 1892) has also indicated
“Riedel 494” and “Floret Novembri” under
Aiouea elliptica, thus also from the false label
on the holotype.
As for the old Fazenda da Mandioca, Taulois
(1990) mentions that the place where the
farm existed, bought in 1816 by the Russian
consul-general in Rio de Janeiro Grigori
Ivanovitch Langsdorff, belongs nowadays
to the “Indústria de Material Bélico,” Imbel,
where is installed the “Fábrica da Estrela,” an
explosives factory. The farm was expropriated
by the government in 1826 and renamed the
“Real Fábrica de Pólvora da Estrela.” Before
becoming a diplomat, consul Langsdorff was
a naturalist, a scientist interested in nature. His
presence in Brazil was related to this interest.
The purchase of the Fazenda da Mandioca
was justified by the fact of being located in a
region of mild tropical climate with abundant
rainfall (2,000 to 3,000 mm), and no dry season
with average temperatures of 28˚C. The place
was surrounded by mountains with elevations
above 1,000 m, measured from the absolute
height of 30 m in Fazenda da Mandioca. These
mountains were covered with a characteristic
sub-tropical rainforest. Another reason was
the fact that the region was regularly inhabited
due to the existence of a good road connecting
the capital of the Kingdom with the province
of Minas Gerais. The “Estrada dos Mineiros”
was in operation for almost a century, heavily
trafficked by troops of mules coming and going
from the Minas Gerais. At that time, Minas
Gerais was still living in luxury, because of
the gold mined there over the past 120 years.
The trip began in the “Caes dos Mineiros,” in
front of the old building of the “Ministério da
Marinha” in Rio. After about six hours of sailing
in a boat, a traveler landed in Porto da Estrela,
located at the bottom of “Baía de Guanabara.”
After four or five more hours on horseback, one
finally reached the Fazenda da Mandioca.
3. Aiouea trinervis Meisn. in DC., Prodr. 15(1):
83. 1864; ibid. in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 171.
1866. TYPE: BRAZIL. São Paulo, “in campis
siccis Rio Pardo,” Sept. 1826, L. Riedel 486
(Holotype: LE; Isotypes, LE, NY 00126856).
For a complete list of synonyms, see Kubitzki
and Renner (1982).
The holotype bears an original label
stating “no. 486, Laurus frutex 2–3 ped. foliis
coriaceis, florib. luteis,” which was transcribed
by Meissner on the label of the isotype at NY.
4. Aniba canelilla (Kunth) Mez, Jahrb. Königl.
Bot. Gart. Berlin 5: 53. 1889.
Basionym: Cryptocarya canelilla Kunth in
Humboldt, Bonpland & Kunth, Nov.
Gen. Sp. (quarto ed.) 7: 192, t. 645. 1825.
2012 de Moraes, BRAZILIAN LAURACEOUS COLLECTIONS OF RIEDEL 191
Lectotype (designated by Kostermans,
1938b: 899): VENEZUELA. “crescit
ad orientem Esmeraldæ, in monte de la
Canelilla, juxta ripam Cauræ et Erevati;
item prope catarractam Maypurensium,”
s.d., immat. fr., F. W. H. A. von Humboldt
& A. J. Bonpland 1018 (B-W 07784 00
0 & B-W 07784 01 0 [“Laurus canelilla
Willd.,” herbarium name, “Orinoco”];
Isolectotypes, P 00307242 [F neg. 35005],
P 00506929).
Synonym: Mespilodaphne pretiosa Nees &
Mart. var. angustifolia Nees, Syst. Laur.:
237. 1836, nom. invalid.; ibid. Meissner
in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 103. 1864; ibid. in
Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 198–199. 1866.
Specimens: BRAZIL. Pará, “in sylvis
ad oppidum Pará rarius, frequentius in
Provinciae Paraensis interioribus,” 1819,
C. F. P. von Martius s.n. (M 0121069,
M 01121070, M 0121071, M 0121072,
MEL 2318499); idem, “ad fluvium Rio
Negro,” C. F. P. von Martius s.n. (G, MEL
2318499); idem, Pará, loco haud indicato,
s.d., L. Riedel s.n. (LE n.v.).
For a complete list of synonyms, see Kubitzki
and Renner (1982).
Meissner (1864: 103) cited “Circa Maypure,
Esmeraldas et Para (Humboldt ! Martius !
Riedel !) ... Pao v. Casca preciosa v. Casca de
Maranhâo, ... (v. s. fr. jun. sine fl. in hb. Berol.,
Mon., Petrop.),” whereas Mez (1889: 53)
quoted “Casca preciosa (Martius!, Burchell!),
Páo (Martius!), Casca de Maranhão (herb.
Petrop!).” Later, Kostermans (1938b: 899–900)
cited “Casca de Maranhao” (Brazil: Riedel);”
and “Pará, (Riedel s.n.? [Lg.]; …).”
5. Aniba citrifolia (Nees) Mez, Jahrb. Königl.
Bot. Gart. Berlin 5: 74. 1889.
Basionym: Aydendron citrifolium Nees, Syst.
Laur.: 257. 1836. TYPE: Amazonas, “in
sylvis (ad amnem Jui) Japurensibus,”
Febr. 1820, C. F. P. von Martius s.n.
(Holotype: M 0147109 [F neg. 6583]).
Synonym: Aydendron affine Meisn. in DC.,
Prodr. 15(1): 92. 1864, p.p.; ibid. in
Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 182. 1866. TYPE:
BRAZIL. Amazonas, “Barra” [Manaus],
Sept. 1828, L. Riedel s.n. (Syntypes:
LE 00000105, NY 00354867). Other
syntype: BRAZIL. Amazonas, São
Gabriel da Cachoeira, “in fl. Negro ripis
infra cataractas S. Gabriel,” Dec. 1854,
R. Spruce 3769 (K 000601902, lectotype
designated by Mez, 1889: 63–64; second-
step lectotype, designated by Kostermans,
1938b: 891; Isolectotypes, AWH 28365,
B† [F neg. 3798], BM 000993892, BR
8685506, E 00259403, G [2 sheets], GH
00041145, GOET 004486, K 000601901,
LE 00000106, NY n.v., OXF 00000336, P
00745594, P 00745595, W n.v.; = Aniba
affinis (Meisn.) Mez, Jahrb. Königl. Bot.
Gart. Berlin 5: 63. 1889).
For a complete list of synonyms, see Kubitzki
and Renner (1982).
The syntype by Riedel of Aydendron affine
Meisn. at LE bears an original label with
“Laurus/Barra/Sept 1828.”
6. Aniba firmula (Nees & Mart.) Mez, Jahrb.
Königl. Bot. Gart. Berlin 5: 58. 1889.
Basionym: Aydendron firmulum Nees & Mart.
in Nees, Linnaea 8: 36. 1833. TYPE
(Kostermans, 1938b: 922): BRAZIL.
Loco haud indicato, fl., s.d., F. Sellow 369
(B†). Lectotype (designated by Kubitzki
and Renner, 1982: 75): BRAZIL. Loco
haud indicato [São Paulo], fl., s.d., F.
Sellow 369 (K 000512711, with a label
annotated by D.F.L. von Schlechtendal as
“Sellow 369 (col. rubro);” Isolectotypes,
F 619549 [fragment ex B†], G 00020748,
G-DC 00200538 [Sellow s.n.], HAL
103836 [Sellow s.n.], US 00099435
[616860, from the Herbarium Bureau of
Science Manila ex B, NY neg. N.S. 5890],
WRSL n.v.). Specimens: BRAZIL. Minas
Gerais, Serra do Cipó, “in ripa rivulorum
S. da Lapa,” Nov. 1824, L. Riedel 929 &
930 (LE 00000118, LE 00000119, LE
00000120, NY 00354894).
Aydendron sellowii Meisn. in DC., Prodr.
15(1): 88. 1864, nom. illegit. superfl.
For a complete list of synonyms, see Kubitzki
and Renner (1982).
Specimen LE 00000118 bears an original
label indicating “Laurus – frutex arbores.
8–12 ped. fol. oblongo-lance. glabris, subt.
cinerascentib. florib. axill. luteo albis.”
7. Aniba intermedia (Meisn.) Mez, Jahrb.
Königl. Bot. Gart. Berlin 5: 73. 1889.
Basionym: Aydendron intermedium Meisn.
in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 89. 1864; ibid. in
Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 179. 1866. TYPE:
BRAZIL. Bahia, Castelo Novo, “in sylvis
192 Harvard Papers in Botany Vol. 17, No. 1
pr. Castel Novo,” Apr. 1822, L. Riedel
732 (Holotype: LE 00000112; Isotypes,
B† [F neg. 3804], G, GH 00041154,
GOET 004488, GOET [ex Herbarium
Grisebachianum], K 000601891, L
0035565, L 0035566, LE 00000110, LE
00000111, LE 00000113, NY 00354880,
S [R-7402], W†).
Aniba puchury-minor (Mart.) Mez var.
intermedia (Meisn.) Kosterm., Recueil
Trav. Bot. Néerl. 35: 905. 1938.
The holotype bears an original label
stating “Genus Ocotea Aubl./Cal. 6 partit.
laciniis alternis interioribus Stam. filamenta
9 membranacea lata apice truncata, quorum
6 exteriora calyci opposita, 3 interiora basi
biglandulosa; antherae 4 singulo filamento
intus adnatae ā basi ad apicens dehiscentes,
2 inferiores, 2 superiores, Stigma concavum
Drupa, non vidi.” In his diary of Bahia, on
reverse of leaf 71, Riedel wrote: “732, Ocotea
Aubl. Cal. 6 part. laciniis alternis interioribus.
Stam. filamenta 9 membranacea lata apice
truncata, quorum 6 exteriora calyci opposita,
3 interiora basi biglandulosa, (antherae 4
singulo filamento intus adnatae 2 inferiores
2 superiores). Stigma concavum. Drupa __
Arbor, foliis lato-lanceolatis, florib. paniculatis
terminalib. axillarib.q. Cor. parva lutesc.”
8. Aniba parviflora (Meisn.) Mez, Jahrb.
Königl. Bot. Gart. Berlin 5: 56. 1889.
Basionym: Aydendron parviflorum Meisn.
in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 90. 1864; ibid.
in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 179. 1866.
LECTOTYPE (designated here):
BRAZIL. Amazonas, “in collib. umbr.
pr. Borba,” Jul. 1828, L. Riedel 1381
(LE 00000115; Isolectotypes, G, K
000601910, LE 00000114, NY 00354888,
OXF 00000275); Syntype: BRAZIL.
Pará, “pr. Obidos,” Nov. 1828, L. Riedel
s.n. (LE, NY 00354889).
For a complete list of synonyms, see Kubitzki
and Renner (1982).
In the protologue, Meissner (1864: 90)
indicated “In Brasiliæ prov. Parà circa Obidos
et Borba (Riedel n. 1381!),” and “(v. s. in h.
Petrop.),” thus the specimens by Riedel at LE,
from Borba and Óbidos, which were annotated
by Meissner, represent distinct collections and
are syntypes. Both Kostermans (1938b) and
Kubitzki and Renner (1982) have failed in
typifying the species, since they did not clearly
indicate which specimen in LE would be the
[lecto]type. The indication by Kostermans
(1938b) that “[t]he original label in the
Leningrad herb. bears the number 1383 and
not 1381,” which was adopted by Kubitzki and
Renner (1982), is wrong. The lectotype here
selected bears an original label idicating “no.
1381, Laurus ? Arb. 15–20 ped. fol. obovatis
glabris. florib. parvis flavis.” The register in
Riedel’s diary of Mato Grosso says “1381,
Laurus, Arbor 15–20 ped. foliis glaberrimis,
obovatis, florib. parvis lutescentib.”
9. Beilschmiedia emarginata (Meisn.)
Kosterm., Recueil Trav. Bot. Néerl. 35: 855.
1938.
Basionym: Cryptocarya emarginata Meisn.
in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 76. 1864; ibid. in
Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 166. 1866. TYPE:
BRAZIL. São Paulo, Lorena, “in sylv.
subhumidis pr. Lorena,” Oct. 1833, L.
Riedel 1585 (Holotype: LE 00000128;
Isotypes, G 00007871, K 000601865,
MO ex U [fragment], NY 00355041).
Hufelandia emarginata (Meisn.) Mez,
Jahrb. Königl. Bot. Gart. Berlin 5: 18.
1889.
The holotype bears an original label
informing “No. 1585, Laurus. Arbor 20–30
ped. fol. ovato-oblong. emarginatis glaberr. flor.
flavicantibus.”
10. Cassytha filiformis L., Sp. Pl. 1: 35. 1753.
Lectotype (designated by Imkhanitskaya,
1974: 208): INDIA. P. Osbeck s.n. (Herb.
Linn No. 519.1, LINN). Specimen: BRAZIL.
Rio de Janeiro, “circa Cabo Frio; in arboribus
et fruticetis,” L. Riedel s.n. (LE n.v., NY
00459767).
Synonyms: Cassytha americana Nees, Syst.
Laur.: 644. 1836, nom. illegit. superfl.;
ibid. Meissner in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 256.
1864; ibid. Meissner in Martius, Fl. Bras.
5(2): 296. 1866.
Cassytha americana Nees var. puberula
Meisn. in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 256. 1864;
ibid. in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 296. 1866.
TYPE: BRAZIL. Bahia, “in collibus
siccis pr. Ilheos. J. Domingo” [Fazenda
João Domingo], Jun. 1821, L. Riedel 374
(Syntype: LE n.v., NY 00354928).
For a complete list of synonyms, see Stapf
(1912), Kostermans (1950), and Weber (1981).
2012 de Moraes, BRAZILIAN LAURACEOUS COLLECTIONS OF RIEDEL 193
In the protologue of Cassytha americana,
Nees (1836) cited in the synonymy “Cassytha
filiformis Iacq. Pl. Am. p. 115. t. 97. [sic] Hook.
Exot. Fl. t. 167./Cassyta filiformis Willd., Spr.
l. c. (ex parte.),” thus referring to the American
elements previously treated by Jacquin (1763:
115, t. 79), Hooker (1827: t. 167, 167),
Willdenow (1799: 487–488), and Sprengel
(1825: 271), respectively. Cassytha filiformis
Jacq. is a later homonym of C. filiformis L.
Riedel wrote on leaf 56 of the diary of
Bahia: “374, Cassyta filiformis ? pl. volubilis
filamentosa ramosa, in fruticetis parasitica.”
Regarding the locality indicated by Riedel, “J.
Domingo,” Augel (1979) states that Riedel, in
his diary of Bahia, often described the localities
he had visited such as Olivença, Barra do Itaípe,
Maraú, Camamu, and Una. Additionally, there
were constant references to the various foreign
colonization groups, viz.: the coffee plantation
of the Dutch Peter Weyll; the farms of Almada,
where he always went to visit his friend Adolphe
Saueracker; the French colony of Fazenda
Esperança; the Swisses of Castelo Novo (Mr.
Borel), and of João Domingo (Mr. Müller);
the Colônia Leopoldina (Freyreiss, Henning,
Schaeffer); the different coffee growers in the
region of Una, like Hubert, Tominil, Pohl; and
others.
11. Cinnamomum camphora (L.) J. Presl in
Berchtold and J. Presl, Přir. Rostlin 2: 36, 47–
56, t. 8. 1825 [1823?].
Basionym: Laurus camphora L., Sp. Pl. 1:
369. 1753. Lectotype (designated by
Kostermans, 1978: 18): JAPAN. Herb.
Linn. No. 518.7 (LINN). Specimen:
BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro, s.d., L. Riedel
s.n. (LE n.v., NY 459793).
12. Cinnamomum erythropus (Nees & Mart.)
Kosterm., Reinwardtia 6: 21. 1961.
Basionym: Persea erythropus Nees & Mart.
in Nees, Linnaea 8: 49. 1833. Lectotype
(designated by Moraes, 2008: 48):
BRAZIL. Minas Gerais, Ouro Preto,
“in ferruginosis ad Antonio Pereira,”
Apr. 1818, fl., C. F. P. von Martius s.n.
(GZU 000249338, fragment on the
top, annotated by Nees, Anonymous
s.n.); Syntypes: Brazil. Loco haud
indicato, fl., F. Sellow 1360 (B†, F 619716
[fragment ex B†, F neg. 58035, Sellow
s.n.], GZU 000265498 [fragment on the
bottom, annotated by Nees, Anonymous
s.n.]); Specimens: BRAZIL. Mato Grosso
do Sul, “Rio Pardo,” 1826, L. Riedel
s.n. (LE n.v., NY 00459799); Loco haud
indicato, s.d., L. Riedel s.n. (LE n.v., NY
00459797); idem, s.d., L. Riedel s.n. (LE
n.v., NY 00459798).
Phoebe erythropus (Nees & Mart.) Mez,
Jahrb. Königl. Bot. Gart. Berlin 5: 189.
1889.
Synonyms: Persea erythropus Nees & Mart. var.
angustata Meisn. in DC., Prodr. 15(1):
55. 1864 ≡ Persea erythropus Nees &
Mart. var. mixtinervia Meisn. in Martius,
Fl. Bras. 5(2): 162. 1866, nom. illegit.
superfl. TYPE: BRAZIL. Minas Gerais,
“Serra da Piedade et S. Itacolomi,” Oct.–
Nov. 1834, L. Riedel 2777 (Syntypes,
C, G [2 sheets], K 000602109, K
000602110, LE 00000480, LE 00000481,
LE 00000482, NY 00355827, OXF
00000375 [Anonymous s.n.], P 01978620,
US 00099112).
An original label by Riedel informs
“No. 2777, Laurus. frutex 3–6 ped. fol. obl.
mucronatis coriaceis subt. tomentosis, florib
axill. panicul., panicula glauca, cor. flava.”
13. Cinnamomum stenophyllum (Meisn.)
Vattimo-Gil, Rodriguésia 31(49): 8. 1979.
Basionym: Persea stenophylla Meisn. in DC.,
Prodr. 15(1): 55. 1864; ibid. in Martius,
Fl. Bras. 5(2): 160. 1866. TYPE:
BRAZIL. São Paulo, Mogi das Cruzes,
“in sylvis montosis pr. Mugy,” Nov. 1833,
L. Riedel 1587 (Holotype: LE 00000510;
Isotypes, C, G, K n.v., LE 00000509, NY
00355861, P 00128581, US 00099149).
Phoebe stenophylla (Meisn.) Mez, Jahrb.
Königl. Bot. Gart. Berlin 5: 190. 1889.
The holotype bears an original label by
Riedel with “Arbor 20–40 ped. fol. subt.
tomentosis, racemis axill. terminalibus,”
whereas the label on the isotype LE 00000509
states “1587, Laurus. Arbor 20–40 ped. fol.
lanceolat. acuminat. basi attenuatis subtus
glaucescentibus/tomentosis flor. terminalib.”
14. Cinnamomum tomentulosum Kosterm.,
Reinwardtia 6: 24. 1961.
Basionym: Phoebe tomentosa Meisn. in DC.,
Prodr. 15(1): 30. 1864; ibid. in Martius, Fl.
Bras. 5(2): 149. 1866. TYPE: BRAZIL.
194 Harvard Papers in Botany Vol. 17, No. 1
Minas Gerais, Serra do Caraça, “in monte
Carassa,” Sept. 1824, L. Riedel 522
(Holotype: LE 00000537; Isotypes, LE
00000538, NY 00355913, NY 00355914,
US 00099192).
Cinnamomum tomentosum (Meisn.)
Vattimo-Gil, Arch. Jard. Bot. Rio de
Janeiro 17: 222. 1962, nom. illegit., non
Cinnamomum tomentosum D. Don, Prodr.
Fl. Nepal.: 66. 1825.
Synonyms: Phoebe tomentosa Meisn. var.
minor Meisn. in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 30.
1864; ibid. in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 149.
1866. TYPE: BRAZIL. Minas Gerais, “in
collib. siccis pr. Penha,” 19 Sept. 1824,
L. Riedel 522 duplius (Holotype: LE
00000539; Isotype, NY 00355915).
Persea erythropus Nees & Mart. var.
obovata Meisn. in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 55.
1864 ≡ Persea erythropus Nees & Mart.
var. triplinervia Meisn. in Martius, Fl.
Bras. 5(2): 162. 1866, nom. illegit. superfl.
TYPE: BRAZIL. Minas Gerais, “in camp.
inter Rio das Velhas et R. Paranahyba,”
Aug. 1834, L. Riedel 2462 (Syntypes, BR
8763297, G, K 000602111, LE 00000483,
LE 00000484, NY 00355829).
For a complete list of synonyms, see Lorea-
Hernández (1996).
The holotype of Phoebe tomentosa bears an
original label stating “no. 522, Laurus Arbor
15–20 ped. foliis pilosis, florib. axill. termin.
flavescentib.” The original label of Riedel 2462
informs “Laurus. Frutex 2–3 ped. flor. flavis.”
15. Cinnamomum verum J. Presl. in Berchtold
and J. Presl, Přir. Rostlin 2: 36–37, t. 7. 1825
[1823?] (see Kostermans, 1965).
Basionym: Laurus cinnamomum L., Sp. Pl.
1: 369. 1753. Lectotype (designated by
Wuu-Kuang, 2011: 261): Herb. Clifford:
154, Laurus 6, sheet B (BM 000558701).
Synonyms: Cinnamomum zeylanicum Breyn.,
Ephem. Nat. Cur. Dec. I, Ann. 4: 139.
1676, nom. invalid. (see Howard, 1981).
Cinnamomum zeylanicum Blume, Bijdr.
Fl. Ned. Ind. 11: 568. 1825; Nees in
Nees and Th. Nees, Cinnam. Disp.: 48.
1823; Nees in Wallich, Pl. Asiat. Rar. 2:
74. 1831; Nees, Syst. Laur.: 45. 1836;
Meissner in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 13. 1864;
ibid. in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 147. 1866.
Cinnamomum riedelii Lukman.,
Nomencl. Icon. Cannel.: 6, t. 4, fig. 34.
1889, syn. nov. TYPE: BRAZIL. Rio
de Janeiro, s.d., L. Riedel 489 (Holotype
?: P 01978197; Isotypes, LE n.v., NY
00459832).
For a complete list of synonyms, see
Kostermans (1964, 1986).
The only specimen located at P that agrees
with the protologue and figure of Cinnamomum
riedelii, published by Lukmanoff (1889), is the
collection by Riedel 489, which is identifiable
as C. verum and is here assumed to be the
holotype, although it is not annotated by
Lukmanoff.
16. Cryptocarya citriformis (Vell.) P.L.R.
Moraes, Taxon 54: 791. 2005.
Basionym: Laurus citriformis Vell., Fl. Flumin.:
251. 1829 [1825]. Lectotype (designated
by Moraes, l.c.): BRAZIL. [icon:
original plate on parchment of “Flora
Fluminensis” in the Manuscript Section
of the Biblioteca Nacional of Rio de
Janeiro, of] Fl. Flumin. Icon. 4: 53. 1831
[1827].
Synonyms: Aydendron floribundum Meisn.
in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 88. 1864; ibid. in
Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 177. 1866. TYPE:
BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro, Magé, “in sylv.
Mandiocca” [Langsdorff’s Fazenda da
Mandioca], Sept. 1823, L. Riedel s.n.
(Holotype: LE 00000107; Isotypes, B†,
G, G-DC, K 000601791, L 0036201, LE
00000108, LE 00000109, NY 00354874,
NY 00354875, OXF 00057028 [left-hand
specimen]).
Cryptocarya minima Mez, Jahrb. Königl.
Bot. Gart. Berlin 5: 14. 1889.
For a complete list of synonyms, see Moraes
(2005, 2007).
The holotype bears an original label stating
“Arbor 30–40 ped. flores luteoli: Drupa:
maxima.”
17. Cryptocarya mandioccana Meisn. in DC.,
Prodr. 15(1): 75. 1864; ibid. in Martius, Fl.
Bras. 5(2): 165. 1866. TYPE: BRAZIL. Rio
de Janeiro, Magé, “in sylvis Mandiocensis”
[Langsdorff’s Fazenda da Mandioca], Oct.
1823, L. Riedel s.n. (Holotype: LE; Isotypes, B†
[F neg. 3844], GOET 007344, GOET 007345,
K 000601800, L 0036185, L 0036186, LE,
2012 de Moraes, BRAZILIAN LAURACEOUS COLLECTIONS OF RIEDEL 195
NY 00355045, OXF 00057027 [right-hand
specimen], OXF 00057026, U); Specimens:
BRAZIL. Loco haud indicato, s.d., L. Riedel
s.n. (NY 00197680); Rio de Janeiro, Magé,
“Mandiocca,” 1831–1833, L. Riedel & B.
Luschnath s.n. (LE n.v., NY 00197679).
The holotype has an original label in Riedel’s
handwriting with “Arbor 20–30 ped. floribus
viride-luteis.”
18. Cryptocarya micrantha Meisn. in DC.
Prodr. 15(1): 75. 1864; ibid. in Martius, Fl.
Bras. 5(2): 165. 1866. TYPE: BRAZIL. Rio de
Janeiro, Magé, “in sylv. umbr. Mand.[iocca]”
[Langsdorff’s Fazenda da Mandioca], Oct.
1823, L. Riedel s.n. (Holotype: LE; Isotypes, B†
[F neg. 3845], GOET 007342, GOET 007343,
K 000601795, L 0033190, L 0036191, LE, NY
00355046).
For a complete list of synonyms, see Moraes
(2005, 2007).
The holotype bears an original label
handwritten by Riedel as “Arbor 15–20
ped. et ultra flores viride-lutei. folia subtus
glaucescentia. (fructib. nudis, sulcatis),” which
was transcribed by Meissner on the isotype at
NY.
19. Cryptocarya riedeliana P.L.R. Moraes,
Taxon. Cryptocarya Spec. Brazil: 94. 2007.
TYPE: BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro, Corcovado, 8
Sept. 1867, A. F. M. Glaziou 1516 (Holotype: BR
837725; Isotypes (only flowering specimens),
B 10 0000927, BR 868666, BR 868699, C,
IAN 93355, NY [3 sheets], P 00221220, U);
Paratypes: BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro, loco haud
indicato, Jul. 1832, L. Riedel 485 (G, K, LE [2
sheets], NY 00886994); idem, s.d., L. Riedel
s.n. (G, K, LE).
Until recently, in most herbaria Cryptocarya
riedeliana has been identified as C. moschata
Nees & Mart. or C. aschersoniana Mez. The
specimen Riedel 485 at LE bears an original
label by Riedel with “Arbor 30–40 ped., fol.
ovato-oblong. et obl.-lanceolatis nitidis, flor.
terminal. racemosis, fruct. costatis odoratis,
Nosca moscada do Brasil.”
20. Dicypellium caryophyllaceum (Mart.)
Nees & Mart. in Nees, Pl. Laur. Expos.: 14.
1833; ibid. Nees, Syst. Laur.: 344. 1836; ibid.
Meissner in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 170. 1864; ibid.
in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 281. 1866. Specimen:
BRAZIL. Pará (?), loco haud indicato, s.d., L.
Riedel s.n. (LE n.v.).
Basionym: Persea caryophyllacea Mart. in
Buchner, Repert. 31: 353. 1829; ibid. in
Spix and Martius, Reise Bras. 3: 915.
1831. TYPE: BRAZIL. Amazonas,
Maués, “in sylvis ad Maué hace culta in
hortis Parae.,” Apr. 1820, C. F. P. von
Martius s.n. (Holotype: M 0147268;
Isotypes, B 10 0185010, B 10 0185011,
G, GZU 000254389); other original
material: BRAZIL. C. F. P. von Martius
Obs. no. 2617: “Persea caryophyllat.
Mart./Dicypellium caryophyllat. Nees/
Laurus sanguinea Sw. ? … Colitur in
horto regio Pará, ex interioribus silvis
advecta” (M 0147264, M 0147265 & M
0147266 [Martius s.n.]).
Ocotea caryophyllacea (Mart.) Kostel.,
Allg. Med.-Pharm. Fl. 2: 482. 1833.
Since the specimen by Riedel at LE has not
been checked, its identity and further information
here about the collection relied on the literature.
Meissner (1864: 170) wrote “In Brasiliæ prov.
Parà et circa Mandioccam (Martius n. 2617!
Riedel !). … et Casca preciosa (Riedel). … (v.
s. in hb. Monac. et Petrop.),” whereas Meissner
(1866: 281) informed “Loco non indicato legit
Riedel. … Casca preciosa incolis: Riedel.”
Mez (1889: 473–474) also registered “Casca
preciosa (ex Riedel!),” and “… et in prov.
Pará in interioribus sylvis ad Rio Tocantins et
Tapajoz, nec non in hortis Paraënsibus culta:
Martius, Riedel. Floret Aprili. (V. s. in herb.
Berol., Deless., Haun., Monac., Petrop.).”
Nees von Esenbeck (1836: 344–345) indicated
“Habitat in sylvis Brasiliae ad Mandioccam,
colitur in hortis prope Pará, Provinciae
Paraënsis, …,” and “Adnotatio. An huius loci:
Linharea aromatica, Canella do Mato. Arruda
in Koster’s Travels p. 493. ? Specimen habeo,
a Ser. Principe Maximiliano Wiedensi in sylvis
Cabo frio Brasiliae lectum, …,” for which
Martius (1843: 111) added “Arbor omnium
Laurinearum, quas Brasilias alit obilissima,
non solum in provinciis imperii aequatorialibus
proveniens, sed quoque sylvarum montanarum
in Serra do Mar decus, …,” denoting that Nees
and Martius’ circumscription encompassed
more than one taxon, since Dicypellium
caryophyllatum (Mart.) Nees is known to be
distributed in the Amazon region (see Rohwer,
1988). In fact, the specimen collected by Prince
196 Harvard Papers in Botany Vol. 17, No. 1
Maximilian zu Wied in Cabo Frio, Rio de
Janeiro, which was cited by Nees, is currently
housed at GZU (000253872), and belongs to
Ocotea odorifera (Vell.) Rohwer.
21. Endlicheria anomala (Nees) Mez, Jahrb.
Königl. Bot. Gart. Berlin 5: 133. 1889.
Basionym: Goeppertia anomala Nees, Syst.
Laur.: 370. 1836; ibid. in Linnaea 21: 514.
1848; ibid. Meissner in DC., Prodr. 15(1):
173. 1864; ibid. Meissner in Martius,
Fl. Bras. 5(2): 283. 1866. Lectotype
(designated by Kostermans, 1937: 508):
BRAZIL. Amazonas, Rio Amazonas,
near Ega [Tefé], Sept. 1831, E. F. Poeppig
2552 (W; Isolectotypes, B, BM n.v., F
0061402, G, G-DC [F neg. 7304], GOET,
GZU 000254084, HAL 0103806, KIEL,
LE, LZ†, NY 00099495, OXF 00088400,
P 00745681, P 00745682); Specimens:
BRAZIL. Amazonas, “Rio Madeira, in
sylv. umbr. arenosis pr. Borba,” Aug.
1828, L. Riedel 1376 (LE n.v., OXF
000004037); Amazonas, Manaus, “in
sylv. umbrosis ripae Rio Negro pr. Barra,”
Sept. 1828, L. Riedel 1451 (GOET [2
sheets]), LE n.v., NY 01155477, OXF
00000399 [“Barra” = Manaus]).
For a complete list of synonyms, see
Chanderbali (2004).
Riedel wrote in the diary of Mato Grosso:
“1376, ♄ 20–30 ped. foliis subt. cinerascentib.
florib. axillarib. flavescentib.” The transcription
by Meissner on the label of Riedel 1451 at NY
informs “1451. Arbor 15–20 ped., fol. oblongo-
ellipt., flor. flavesc.,” which is literally the
information given by Riedel in his diary of
Mato Grosso (Fig. 2).
22. Endlicheria macrophylla (Meisn.) Mez,
Jahrb. Königl. Bot. Gart. Berlin 5: 128. 1889.
Basionym: Ampelodaphne macrophylla Meisn.
in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 81. 1864; ibid.
in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 167. 1866.
Lectotype (designated by Kostermans,
1937: 523): BRAZIL. Amazonas,
“in vicinibus Barra” [Manaus], Apr.
1851, R. Spruce 1453 (K 000601843;
Isolectotypes, B n.v., BM 000993882,
BR 8807151, C, E 00036078 [only the
flowering twig], F 0061333 [fragment],
G, G-DC [F neg. 7295], GH 00041137,
GOET 004495 [only the flowering twig],
L n.v., LE 00000134, NY 00354825
[only the flowering twig], NY 00354827,
P 00745672, P 00077243, W n.v.);
Syntypes: BRAZIL. Amazonas, “in
vicinibus Barra,” Apr. 1851, R. Spruce
1453 bis (BM 000993883, BR 8807182,
E 00036078 [the fruiting twig], GOET
004495 [the fruiting twig], K 000601842,
K 000601844, NY 00354825 [the
fruiting twig], P 00745671, P 00745673);
BRAZIL. Amazonas, Manaus, “in locis
arenosis Barra,” Sept. 1828, L. Riedel
1411 (B n.v., G, GOET, K 000601845,
L n.v., LE 00000129, LE 00000130, LE
00000131, LE 00000132, LE 00000133,
NY 00354826, OXF 00000392).
An original label by Riedel states “Laurinae.
Gen. novum. Cal. 0. Cor supera 6 petala. Stam
6–9 Styl. 1. Stigma concavum 3 dentatum–
frutex 8–12 ped, foliis pubescentib, florib.
racemosis, axill. terminalib, Corolla parva
atropurpurea,” which was also stated almost
literally by Riedel in his diary of Mato Grosso.
23. Endlicheria paniculata (Spreng.) J.F.
Macbr., Publ. Field Mus. Nat. Hist., Bot. Ser.
13 (2/3): 850. 1938.
Basionym: Citrosma paniculata Spreng.,
Syst. Veg. (ed. 16) 2: 545. 1825. TYPE:
Brazil. Loco haud indicato, fl. C,
F. Sellow s.n. (Holotype: B†); Other
specimens: Brazil. Minas Gerais,
“Guidowald,” fl. C, F. Sellow B 1383 c 418
(K 000512705); São Paulo, fr., F. Sellow
s.n. (P 00571413, ex Herbier Impérial du
BRÉSIL N.o 202); loco haud indicato, fl.
C, F. Sellow 1166 (K 000512704); idem,
fl., F. Sellow 2244 (K 000512683); idem,
fl., F. Sellow B 383 c 418 (K 000512684);
idem, fl., F. Sellow s.n. (B 10 0185006, ex
Herb. Baschant); idem, fl., F. Sellow s.n.
(BR 8806345); idem, fl., F. Sellow s.n.
(BR 8806499); idem, fl., F. Sellow s.n.
(BR 8807120, G-DC 00131435, GZU
000249328 (fl. F), HAL 103839); idem,
fl., F. Sellow s.n. (E 00259394); idem, fl.,
Sellow s.n. (E 00259395); idem, fl. ☿–C,
F. Sellow s.n. (GZU 000249331); idem,
fl., F. Sellow s.n. (K 000512706); idem, fl.
F, F. Sellow s.n. (K 000512707); idem, fl.
F, F. Sellow s.n. (P 00571412, ex Herb.
Kunth).
2012 de Moraes, BRAZILIAN LAURACEOUS COLLECTIONS OF RIEDEL 197

Figure 2. Pages from Riedel’s diary of Mato Grosso with annotations on collections No. 1436 to 1455, from
Barra [Manaus], dated September 1828. Manuscript preserved in the Biblioteca Nacional of Rio de Janeiro. ©
Fundação Biblioteca Nacional.

Siparuna paniculata (Spreng.) A. DC. in Goeppertia hirsuta (Schott) Nees, Syst.

DC., Prodr. 16(2): 656. 1868.
Synonyms: Cryptocarya hirsuta Schott
in Spreng., Syst. Veg. (ed. 16) 4(2):
405. 1827. Lectotype (designated by
Kostermans, 1937: 549): BRAZIL. Rio
de Janeiro, fl. F, J. E. Pohl 5611 (W†).
Lectotype (designated by Moraes, 2008:
10): Brazil. Rio de Janeiro, “ad S.
Cristovão prope Sebastianopolis Bras.,”
s.d., fl. F, J. B. E. Pohl 5611 (M 0111046
[F neg. 19260, ex Herbarium Zuccarinii];
Isolectotypes, B†, BR 8806796, M 0111047
[ex Herbar Kummer.], U 0120552, WRSL
n.v.); Probable isolectotypes, G 00020752
[Pohl s.n.], GZU 000249325 [ex Hb.
Schott, fragment, flowers], P 00603808
[ex W, Anonymous s.n.], P 00603809 [ex
W, Anonymous s.n.].
Endlicheria hirsuta (Schott) Nees,
Linnaea 8: 38. 1833.
Laur.: 366. 1836; ibid. Meissner in DC.,
Prodr. 15(1): 172. 1864; ibid. Meissner
in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 282. 1866.
Specimens: BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro,
Magé, “in fruticetis prope Mandioccam”
[Langsdorff’s Fazenda da Mandioca],
Jan.–Feb. 1823, fl. F, L. Riedel s.n. (LE
n.v., NY 00459914); idem, L. Riedel
s.n. (LE n.v., NY 00459921); idem, “in
sylvis umbrosis Rio de Janeiro,” Nov.–
Dec. 1829, L. Riedel 23 (LE n.v., NY
00355144); idem, “in umbrosis Mtis
Corcovado prope Rio de Janeiro,” Oct.
1832, fr., L. Riedel 1142 (K 000512709,
LE n.v., NY 00459915); loco haud
indicato, L. Riedel s.n. (GOET [2 sheets],
K 000512708, LE n.v., MEL 2318480);
loco haud indicato, s.d., L. Riedel s.n. (LE
n.v., NY 00459919); Magé, “Mandioca,”
1831–1833, L. Riedel & B. Luschnath s.n.
198 Harvard Papers in Botany Vol. 17, No. 1
(LE n.v., NY 00459920, NY 00459922);
loco haud indicato, “Iter Brasiliense
1824–29,” s.d., ster., L. Riedel s.n. (LE
n.v., NY 00918576).
For a complete list of synonyms, see
Chanderbali (2004), Moraes (2008).
Mez (1889, 1892) also cited Riedel 2298
(n.v.).
Specimen Riedel s.n. at NY 00459914 bears
a label transcribed by Meissner with “Arbor
20–25 ped., flor. viridi-lutei,” while in specimen
Riedel 1142 at NY the label transcribed by
Meissner states “1142. Frutex et arbor, fol.
ovato-lanceolatiacuminatis supra glabris subtus
puberulis, fruct. oblongis.”
24. Licaria armeniaca (Nees) Kosterm.,
Recueil Trav. Bot. Néerl. 34: 584. 1937.
Basionym: Evonymodaphne armeniaca Nees,
Syst. Laur.: 264. 1836. Lectotype (desig-
nated by Kostermans, 1936: 732): PERU.
“Maynas circa oppidum Tocache ad fl.
Huallagam,” Jun. 1831, E. F. Poeppig
1787 (W n.v.; Isolectotypes, B [F neg.
3835], F 0040275 [fragment], G, GZU
000254083, L, LE 00000546, LE
00000547, M 0152446, NY 00355139
[fragment], OXF 00000297, P 00128453,
P 00128454); Syntype: PERU. “Tocache,”
1830/1831, E. F. Poeppig 1861 ex parte (B
10 0247504 [B neg. 5266A], F 0040349,
GZU 000254082, GZU 000254369, NY
00355140, P 00756825, US 00048572).
Acrodiclidium armeniacum (Nees) Mez,
Jahrb. Königl. Bot. Gart. Berlin 5: 85.
1889.
Misanteca armeniaca (Nees) Lundell,
Wrightia 4: 99. 1969.
Synonyms: Mespilodaphne parviflora Meisn.
in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 109. 1864; ibid.
in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 202. 1866.
LECTOTYPE (designated here):
BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro, “in umbr.
sylvaticis R. Jan.,” Jun.–Jul. 1832, L.
Riedel 478 (LE 00000578; Isolectotypes,
G, K 000602380, K 000602381,
K 000602382, NY 00355357, US
00051079); Syntype: BRAZIL. Rio de
Janeiro, Serra dos Órgãos, Apr. 1833,
B. Luschnath s.n. (BR 8806369, BR
8806598, KIEL, LE n.v.).
Acrodiclidium parviflorum (Meisn.) Mez,
Jahrb. Königl. Bot. Gart. Berlin 5: 85.
1889.
For a complete list of synonyms, see Kurz
(2000).
The lectotype of Mespilodaphne parviflora
bears an original label by Riedel with “478,
Persea. Arbor v. frutex – Foliis oblongo-
lanceolatis acuminatis glabris undulatis.
florib. racemosis terminalib. axillaribus. Cor.
atrorubra.”
25. Licaria puchury-major (Mart.) Kosterm.,
Recueil Trav. Bot. Néerl. 34: 583. 1937.
Basionym: Ocotea puchury-major Mart. in
Buchner, Repert. 35: 171. 1830. TYPE:
BRAZIL. Amazonas, “in sylvis ad
Tabatinga,” Dec. 1819, fr., C. F. P. von
Martius s.n. (Holotype: M 0147421 [F
neg. 19259]; Isotypes, B†, BR 8812841,
G, GZU 000254328, L n.v.; Possible
isotypes: M 0147419, M 0147420).
Nectandra puchury-major (Mart.) Nees
& Mart. in Nees, Syst. Laur.: 328. 1836;
ibid. Meissner in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 156.
1864; ibid. in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 265.
1866. Specimens: BRAZIL. Amazonas,
“circa Borba,” 1828, L. Riedel s.n. (LE
n.v., NY 01477182).
Acrodiclidium puchury-major (Mart.)
Mez, Jahrb. Königl. Bot. Gart. Berlin 5:
88. 1889.
Misanteca puchury-major (Mart.)
Lundell, Wrightia 4: 101. 1969.
For a complete list of synonyms, see Kurz
(2000).
The vernacular name indicated by Riedel
is “Picheri,” while Martius annotated it as
“Puchury, Puchery, Puchyry,” on the label.
26. Mezilaurus crassiramea (Meisn.) Taub. ex
Mez, Arbeiten Königl. Bot. Gart. Breslau 1:
112. 1892.
Basionym: Oreodaphne crassiramea Meisn.
in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 117. 1864; ibid.
in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 212. 1866.
Lectotype (designated by Alves,
2011: 63): BRAZIL. Goiás, “Serra
d’Ourada,” 1839, J. E. Pohl s.n. (ex
Herb. Vindob. N. 1932) (K 000601950;
Isolectotypes, BR 8685995, NY
00355700 [fragment]). Specimens:
BRAZIL. Mato Grosso: “Chapada”
[Serra da Chapada], 1825, L. Riedel
s.n. (LE n.v., NY 00459967).
2012 de Moraes, BRAZILIAN LAURACEOUS COLLECTIONS OF RIEDEL 199
27. Nectandra canescens Nees & Mart. in Nees,
Linnaea 8: 47. 1836. Lectotype (designated by
Rohwer, 1993: 274): BRAZIL. Pará, “in sylvis
fl. Amazonum, Provinciae Paraënsis et RN,”
20 Oct. 1819, immat. fr., C. F. P. von Martius
Obs. [= Observationes botanicae] no. 2750:
“arbor 15–20 ped. …In silvis ad marginem
fl. Amazonum” (M 0112453; Isolectotypes,
GZU 000254254, M 0112458, M 0112459);
Other specimen: C. F. P. von Martius s.n. (B 10
0185095 [F neg. 3750]).
Synonym: Nectandra magnoliifolia Meisn.
in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 154. 1864, as
‘magnoliaefolia’, non Nectandra
magnoliifolia A. Rich. in Sagra, Hist.
Fis. Cuba, Bot. 11: 188. 1850; ibid.
in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 262. 1866.
Lectotype (designated by Rohwer,
1993: 274): BRAZIL. Amazonas, “ad
oram septentrionalem flum. Amazon, ad
ostium,” Aug. 1851, R. Spruce 1693 (G-
DC; Isolectotypes, AWH 28293, B 10
0185045, BM 000947278, BR 8686589,
G, K 000576196, K 000576197, LE
00000239, NY, OXF 000002709, P
00711020, P 00711021); Syntype:
BRAZIL. Amazonas, “in sylv. umbr.
arenosis pr Borba,” Aug. 1828, L. Riedel
1323 (G [fragment], LE 00000236, LE
00000237, LE 00000238, NY 00355467,
NY 00355468, OXF 000002507).
The specimen LE 00000238 bears an
original label by Riedel with “no 1323, Laurus
Arbor 60–70 ped. Rami hirsuti. fol. glabris,
flor. albis,” which agrees with the information
in his diary of Mato Grosso, while the label
on specimen LE 00000237 informs “Laurus
Arbor 50–60 ped. flores albis.” As indicated by
Rohwer (1993), specimen NY 00355469 is a
collection by Riedel annotated by Meissner on
label as “Riedel 1323,” however, it belongs to
Nectandra oppositifolia Nees & Mart.
28. Nectandra cissiflora Nees, Syst. Laur.:
296. 1836. Lectotype (designated by Rohwer,
1993: 142): PERU. Maynas, “Andes peruv.,”
“ad fl. Amazonum,” 1829, E. F. Poeppig
3061 (addenda No. 40) (GZU 000254256;
Isolectotypes, B 10 0185090 [F neg. 3751], BM
000947227, F 875335 [NY neg. N.S. 7040],
G, G-DC, GOET 004506, GZU 000254257
[fragment], KIEL, L 0037116, LE 00000225,
OXF, P 00128693).
Synonyms: Nectandra myriantha Meisn. in DC.,
Prodr. 15(1): 163. 1864; ibid. in Martius,
Fl. Bras. 5(2): 275. 1866. Lectotype
(designated by Rohwer, 1993: 142):
BRAZIL. São Paulo, “in sylvis primaevis
ad Rio Parana,” Jul. 1834, L. Riedel
2440 (K 000642345; Isolectotypes, A
00041956 [fragment], C [F neg. 22069],
G, LE n.v., NY 00355479, US 00048569).
Nectandra myriantha Meisn. var.
attenuata Meisn. in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 163.
1864; ibid. in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 275.
1866. Lectotype (designated by Rohwer,
1993: 142): BRAZIL. Minas Gerais, “in
sylvaticis ad rivulos pr. Alegre” [S. Anna
dos Alegres], Sept. 1834, L. Riedel 2778
(NY 00355480; Isolectotypes, C [F neg.
22075], G, K 000642342, LE n.v., P
00711033, P 00711034, US 00048568).
For a complete list of synonyms, see Rohwer
(1993).
The specimen NY 00355479 has a label
transcribed by Meissner with “canella
foedorenta incolarum, teste Riedel. Arbor
procera, 50–60 ped. et major, fol. coriaceis supra
nitidis subtus glaucescentibus, florib. paniculat.
albis.” The lectotype of Nectandra myriantha
var. attenuata bears a label transcribed by
Meissner with “Frutex arborescens 6–15 ped.,
fol. glaberr. subtus glaucesc. fl. paniculat. albis
v. flavicant.”
29. Nectandra lanceolata Nees & Mart.
in Nees, Linnaea 8: 47. 1833. Lectotype
(designated by Rohwer, 1986: 13; second-step
lectotype designated by Moraes, 2008: 18):
BRAZIL. Rio Grande do Sul, 19 Nov. 1823, fl.,
F. Sellow d 1447 (B 10 0185054; Isolectotypes,
G 00020753, G 00020754, K 000512725);
Possible isolectotype : B 10 0185053 [B neg.
1581/11, NY neg. 8345]; Other syntypes:
BRAZIL. São Paulo, “Ypanema,” 1819, fl.,
F. Sellow B 1377 c 411 (B 10 0185052, B 10
0185051 [B neg. 1581/10, NY neg. 8344], VT);
idem, São Paulo, fr., F. Sellow 5373 [= Sellow
5737] (B 10 0185055, GZU 000249362 [fruiting
branch]); Probable syntypes: BRAZIL. Loco
haud indicato, fl., F. Sellow s.n. (B 10 0185050,
ex Herb. Baschant); idem, fl., F. Sellow s.n.
(CGE); idem, immat. fr., F. Sellow s.n. (E
00259365); idem, fl., Anonymous s.n. (GZU
000249362, flowering branches, with label of
“Pomatium angustifolium”); idem, immat. fr.,
200 Harvard Papers in Botany Vol. 17, No. 1
F. Sellow s.n. (G ex B [F neg. 27600]); idem, fl.,
F. Sellow s.n. (G-DC 00131259, HAL 010522);
idem, fl., F. Sellow s.n. (KIEL); idem, fl., F.
Sellow s.n. (NY 00355458); idem, fl., F. Sellow
s.n. (US 00099287 ex K ex Herb. Hook. ex B);
Specimen: BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro, L. Riedel
480 bis (G, LE n.v.).
30. Nectandra nitidula Nees & Mart. in Nees,
Linnaea 8: 48. 1833 ≡ Nectandra nitidula Nees
& Mart. var. minor Nees, Syst. Laur.: 313. 1836
[homotypic by typification; lectotype designated
by Moraes, 2008: 20]. Lectotype (designated
by Rohwer, 1993: 180): Brazil. São Paulo,
“in campis prope Taubaté,” Dec. 1817, fr., C.
F. P. von Martius Obs. no. 546: “arbor 20 ped.
cal. viridis” (M 0111064); Other syntypes:
Brazil. São Paulo, 1829, fl., F. Sellow 28 (B
10 0185228 [B neg. 1581/3, NY neg. 8319]);
Brazil. Loco haud indicato, fl., F. Sellow
s.n. (B 10 0185227 [B neg. 5197, annotated by
Nees]; Probable syntypes: Brazil. Loco haud
indicato, fl., F. Sellow s.n. (B 10 0185226);
idem, fl., F. Sellow s.n. (BR 8808479, E
00259309); idem, fl., F. Sellow s.n. (CGE);
idem, fl., Anonymous s.n. (GZU 000259200,
annotated by Nees); Other specimens: Brazil.
Minas Gerais, “Itambé,” fl., F. Sellow c 401 (B
10 0185225, VT); Brazil. Minas Gerais (?),
fl., F. Sellow 1267 (B 10 0185250 [NY neg.
8363, upper specimen]); Brazil. Loco haud
indicato, fl., F. Sellow 1163 (K 000512723);
BRAZIL. Minas Gerais, fl., (F. Sellow s.n.) (P
001955141 [ex Herbier Impérial du BRÉSIL
N.o 34]).
Synonym: Nectandra nitidula Nees & Mart.
var. latifolia Nees, Syst. Laur.: 313. 1836;
ibid. Meissner in DC., Prodr. (15(1): 160.
1864; ibid. Meissner in Martius, Fl. Bras.
5(2): 271. 1866. Lectotype (designated
by Rohwer, 1993: 181): Brazil. Minas
Gerais, “Alberto Dias,” 1818, fl., F. Sellow
B 1369 c 402 (B 10 0185224 [B neg.
1581/4, NY neg. 8320]; Isolectotypes, E
00259363 [Sellow s.n.], G-DC 00131417
[Sellow s.n.], HAL 010384 [annotated
by Schlechtendal, mixtum compositum,
only the branches with flowers, Sellow
s.n.], GZU 000249361 [Anonymous
s.n.], P 00711050; Syntypes: Brazil.
Loco haud indicato, ster., F. Sellow
1370 (B 10 0185407, B 10 0185408, B
10 0185409 [B neg. 5242 A] {= Ocotea
fasciculata (Nees) Mez, fide Mez, 1889:
249. Basionym: Oreodaphne fasciculata
Nees, Linnaea 21: 521. 1848. Lectotype
(designated by Moraes, 2008: 21, as
‘Holotype’; cf. Art. 9.8). LECTOTYPE
(second-step lectotype, designated
here): GuYana. “am Ufer des Flusses
Rupununi,” May 1843, fl., Richard
Schomburgk 1286 [= Robert Schomburgk
ser. 2, 928] (B 10 0000002 [annotated by
Nees with ‘Oreodaphne Camphoromoea
fasciculata N. ab Es’], only the flowering
branches on the left; Isolectotypes,
B 10 0000003 [ex Herb. Kunth, Ri.
Schomburgk 1286], F 0061686 [ex B,
fragment], K 000352442 [Ri. Schomburgk
1286], K 000352443 [Ro. Schomburgk
ser. 2 928/1286], K 000352444 [Ro.
Schomburgk ser. 2 928/1286], K
000352445 [Ro. Schomburgk ser. 2
928/1286])}; Specimen: BRAZIL. Minas
Gerais, “in fruticetis montosis, Aguas
Quentes, Serra do Caraça,” Sept. 1824,
L. Riedel 499 (K 000642321, LE n.v., NY
00918099, OXF 00098258, RB 463787).
For a complete list of synonyms, see Rohwer
(1993), Moraes (2008).
The collection of Nectandra nitidula by
Riedel bears his information of “Arbor 15–20
ped., ramis fulvis, fol. oblonga-lanceolat.
acuminatis subcoriacis nitidis. flor albis.” Mez
(1889: 436; 1892: 153) quoted “Riedel 106
& 109 (in herb. Brux.),” but these collections
are actually gatherings by Peter Claussen
from Cachoeira do Campo, Minas Gerais, in
August 1839 (Claussen 106 [BR 8808240],
Claussen 107 [BR 8807946], and Claussen
s.n. [BR 8808271; attributed to Riedel]), which
correspond with the Martii Herbarium Florae
Brasiliensis no. 1239 {this latter being the
lectotype designated by Rohwer (1993: 181)
of Nectandra nitidula Nees & Mart. var. maior
Nees, Syst. Laur.: 313. 1836 (M 0111062;
Isolectotypes, AWH 28295, BM 000947260, G,
G-DC, JE 00004387 [Anonymous 1239], K not
located, M 0111059, MO 247468 [1803608],
NY 00355481, OXF 00083028, P 00711051)}.
In his treatment of the Lauraceae for the
“Flora der Aequinoctial-Gegenden der neuen
Welt” by Johann Friedrich Klotzsch, Nees
von Esenbeck (1848) indicated the collection
“im brittischen Guiana, am Ufer des Flusses
Rupununi. Rich. Schomburgk n. 1286,” in the
protologue of Oreodaphne fasciculata. In this
treatment, Nees had systematically specified
2012 de Moraes, BRAZILIAN LAURACEOUS COLLECTIONS OF RIEDEL 201
the herbaria from which he examined many
of the specimens cited, and for those without
any statement about it, the herbarium at Berlin
should be assumed as the institution keeping
those samples, for obvious reasons. Since
the sheet B 10 0000002 is the only one that
was annotated by Nees von Esenbeck, I have
indicated it as the holotype of Oreodaphne
fasciculata Nees, in my work on the Lauraceae
collected by Friedrich Sellow (Moraes, 2008:
21). However, Assis and Mello-Silva (2010)
have recently claimed that “Nees von Esenbeck
(1848) described Oreodaphne fasciculata based
on Schomburgk 1286, but did not assign the
holotype. Schomburgk 1286 at B herbarium is
a mixed collection, with materials from Ocotea
fasciculata and O. schomburgkiana (Nees)
Mez. The fuller collections at K herbarium,
represented by four sheets, are not mixed for
Schomburgk 1286, and the sheet K 000352442 is
selected here as the lectotype of O. fasciculata.”
In fact, the sheet at B 10 0000002 bears a small
sterile branch on its top right that would be
identifiable as Ocotea schomburgkiana (Nees)
Mez, being therefore a mixed material with
the other two well-preserved fertile branches
of Ocotea fasciculata, on this sheet annotated
by Nees. Thus, according to the articles 9.8 and
9.17 of the ICBN (McNeill et al., 2006), the
lectotypification proposed by Assis and Mello-
Silva (2010) is superfluous.
As pointed out by Moraes (2008), the
numbering system of collections of the brothers
Robert and Richard Schomburgk follows the
explanation provided by Bentham in his later
publications, where he gave the correlation
between Robert’s second collection series (Rob.
ser. 2, collected with his brother from 1841 to
1843) numbers at Kew and Richard’s numbers
at Berlin as x/y or x/yB, treating these parallel
numerations as referring to the same collection
(see van Dam, 2002).
31. Nectandra oppositifolia Nees & Mart. in
Nees, Linnaea 8: 47. 1833; ibid. Meissner in
DC., Prodr. 15(1): 146. 1864; ibid. Meissner
in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 250. 1866 ≡
Nectandra oppositifolia Nees & Mart. var.
angustifolia Nees & Mart. in Nees, Linnaea
8: 47. 1833 [homotypic by lectotypification;
lectotype designated by Moraes, 2008: 22].
Lectotype (designated by Rohwer, 1993: 286):
Brazil. São Paulo, fl., F. Sellow 5722 (B 10
0185222 [NY neg. 8327]; Isolectotypes, B 10
0185221, BM 000895363, G-DC 00130422,
K 000512726, VT); Other syntypes: Brazil.
“Brasilia orientalis,” fl., F. Sellow LVI (BR
8808226); BRAZIL. Santa Catarina, fl.,
F. Sellow 4428 (B 10 0185220); Probable
syntypes: Brazil. Loco haud indicato, fl.,
F. Sellow s.n. (GZU 249356 and HAL 10385,
both with a label by Schlechtendal annotated
as “Pomatium oppositifolium”); idem, fl., F.
Sellow s.n. (GZU 000249357, annotated by
Nees as “Pomatium oppositifolium”); Other
specimens: Brazil. Loco haud indicato,
ster., F. Sellow s.n. (B 10 0185172); idem, fl.,
F. Sellow s.n. (B 10 0185175); BRAZIL. Rio
de Janeiro, Magé, “Mandiocca” [Langsdorff’s
Fazenda da Mandioca], 1831–1833, L. Riedel &
B. Luschnath s.n. (LE n.v., NY 00469205); idem,
L. Riedel s.n. (LE n.v., NY 00469204); idem,
Magé, “locis humidiusculis inter Mandiocca
et Inhumerim,” Feb.–Mar. 1823, L. Riedel s.n.
(LE n.v., NY 00469203); loco haud indicato,
s.d., L. Riedel 1323 (LE n.v., NY 00355469).
For a complete list of synonyms, see Rohwer
(1993).
Under Nectandra rigida (Kunth) Nees,
Syst. Laur.: 284. 1836, Meissner (1864: 149;
1866: 255) cited Riedel 1323, which is the
same number of the syntype of Nectandra
magnoliifolia Meisn. The label transcribed
by Meissner on the specimen NY 00469203
informs “Arbor 12–15 ped., flor. axillar. albis.”
32. Nectandra psammophila Nees & Mart.
in Nees, Syst. Laur.: 303. 1836. Lectotype
(designated by Rohwer, 1993: 160). BRAZIL.
Espírito Santo, Vila Velha, “Barra de Jucu,”
Mar. 1816 (sic), M. A. P., Prinz zu Wied s.n.
(BR 8808066; Isolectotypes, B 10 0185169 [F
neg. 3763], BR 8808363, GOET 000753, GZU
000254281, MEL 2324403, MEL 2324386).
Synonym: Nectandra riedelii Meisn. in
DC., Prodr. 15(1): 161. 1864; ibid.
in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 271. 1866.
Lectotype (designated by Rohwer, 1993:
160): BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro, Magé,
“in umbrosis sylvaticis Mandiocca”
[Langsdorff’s Fazenda da Mandioca],
Nov. 1823, L. Riedel s.n. (NY 00355503;
Isolectotypes, LE 00000242, LE
00000243, LE 00000244, LE 00000245);
Syntype: BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro, Magé-
Petrópolis, “in fruticalis collibusque
umbrosis Serra Estrella” [Serra da
Estrela], Jan.–Feb. 1823, L. Riedel s.n.
202 Harvard Papers in Botany Vol. 17, No. 1
(LE n.v., NY 00355502); Unplaced
syntypes: B 10 0185148, G, GOET [2
sheets], K 000642239, L 0037064, L
0037065); Specimens: BRAZIL. Minas
Gerais, loco haud indicato, s.d., L.
Riedel s.n. (NY 00469231 [with label of
Oreodaphne regeliana Meisn.]); idem,
loco haud indicato, s.d., L. Riedel & G. H.
Langsdorff 88 (LE n.v., US n.v.); idem,
loco haud indicato, s.d., L. Riedel & G. H.
Langsdorff 664 (LE n.v., NY 00469230,
US n.v.).
For a complete list of synonyms, see Rohwer
(1993).
Specimens LE 00000242 and LE 00000244
bear original labels by Riedel with “Filamentis
6 exteriorib. petaloideis 4 antheriferis. Arbor
15–20 ped. flores albi.” The transcription by
Meissner on label of specimen NY 00355502
says “Arbor 15–18 ped., flor. spurco-albis.”
33. Nectandra puberula (Schott) Nees, Syst.
Laur.: 332. 1836.
Basionym: Persea puberula Schott in Sprengel,
Syst. Veg. (ed. 16) 4(2): 405. 1827. TYPE:
BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro, loco haud
indicato, H. W. Schott s.n. (Holotype: B 10
0185167 [B neg. 5200, ex Herb. Sprengel
nr. 40]; Isotypes, GZU 000254414, and
possibly P 00711066, P 00711067).
Synonym: Nectandra amara Meisn. var.
chartacea Meisn. in DC., Prodr. 15(1):
158. 1864; ibid. in Martius, Fl. Bras.
5(2): 267. 1866. Lectotype (designated
by Rohwer, 1993: 221): BRAZIL. Rio
de Janeiro, “São Cristóvão,” H. W. Schott
5609 (G; Isolectotypes, F 0061480, F
0061481 [fragment], US 00048566,
US 00997590); Syntype: BRAZIL. Rio
de Janeiro, “in sylvaticis collibusque
umbrosis circa Rio de Janeiro,” May–
Jul. 1832, L. Riedel 480 (B 10 0185163
& GOET–2 sheets [Riedel s.n.; annotated
as “Nectandra amara β. subevenia
Meissn.”], C, G, K 000576215, K
000576216 [Riedel s.n.], L 0037068, LE
n.v., MEL 2324391, MICH 1104568, NY
00355407, NY 00355408, NY 00355409,
P 00711053, P 00711054, US 00288970,
W n.v.).
For a complete list of synonyms, see Rohwer
(1993).
The label transcribed by Meissner on
sheet NY 00355407 states “Arbor 40 ped.,
fol. lanceolati acuminat. ramisque leviter
pubescentib. flor. flavicantibus.”
34. Nectandra purpurea (Ruiz & Pav.) Mez,
Jahrb. Königl. Bot. Gart. Berlin 5: 443. 1889.
Basionym: Laurus purpurea Ruiz & Pav.,
Fl. Peruv. 4: t. 351. 1804 [–1830].
Lectotype (designated by Bernardi,
1967: 60, as “specimine holotypico
herbarii berolinensis addicto”): PERU.
Huánuco, “in Andium nemoribus ad
Cuchero et Chinchao,” 1778, H. Ruíz L.
& J. A. Pavón s.n. (B 10 0185160 [B neg.
1232/25]; Isolectotypes, BM 000947299,
F [V0040316F; #13/25 ex MA 811806],
G [F neg. 27609], MA 811806, OXF
00000255); Icon: Laurographia t. 7 (G [F
neg. 34254]).
Synonyms: Ocotea latifolia Kunth in
Humboldt, Bonpland & Kunth, Nov.
Gen. Sp. (quarto ed.) 2: 165. 1817.
TYPE: COLOMBIA. Cundinamarca,
“in alta planitie Bogotensi,” F. W. H. A.
von Humboldt & A. J. A. Bonpland s.n.
(Holotype: P 00128755).
Nectandra latifolia (Kunth) Mez, Jahrb.
Königl. Bot. Gart. Berlin 5: 454. 1889.
Nectandra polita Nees & Mart. in Nees,
Syst. Laur. 325. 1836; Meissner in DC.,
Prodr. 15(1): 163. 1864; Meissner in
Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 275. 1866. TYPE:
Bahia, Cachoeira, “in sylvis Capões ad
Villa da Caxoeira,” Nov. 1818, C. F. P. von
Martius s.n. (Holotype: M 0121031 [F
neg. 19268]; Isotype, GZU 000249355).
Specimens: BRAZIL. Bahia, Ilhéus, “in
collib. pr. Ilheos,” May 1821, L. Riedel
307 (GOET, K 000642337, LE n.v., NY
00887019); idem, Apr. 1837, B. Luschnath
s.n. in Martii Herbar. Florae Brasil. no.
420 (B 10 0185159, BM 000947255, BR
8810489, BR 8810519, G, G-DC, GZU
000249354 [fragment], K 000642336, L
0037070, M 0121032, MO 1741668, NY
00355493, P 00711025); idem, 1836, B.
Luschnath s.n. (BR 8808042).
For a complete list of synonyms, see Rohwer
(1993).
According to Rohwer (1993), it is not certain
that the epithet coined by Ruiz and Pavón
2012 de Moraes, BRAZILIAN LAURACEOUS COLLECTIONS OF RIEDEL 203
really has priority over the one published by
Kunth. The fourth volume of Flora Peruviana
et Chilensis was completed in 1804. Although
the text of their treatment of 29 species of
Laurus had remained unpublished until 1956
(Ruiz and Pavón, 1956), their plates were
distributed much earlier. Alvarez Lopez (1954)
informs from the “Libreta para el 3.o Tomo de
los Apuntes de Grabadores y Pulidor y para el
tomo IV y V” (Arch. RJB. leg. IV, 13, 2) that
in 1803 the illustrators of the plates of Ruiz
and Pavón’s Flora Peruviana et Chilensis
were working particularly on the species of
Laurus: L. acutifolia is mentioned in March;
L. triplinervis and L. dysodantha in April;
L. multiglandulosa, L. heteranthera and L.
subcordata in May; in June L. linearifolia and
L. ferruginea; L. leptobotra in August; and
later more Laurus, with L. nitida being the
last one to be executed, which Isidoro Gálvez
presented in 4 November 1803 (Alvarez Lopez,
1956). The engraving of letters and numbers
for all the plates of volume IV seems to have
been concluded a year later by Pedro Gangoiti
(Alvarez Lopez, 1956). In any case, those plates
were not available for releasing up to the end
of 1803, or the beginning of 1804, and the date
of publication remains uncertain. Stafleu and
Cowan (1983) state that the first reference to the
plates dated from 1830 (from the information
by R. D. Hooglang to Stafleu and Cowan,
1979, about an instance of competition between
names of Weinmannia published by Kunth and
those by Ruiz and Pavón; see D. Don, 1830).
However, as pointed out by González Bueno
and Aranda (in Ruiz and Pavón, 1989), in the
“Prolegomena” by Humbold, Bonpland and
Kunth (1816: VIII), they alluded to “Ruizii et
Pavonii collectiones ineditæ,” which indicates
that they were already aware “somehow”
of the existence of inedited species of Ruiz
and Pavón, for which the text was published
only much later. As for the first references to
Ruiz and Pavón’s fourth volume being dated
from 1830, Lambert (1821: VIII–IX) quoted
“[i]t may here be interesting for botanists to
learn, that the plates are finished of the fourth
and fifth unpublished volumes of the Flora
Peruviana, containing in all two hundred and
twenty-three figures.” In the same latter book,
Humboldt, in his account “On the Cinchona
forests of South America” (in Lambert, 1821:
27–28), mentioned “… with aromatic Puchery
or Todaspuie (Laurus* Putseri Mut.), with
Almonds (Caryocar amygdaliferum Mut.), with
four kinds of Styrax, with the Balsam of Tolu
(Toluifera* indica), …,” for which Lambert
wrote in the footnote “[t]he Laurus Putseri of
Mutis is the same as the Laurus Pucheri of Fl.
Peruviana, vol. iv. t. 352, ined. The number of
species of this genus figured in the fourth vol.
ined. of the Flora Peruviana, amounts to thirty.
The fruit of the Laurus Pucheri is frequently
sold in the London shops under the name of
Sassafras nuts. Caryocar amygdaliferum,
Fl. Peruv. vol. v. ined. t. 470. Myrospermum
balsamiferum, Fl. Peruv. 4, ined. t. 373.”
Rohwer (1993) indicated that Martii Herbar.
Florae Brasil. no. 420 would probably be the
same collection of Martius s.n., collected in
Cachoeira. However, Martius (1837–[1841];
1841: 7) clearly indicated “420. Oreodaphne
dispersa Nees ab Esenb. Laur. 427 var.
grandifolia ? ipso definiente. ... In silvis ad
Ilheos. Aprili. Dryas,” which does therefore
represent a different collection.
The information written by Riedel in the
diary of Bahia, on reverse of leaf 53, which
was reproduced almost literally by Meissner
on the label of the specimen at NY, was “307,
Laurus sp. fol. lanceolato-ovatis acuminatis
perennantib. ramis patentissimis, paniculis
pedunculatis axillarib. terminalib.q. Bacca
nigra magnitudine Cerasi.”
35. Nectandra reticulata (Ruiz & Pav.) Mez,
Jahrb. Königl. Bot. Gart. Berlin 5: 404. 1889.
Basionym: Laurus reticulata Ruiz & Pav., Fl.
Peruv. 4: t. 348. 1804 [–1830]. Lectotype
(Rohwer, 1993: 276; second-step
lectotype designated by Moraes, 2008:
24): PERU. Cuchero, May–[Sept.?]
1780, fl., H. Ruíz L. & J. A. Pavón s.n.
(MA, with handwritten labels “Laurus
reticulata Laurographia Pavon et Sp. Pl.
Fl. Per./de Cuchero,” and “Enneandria
Monogyn. Casyta ? Laurus F P. c. L.
N. 160 Ex Vitoc. Año 94” by Ruiz, and
printed label of “Herbarium Peruvianum
Ruiz et Pavon,” numbered “13/19,”
identified by O. C. Schmidt as “Nectandra
reticulata (R. & P.) Mez;” Isolectotypes,
F 845497 [V0040293F, ex MA, ex Vitoc,
leaf and flower fragment], MA [2 sheets,
204 Harvard Papers in Botany Vol. 17, No. 1
one of them with scale label numbered
29398]); Other syntypes: PERU. Cuchero
and Chinchao, fl., H. Ruíz L. & J. A.
Pavón s.n. (B 10 0185150, BC 872724,
BM 000947252, BR 8808370 [ex Herb.
Reg. Berolinense ex Herb. Lamberti],
F 842760 [F neg. 58079], F 842768 [F
neg. 58078, with fl. and fr.], FI-W n.v.,
G (Pavón 504, 2 sheets; Pavón s.n., 11
sheets), HAL 0010378 [ex Herb. Reg.
Berolinense ex Herb. Lamberti], MA [ex
Herbarium Peruvianum Ruiz et Pavon, 2
sheets numbered “13/20”], P 00571439
[ex Herb. Pavon], P 00571440 [ex Herb.
Pavon No. 36, seen by Mez], P 00571441
[ex Herb. Reg. Berolinense ex Herb.
Lamberti]; PERU. Cuchero, Jul., fl., J.
Dombey s.n. (B 10 0185149, G-DC, GZU
000254296 [fragment], MA [ex Herb.
Ruiz & Pavón, with label by Dombey
of “Laurus pubescens. F. p. 1780/
in Sylvis Cochero,” and “Enneandria
monogynia… /habitat in Sylvis Cochero,
floret julio;” see Alvarez Lopez, 1956:
75], P 00745320, P 00745321—syntypes
of Nectandra villosa Nees & Mart. var.
venosa Nees); Icon: Laurographia t. 3 (G
[F neg. 34250]).
Synonyms: Nectandra villosa Nees & Mart.
in Nees, Linnaea 8: 47. 1833. Lectotype
(Rohwer, 1986: 61, as ‘Holotyp’):
BRAZIL. Minas Gerais, “Santo Antonio,”
fl., F. Sellow B 1391 c 426 (B 10
0185151 [NY neg. 8326]; Isolectotypes,
B 10 0185152, B 10 0185153 [NY neg.
8325], BR 8808028 [Sellow s.n.], G-DC
00146947 [Sellow s.n.], GZU 000264234,
HAL 0010382 [Sellow s.n.], K 000512724
[as Sellow 1391]).
Nectandra mollis (Kunth) Nees var.
villosa (Nees & Mart.) Meisn. in DC.,
Prodr. 15(1): 148. 1864; ibid. in Martius,
Fl. Bras. 5(2): 253. 1866. Specimen:
BRAZIL. Loco haud indicato, L. Riedel
482 (B 10 0185156, C, G, K n.v., LE n.v.,
MEL 2318487, NY 00469266, P n.v., US
n.v.).
For a complete list of synonyms, see Rohwer
(1993).
Meissner indicated on the label of sheet NY
00469266 “In Brasil. loco non indicato.”
36. Nectandra spicata Meisn. in DC., Prodr.
15(1): 151, 512. 1864; ibid. in Martius, Fl. Bras.
5(2): 258. 1866. LECTOTYPE (designated
here): BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro, “pr. R. Jan.,”
Jun.–Jul. 1832, L. Riedel 474 (LE 00000248;
Isolectotypes, GOET, K 000642242 [Riedel
s.n.], K 000642244 [Riedel s.n.], LE 00000250,
S [R-7241]); Syntypes: BRAZIL. Rio de
Janeiro, L. Riedel 477 (G, K 000642243, LE
00000249, P 00711089, US 00288903); idem,
1832, L. Riedel 482 (GOET, L 0037138 [Riedel
s.n.], LE 00000247, NY 00355508); Rio de
Janeiro, Cantagalo, “sylvis de Canta Gallo,”
Oct. 1833, B. Luschnath s.n. (BR 8811158);
Specimens: BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro, Magé,
“in sylv. pr. Mand.[iocca],” Jan.–Mar. 1823, L.
Riedel s.n. (LE 00000251, NY 00469277, NY
00469278); Loco haud indicato, s.d., L. Riedel
& G. H. Langsdorff 83 (LE n.v., US n.v.).
The specimen LE 00000250 bears an original
label by Riedel with “474, Persea. Arbor –
Foliis ovato-oblongis acuminatis glabris subtus
in nervorum axillis pubescentibus. florib.
terminalib. lutescentibus,” whereas the label on
specimen LE 00000251 informs “Arbor 15–20
ped. ramis patentibus. floribus albis.”
37. Persea americana Mill., Gard. Dict. (ed. 8).
1768.
Basionym: Laurus persea L., Sp. Pl. 1: 370.
1753. Lectotype (designated by van
der Werff, 2002: 580): “Prunifera
arbor, fructu maximo pyriformi viridi,
pericarpio esculento butyraceo nucleum
unicum maximum nullo ossiculo tectum,
cingente. The Avocado or Alegator pear-
tree,” in Sloane (1725: 132, Plate 222, fig.
2). Typotype: JAMAICA. Herb. Sloane
Vol. VII: 77 (BM-SL 000594115).
Synonyms: Persea gratissima Gaertn., Fruct.
Sem. Pl. 3: 222, t. 221. 1807, nom.
superfl. for Persea americana Mill.; ibid.
Meissner in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 52. 1864;
ibid. in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 158. 1866.
Persea gratissima Gaertn. var. oblonga
Meisn. in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 53. 1864;
ibid. in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 159. 1866.
TYPE: BRAZIL. Loco haud indicato, L.
Riedel 106 (Syntype: LE n.v.).
For a complete list of synonyms, see van der
Werff (2002).
2012 de Moraes, BRAZILIAN LAURACEOUS COLLECTIONS OF RIEDEL 205
As pointed out by van der Werff (2002),
Kopp (1966) had designated the description
in Clusius (1601: 2) as the lectotype of Laurus
persea. However, since descriptions are not
accepted as lectotypes according to Article
8.1 of the ICBN (McNeill et al., 2006), the
illustration in Sloane (1725) was designated as
lectotype of Laurus persea L. and therefore of
Persea americana Mill.
38. Persea caesia Meisn. in DC., Prodr. 15(1):
44. 1864; ibid. in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 154.
1866. TYPE: BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro, “in sylv.
humidiusculis Macahe” [Macaé], May 1832, L.
Riedel s.n. (Holotype: LE 00000472; Isotype,
NY 00355818).
The holotype bears an original label by
Riedel with “Laurus. Arbor 20 ped. foliis ovatis
glaucis, florib. flavescentib.” Kopp (1966: 88)
quoted “holotype NY,” which is a mistake since
Meissner cited only one specimen as “v. s. sine
fr. in hb. Petrop.” (LE).
39. Persea microneura Meisn. in DC., Prodr.
15(1): 53. 1864; ibid. in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2):
158. 1866. TYPE. BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro, “in
collib. siccis umbr. pr. Corrego Secco,” Feb.
1824, L. Riedel s.n. (Holotype: LE 00000495;
Isotypes, G, K 000602072, LE 00000496, LE
00000497, NY 00355840).
Phoebe microneura (Meisn.) Mez, Jahrb.
Königl. Bot. Gart. Berlin 5: 204. 1889.
Cinnamomum microneurum (Meisn.)
Kosterm., Reinwardtia 6(1): 22. 1961.
The original labels handwritten by Riedel
state “Arbor 20–25 ped. folia subtus glauca.”
40. Persea punctata Meisn. in DC., Prodr.
15(1): 50. 1864; ibid. in Martius, Fl. Bras.
5(2): 152. 1866. TYPE: BRAZIL. São Paulo,
Batatais, “in paludibus ad Batataes,” Jun. 1834,
P. W. Lund s.n. (Holotype: G-DC 00135196;
Isotypes, C, NY 00355845).
Mutisiopersea punctata (Meisn.)
Kosterm., Rheedea 3(2): 135. 1993.
Synonyms: Persea splendens Meisn. var.
lanceolata Meisn. in DC., Prodr. 15(1):
44. 1864; ibid. in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2):
152. 1866. TYPE: BRAZIL. São Paulo,
“in paludosis Araracoara, St. Carlos,
Mugy” [Araraquara, São Carlos, Mogi das
Cruzes], Nov. 1833–May 1834, L. Riedel
2234 (Holotype: LE 00000506; Isotypes,
B 10 0185205, C, G, K 000602085, LE
00000507, LE 00000508, NY 00355860,
US 00099148).
Persea lanceolata (Meisn.) Mez, Jahrb.
Königl. Bot. Gart. Berlin 5: 150. 1889.
As indicated by Henk van der Werff on a
label at NY 00355845, the lectotypification
of Persea punctata Meisn. proposed by Kopp
(1966: 93) was superfluous since Meissner
(1864: 50) cited only one specimen as “v. s.
sine fr. in h. DC.” (G-DC), which is thus the
holotype. Kopp (1966: 93) has also mistakenly
indicated the specimen at NY as holotype
of Persea splendens Meisn. var. lanceolata
Meisn., for which again Meissner clearly
indicated in the protologue that he had seen it at
LE. The specimens by Riedel at LE bears labels
with “no. 2234, Laurus. Arbor et frutex 20 , 12
ped. fol. coriaceis supra glabris subt. sericeis
flor. luteis,” which was transcribed by Meissner
on the label of specimen at NY.
In a recent phylogenetic study on the Persea
group, Rohwer et al. (2009) found that Persea
subg. Eriodaphne, which includes the Brazilian
species and probably also the Macaronesian
Persea indica (L.) Spreng., Syst. Veg. (ed. 16) 2:
268. 1825, could be treated as a separate genus,
according to their results. Their suggestion
that this genus should be called Mutisiopersea
Kosterm., however, was erroneous, since
the oldest available name for this group is
Farnesia Heist. ex Fabr. (Li et al., 2011). Yet,
Rohwer et al. (2009) advised that a far larger
number of Persea subg. Eriodaphne as well as
several of the aberrant Persea species should
be investigated before making the formal new
combinations.
41. Persea rufotomentosa Nees & Mart. in Nees,
Syst. Laur.: 153. 1836. TYPE: BRAZIL. Minas
Gerais, “in sylvis Capões et in Tabuleiro locis
editis Montanis Serro Frio,” Aug. 1818, C. F. P.
von Martius s.n. (Holotype: M 0147211 [F neg.
6582]; Isotypes, GZU 000254417 [fragment],
M 0147212, M 0147213). Specimen: BRAZIL.
Minas Gerais, Diamantina, “in monte Serra
Grande dict. pr. Tejuco,” Dec. 1824, L. Riedel
1248 (LE n.v., NY 00918246, RB 29868,
US n.v.).
Mutisiopersea rufotomentosa (Nees &
Mart.) Kosterm., Rheedea 3(2): 135. 1993.
206 Harvard Papers in Botany Vol. 17, No. 1
Meissner transcribed on the label at NY
00918246, “Frutex arboresc. 10–12 ped., fol.
ferrugineo-tomentos., flor. albid. flavesc.”
Meissner misidentified the specimen by Riedel
1248 as Persea rigida Nees & Mart. in Nees,
Linnaea 8: 50. 1833; ibid. Meissner in DC.,
Prodr. 15(1): 46. 1864; ibid. in Martius, Fl. Bras.
5(2): 155. 1866 {TYPE: BRAZIL. São Paulo,
fl., F. Sellow 652 (Holotype: B 10 0185203
[NY neg. N.S. 5711]; Isotypes, B 10 0185204,
F 619529 [F neg. 63092, leaf fragment], GZU
000249334 [fragment], M 0111053)}.
42. Persea splendens Meisn. in DC., Prodr.
15(1): 44. 1864; ibid. in Martius, Fl. Bras.
5(2): 151. 1866. Lectotype (designated by
Kopp, 1966: 91): BRAZIL. Mato Grosso, “in
sylvis umbr. ad rivulos S.[erra] da Chapada,”
May 1827, L. Riedel 1001 (NY 00355855;
Isolectotypes, G, GOET, K 000602084, LE
00000502, LE 00000503, LE 00000504, LE
00000505).
The specimen at LE 00000504 bears an
original label by Riedel with “no 1001, Laurinea
Arbor 20–25 ped. fol. subtus nitide-sericeis,
florib. terminalib. flavescentib.,” which was
transcribed literally by Meissner on the label
found at NY 00355855.
43. Persea venosa Nees & Mart. in Nees,
Linnaea 8: 50. 1833; ibid. Meissner in DC.,
Prodr. 15(1): 48. 1864; ibid. in Martius, Fl.
Bras. 5(2): 153. 1866. TYPE: BRAZIL. São
Paulo, Iperó, “Ypanema,” fl., F. Sellow B 1387
c 422 (Holotype: B†). Lecotype (designated
by Moraes, 2008: 52): G-DC 00135213;
Isolectotypes, GZU 000254420 [annotated by
Nees, Anonymous s.n.], HAL 0103845 [Sellow
s.n.], K 000602076, K 000512722 [Sellow s.n.],
NY 00355864 [fragment presumably from
G-DC]; Other specimens: BRAZIL. Paraná, fl.,
F. Sellow 4803 (XXI) (B 10 0185196 [annotated
by Nees], B 10 0185197, G 00020787 [without
locality, fl., Sellow s.n.]; syntype of Ocotea
hypoglauca (Nees & Mart.) Mez); BRAZIL.
Loco haud indicato, F. Sellow s.n. (B† [fragment
at F 619491]; BRAZIL. Loco haud indicato, fr.,
F. Sellow s.n. (B 10 0185194); BRAZIL. São
Paulo, Iperó, “Ypanema,” fr., F. Sellow B 1387
c 422 (BM 001009296, VT); BRAZIL. Paraná,
ster., F. Sellow 4715 (B 10 0185195); BRAZIL.
Minas Gerais, “in fruticatis humidiusculis pr.
Santa Luzia,” Oct. 1824, L. Riedel 698 (G,
GOET, LE n.v., NY 00355863, NY 00918565,
OXF 000003508, US n.v.); BRAZIL. São
Paulo, “in humidis paludosisque Mugy” [Mogi
das Cruzes], Nov. 1833, L. Riedel 1588 (G,
GOET [2 sheets], LE n.v., NY 00918563, OXF
00000371 [Anonymous s.n.], OXF 00000383
[Anonymous s.n.]).
Synonym: Persea venosa Nees & Mart. var.
tersa Nees & Mart. in Nees, Linnaea 8:
50. 1833. TYPE: BRAZIL. Loco haud
indicato, F. Sellow XXIV (Holotype:
B†). Lectotype (designated by Moraes,
2008: 52): BRAZIL. Loco haud indicato,
fl., Anonymous s.n. (GZU 000273810
[annotated by Nees as “β”]).
The label transcribed by Meissner on the
specimen at NY 00355863 (Riedel 698) states
“Arbor 15–20 ped., fol. ovatis subtus glaucis,
flor. flavo-vinati,” while the label on the sheet
NY 00918563 (Riedel 1588) states “Frutex 6–8
ped., fol. ramulisque glaucis, pedunc. longiss.
axill., flor. dichotomo-racemosis flavis.”
44. Persea willdenovii Kosterm., Reinwardtia
7(5): 511. 1969.
Basionym: Persea pyrifolia Nees & Mart. in
Nees, Linnaea 8: 50. 1833, non Persea
pyrifolia (D. Don) Spreng. 1827, Syst.
Veg. (ed. 16) 4: 156. 1827 ; ibid. Meissner
in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 49. 1864; ibid.
in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 152. 1866.
Lectotype (designated by Moraes, 2008:
50): BRAZIL. São Paulo, fl., F. Sellow
5230 (B 10 0185206); Other syntypes:
BRAZIL. São Paulo, ster., F. Sellow
524 (B†; Sellow 324 fide Meissner and
Mez, duplicates K 000512719 [fl.], K
000512720 [ex Herb. Kunth], and VT);
idem, F. Sellow 1385 (B†); idem, F. Sellow
1386 (B†); idem, ster., F. Sellow s.n. (B
10 0185208, GZU [annotated by Nees
as “Nectandra rudis N. ab E.,” “Laurus
iavitensis Spr. in H. R. B.,” Anonymous
s.n.]; Probable syntypes: BRAZIL. Loco
haud indicato, fl., F. Sellow s.n. (BR
8685759); idem, fl., F. Sellow s.n. (E
00259483, LE); idem, fl., F. Sellow s.n.
(G 00020788); idem, fl., F. Sellow s.n.
(GZU 000254421, HAL 103844, LE,
MEL 2324387); idem, fl., F. Sellow s.n.
(HBG 508014); idem, fl., F. Sellow s.n.
2012 de Moraes, BRAZILIAN LAURACEOUS COLLECTIONS OF RIEDEL 207
(K 000512718); idem, ster., F. Sellow s.n.
(G-DC 00135239); idem, fl., F. Sellow
s.n. (STR); idem, fl., F. Sellow s.n. (TUB
019047); idem, fl., Anonymous s.n. (GZU,
annotated by Nees as “Persea pyrifolia/
Bras. trop.”); Other specimens: BRAZIL.
Loco haud indicato, fl., F. Sellow s.n. (B
10 0185207, ex Herb. A. Engler); idem,
fl., F. Sellow s.n. (B 10 0185209); idem,
fl., F. Sellow s.n. (KIEL); BRAZIL. São
Paulo, Itu, “in sylvis pr. Itu,” Nov.–Dec.
1825, L. Riedel 109 (G, K n.v., LE n.v.,
NY 00355858).
Here I am following the circumscription
proposed by Mez (1889) in his Persea cordata
(Vell.) Mez. For Kopp (1966), Riedel 109 is
identifiable as Persea major (Meisn.) L.E.
Kopp, a placement that must be confirmed after
a detailed revision that is in course.
The information transcribed by Meissner
on the label of sheet NY 00355858 is “Ocotea.
Arbor 20–30 ped., fol. subtus glaucesc., flor.
magnis viridi-flavesc.”
45. Pleurothyrium undulatum (Meisn.)
Rohwer, Mitt. Inst. Allg. Bot. Hamburg 20: 44.
1986.
Basionym: Oreodaphne undulata Meisn. in
DC., Prodr 15(1): 115. 1864; ibid. in
Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 210. 1866. TYPE:
BRAZIL. Amazonas, “in fruticetis R.[io]
Negro,” “Barra” [Manaus], Sept. 1828,
L. Riedel 1412 (Holotype: LE; Isotypes,
B 10 0185181 [F neg. 3733], G, GOET
004554, K 000642295, L, LE [3 sheets],
NY 00355792, NY 01023610, OXF
00000384).
Ocotea undulata (Meisn.) Mez, Jahrb.
Königl. Bot. Gart. Berlin 5: 278. 1889.
The holotype bears an original label by Riedel
with “no. 1412, Laurus. Arbor 20–25 ped. Foliis
oblongo-lanceolatis, undulatis, Florib axillarib.
terminalibus. Cor. flava.” In one of the isotypes
in LE, a label by Riedel states “Laurus. ♄ 20–
25 ped. foliis undul. florib. flavescentib. In
sylvaticis pr. Barra. Sept 1828.” In his diary of
Mato Grosso, Riedel annonated “1412, Laurus
– Arbor 20–25 ped. foliis oblongo-lanceolatis
undulatis, florib. axill. terminalibq. Cor. flava.
In fruticetis pr. Barra Sept. 1828.”
46. Rhodostemonodaphne macrocalyx (Meisn.)
Rohwer ex Madriñán, Fl. Neotrop. Monogr. 92:
46. 2004.
Basionym: Goeppertia macrocalyx Meisn. in
DC., Prodr. 15(1): 174. 1864; ibid. in
Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 285. 1866. TYPE:
BRAZIL. Loco haud indicato, s.d., F.
Sellow s.n. (Holotype: B 10 0185176,
ex Herb. Kunth [B neg. 5268, F neg.
3678, NY neg. 8382]; Isotypes, F 648344
[V0061406F, fragment ex B (leaves only)
+ photo], HBG n.v. [fragment ex B].
Ocotea macrocalyx (Meisn.) Mez, Jahrb.
Königl. Bot. Gart. Berlin 5: 367. 1889.
Synonyms: Cryptocarya riedelii Meisn. in DC.,
Prodr. 15(1): 75. 1864, p.p., syn. nov.;
ibid. in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 166. 1866.
TYPE: BRAZIL. Bahia, Ilhéus, “in sylvis
pr. Esperança” [Fazenda Esperança],
May 1822, fl. C, immat. fr., L. Riedel 770
(Holotype: LE 00000176; Isotype, NY
00355048 [annotated by Meissner]).
“Mespilodaphne floribunda Meisn.,”
nom. invalid. Specimens: BRAZIL.
Loco haud indicato, s.d., fl. F, L. Riedel
s.n. (B, G [2 sheets], GOET [2 sheets],
K 000575051, L 0036985 [601020,
ex Meissner’s herbarium, ster.], LE
00000177, LE 00000178).
The holotype of Cryptocarya riedelii
bears an original label by Riedel stating “770,
Laurus sp. fol. lanceolatis acuminatis subtus
glaucescentibus florib. racemosis terminalib.
cor. luteo-viridis. frutex 10–12 ped.” (it is
literally the same as what Riedel wrote in his
diary of Bahia, leaf 73, Fig. 3); a label that
was annotated by Meissner as “Riedel n. 770/
Mespilodaphne floribunda Meissner;” and a
label annotated by Mez as “Ocotea macrocalyx
nob.” The isotype at NY 00355048 bears a label
written by Meissner indicating ‘Mespilodaphne
floribunda nob. olim./Cryptocarya Riedelii
nob. in DC. prodr. 15, 1. p. 75, n. 33. “Fol.
lanceolata, acuminata, subtus glaucesc., flor.
racemos. term. luteo-virid. Frutex 10–12 ped. In
sylvis pr. Esperança m. Maj. 1821. leg. Riedel,
n. 770!’, thus transcribing the information from
the sheet at LE. In the protologue of C. riedelii,
Meissner (1864) quoted “In Brasilià (Riedel n.
770 !). … Antheræ 2-loculares. Fruct. globoso-
pyriformis, demum truncatus, 4 lin. longus. (v.
s. in hb. Petrop.),” whereas in his treatment of
the species for Martius’s Flora Brasiliensis,
208 Harvard Papers in Botany Vol. 17, No. 1
Meissner (1866) gave further information as
“Frutex 10–12-pedalis (Riedel), … Calyx luteo-
viridis, … Fructus junior globoso-pyriformis
… In sylvis prope Esperança, pagum prov. S.
Pauli m. Majo: Riedel n. 770. Oreas,” thus in
agreement with the information on the labels
and with the specimens at LE and NY.
Mez (1889: 14), in his treatment of
Cryptocarya riedelii, reproduced Meissner’s
diagnosis stating that the specimen was not
found at LE (meaning that he did not find the
specimen identified by Meissner as C. riedelii).
However, Mez (1889: 368) cited the invalid
name “Mespilodaphne floribunda Meissner” in
the synonymy of Ocotea macrocalyx, and also
cited Riedel 770, “ad Esperança,” among the
specimens examined under Ocotea macrocalyx.
As pointed out by Moraes (2008: 12), the
fragments of flowers, inside an envelope
annotated by Meissner as from “Riedel 770”
(NY 00354876), which is mounted on the same
sheet of the isotype of Aydendron floribundum
Meisn. (NY 00354875), are the only elements
found so far that belong to Cryptocarya (and
highly resemble the flowers of C. micrantha
Meisn.), thus not conflicting with the protologue
which states that the anthers are disporangiate.
From the information and specimens available,
it is clear that Meissner described C. riedelii
based on mixed material. Otherwise, one has to
assume that another collection Riedel 770 (the
true type of C. riedelii) still remains missing at
LE (A. Sennikov, pers. comm.).
In his treatment of Rhodostemonodaphne,
Madriñán (2004: 48) pointed out that the
herbarium name “Mespilodaphne floribunda”
is referable “to the specimen Riedel s.n. (given
the number 770 by Mez), which I have seen
annotated by Meissner as such (cf. G [2 sheets],
and K); it belongs to R. macrocalyx,” which
is partially correct. In fact, the specimens of
Rhodostemonodaphne macrocalyx by Riedel
s.n., which were also annotated as Mespilodaphne
floribunda, they clearly represent a different
gathering since they possess staminate flowers,
whereas Riedel 770 bears pistillate flowers and
young fruits. Madriñan (2004: 48) also indicated
that Riedel’s gathering from “Esperança” is
from state of Rio de Janeiro, and his label on
the sheets at Berlin and Kew informs “Circa:
22o54’S, 43o14’W, 500? m elev.,” which is in
Rio de Janeiro as well. However, in May 1822,
Riedel was in Bahia, and “Esperança” refers to
“Fazenda [farm] Esperança,” in Almada, near
Ilhéus (Riedel’s diary of Bahia; Augel 1979).
47. Urbanodendron bahiense (Meisn.) Rohwer,
Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 110(2): 166. 1988.
Basionym: Mespilodaphne bahiensis Meisn.
in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 108. 1864; ibid. in
Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 202. 1866. TYPE:
BRAZIL. Bahia, loco haud indicato
[region of Ilhéus], 1821, L. Riedel s.n.
(Holotype: LE; Isotypes, B 10 0185282
[B neg. 1233/9, F neg. 3626], G [2
sheets], GOET 004502, GOET 004503,
K 000602178, L 0036899, L 0036900,
LE, NY).
Ocotea bahiensis (Meisn.) Mez, Jahrb.
Königl. Bot. Gart. Berlin 5: 235. 1889.
Pleurothyrium bahiense (Meisn.) Barroso,
Rodriguésia 12(24): 140. 1949.
The species was undoubtedly collected near
Ilhéus, but it remains without any other known
collection, either in that region or in Bahia,
since Riedel’s time.
48. Urbanodendron verrucosum (Nees) Mez,
Jahrb. Königl. Bot. Gart. Berlin 5: 80. 1889.
Basionym: Aydendron verrucosum Nees,
Linnaea 8: 37. 1833; ibid. Meissner
in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 91. 1864; ibid.
Meissner in Martius 5(2): 181. 1866.
TYPE: BRAZIL. Minas Gerais, Visconde
do Rio Branco, “Presid. de S. J. B.”
[São João Baptista do Presídio], Jan.–
Mar. 1819, fr., F. Sellow B 1374 c 407
(Holotype: B†?, not located, F neg. 3780);
Specimens: BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro, “in
sylvaticis umbrosis circa Rio Janeiro,”
Jul. 1832, L. Riedel 479 (GOET, K n.v.,
LE n.v., NY 00504977, US n.v.); idem,
“in sylvis fruticetis collibus umbrosis
prope Rio de Janeiro,” Sept. 1832, L.
Riedel 1141 (GOET, K n.v., LE n.v., NY
00504976).
Synonym: Aydendron verrucosum Nees var.
attenuata Meisn. in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 91.
1864; ibid. in Martius, Fl. Bras. 5(2): 181.
1866: LECTOTYPE (designated here):
BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro, “in collib. siccis
umbrosis pr Cordoaria,” Jan. 1824, fl., L.
Riedel s.n. (LE 00000121; Isolectotypes,
GOET, K 000601855); Syntype:
BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro, “in sylvis
collibusque umbrosis pr. Mandiocca”
[Langsdorff’s Fazenda da Mandioca],
Mar.–Apr. 1823, fl., fr., L. Riedel s.n. (LE
n.v., NY 00354897, OXF 00098241).
2012 de Moraes, BRAZILIAN LAURACEOUS COLLECTIONS OF RIEDEL 209

Figure 3. Leaf 73 from Riedel’s diary of Bahia showing the text written in two columns. The right-column with
annotations on collections No. 765 to 770. Manuscript preserved in the Biblioteca Nacional of Rio de Janeiro.
© Fundação Biblioteca Nacional.
210 Harvard Papers in Botany Vol. 17, No. 1

Remarks
Specimen K 000576163, Nectandra willde- = Nectandra coriacea (Sw.) Griseb., Fl. Brit.
noviana Meisn. var. obliterata Meisn. in W. I. 281. 1860], bears a label indicating it as
DC., Prodr. 15(1): 165 et 513. 1864 [TYPE: a Riedel collection from Brazil. According to
JAMAICA. Spanish Town, C. T. Hartweg Rohwer in sched., it must be an error since it is
1566 (Holotype: K 000576162; Isotypes, BM a Central American species.
000758757, G, K 000576165, OXF 00078806)
Literature Cited
Alonso, A. R. 2010. Unveiling the Langsdorff
expedition/Desvelando a expedição Langsdorff.
Pages 36–45 in: B. N. Komissarov, A. R. Alonso
and R. Athayde, Curatorship, Expedição
Langsdorff, Catálogo de Exposição, Centro
Cultural Banco do Brasil. Arte A Produções,
Rio de Janeiro.
Alvarez Lopez, E. 1954. Algunos aspectos de la obra
de Ruiz y Pavón. Anales Inst. Bot. Cavanilles 12:
5–111.
––––––. 1956. Comentario sobre “Laurus,” de Ruiz
y Pavón, con notas de Dombey acerca de algunas
de sus especies. Anales Inst. Bot. Cavanilles 13:
71–78.
Alves, F. M. 2011. Estudo taxonômico e filogenético
de Mezilaurus Taub. (Lauraceae) lato sensu e
restabelecimento de Clinostemon Kuhlm. & A.
Samp. Ph.D. Thesis. Universidade de São Paulo,
São Paulo.
Assis, L. C. S. and R. Mello-Silva. 2010. Taxonomic
and nomenclatural changes in the Ocotea indecora
group (Lauraceae). Novon 20: 377–380.
Augel, M. P. 1979. Ludwig Riedel—Viajante alemão
no Brasil. Fundação Cultural do Estado da Bahia,
Salvador.
––––––. 1990. Ludwig Riedel: diários inéditos da
Bahia ao Mato Grosso. Pages 35–42 in: M. P.
Braga, Org., II Seminário Internacional sobre o
Acervo da Expedição Científica de G. I. Langsdorff.
Secretaria da Ciência e Tecnologia, Presidência da
República, Brasília.
Bernardi, L. 1967. Emendationes laureae imprimis
de Nectandra. Candollea 22: 49–67.
Bertels, D. E, B. N. Komissarov, and T. I. Licenko
(Orgs.) 1981. A expedição científica de G. I.
Langsdorff ao Brasil, 1821-1829: catálogo
completo do material existente nos arquivos da
União Soviética. (Tradução e pesquisa bibliográfica
de Marcos Pinto Braga). Secretaria do Patrimônio
Histórico e Artístico Nacional: Fundação Nacional
Pró-Memória, Brasília.
Braga, M. P. 1993. Langsdorff no Brasil. Textos de
História 1: 125–138.
Brummitt, R. K. and C. E. Powell. 1992. Authors
of plant names. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew,
London.
Chanderbali, A. S. 2004. Endlicheria (Lauraceae).
Fl. Neotrop. Monogr. 91:1–141.
Clusius, C. 1601. Caroli ClvsI Atrebatis, Impp. Cæss.
Avgg. Maximiliani. II. Rudolphi. II. Aulæ quondam
familiaris, Rariorvm Plantarvm Historia. Quæ
accesserint, proxima pagina docebit. Ex officina
Plantiniana, apud Ioannem Moretum, Antverpiæ.
Don, D. 1830. A monograph of the family of plants
called Cunoniaceæ. Edinburgh New Philos. J. 9:
84–96.
Faldermann, F. 1831. Some Account of a Russian
Natural History Expedition in Brazil, during
the Seven Years preceding April, 1831. Pages
394–403 in J. C. Loudon, ed. The Magazine
of Natural History, and Journal of Zoology,
Botany, Mineralogy, Geology, and Meteorology.
Vol. 4(21). Printed for Longman, Rees, Orme,
Brown, and Green, Paternoster-Row, London.
––––––. 1832. Further Account of a Russian Natural
History Expedition in Brazil, during the Seven
Years preceding April, 1831. Pages 4–7 in J. C.
Loudon, ed. The Magazine of Natural History, and
Journal of Zoology, Botany, Mineralogy, Geology,
and Meteorology. Vol. 5(23). Printed for Longman,
Rees, Orme, Brown, and Green, Paternoster-Row,
London.
Holmgren, P. K. and N. H. Holmgren. 1998
[continuously updated]. Index Herbariorum:
A global directory of public herbaria and
associated staff. New York Botanical Garden’s
Virtual Herbarium. http://sweetgum.nybg.org/ih/
(accessed in October 2011).
Hooker, W. J. 1827. Exotica Flora, containing
figures and descriptions of new, rare, or otherwise
interesting exotic plants, especially of such as
are deserving of being cultivated in our gardens;
together with remarks upon their generic and
specific characters, natural orders, history, culture,
time of flowering, &c. Vol. III. Printed for William
Blackwood, Edinburgh; and T. Cadell, London.
Howard, R. A. 1981. Nomenclatural notes on the
Lauraceae of the Lesser Antilles. J. Arnold Arbor.
62: 45–61.
Humboldt, F. W. H. A. von, A. J. A. Bonpland,
and K. S. Kunth. 1815 [1816]. Nova genera et
species plantarum: quas in peregrinatione ad
plagam æquinoctialem orbis novi collegerunt,
descripserunt, partim adumbraverunt Amat.
Bonpland et Alex. de Humboldt. Ex schedis
autographis Amati Bonplandi in ordinem digessit
Carol. Sigismund. Kunth. Accedunt tabulæ æri
incisæ, et Alexandri de Humboldt notationes
ad geographiam plantarum spectantes. Tomus
Primus. Sumtibus Librariæ Græco-Latino-
Germanicæ, Lutetiæ Parisiorum.
2012 de Moraes, BRAZILIAN LAURACEOUS COLLECTIONS OF RIEDEL 211
Imkhanitskaya, N. N. 1974. Lavrovye Kuby
(Lauraceae Cubae). Novosti Sist. Vyssh. Rast. 11:
192–209. (in Russian).
Jacquin, N.J. von. 1763. Nicolai Josephi Jacquin
Selectarum Stirpium Americanarum Historia,
in qua ad Linnæanum systema determinatæ
descriptæque sistuntur plantæ illæ, quas in Insulis
Martinica, Jamaica, Domingo, aliisque, et in
vicinæ continentis parte, observavit rariores;
adjectis iconibus in solo natali delineatis. Ex
Officina Krausiana, Vienna.
Komissarov, B. 1994. Expedição Langsdorff: acervo
e fontes históricas. Trad. Marcos Pinto Braga.
Editora da Universidade Estadual Paulista, São
Paulo; Edições Langsdorff, Brasília.
Kopp, L. E. 1966. A taxonomic revision of the genus
Persea in the Western hemisphere (Perseae–
Lauraceae). Mem. New York Bot. Gard. 14: 1–120.
Kostermans, A. J. G. H. 1936. Revision of the
Lauraceae I. Recueil Trav. Bot. Néerl. 33: 719–
757.
––––––. 1937. Revision of the Lauraceae II. The
genera Endlicheria, Cryptocarya (American
species) and Licaria. Recueil Trav. Bot. Néerl. 34:
500–609.
––––––. 1938a. Revision of the Lauraceae III. The
genera Aiouea, Systemonodaphne, Urbanodendron,
Mezilaurus; additions and corrections to Licaria
and Cryptocarya. Recueil Trav. Bot. Néerl. 35:
56–129.
––––––. 1938b. Revision of the Lauraceae V. A
monograph of the genera: Anaueria, Beilschmiedia
(American species) and Aniba. Recueil Trav. Bot.
Néerl. 35: 834–931.
–––––. 1950. 81e Famille.—Lauracées. Pages 1–86
in H. Humbert, ed. Flore de Madagascar et des
Comores. Typographie Firmin-Didot et Cie, Paris.
––––––. 1964. Bibliographia Lauracearum.
Department Urusan Research Nasional; P. T.
Djulie “Archipel,” Bogor.
––––––. 1965. Miscellaneous botanical notes 4.
Reinwardtia 7: 141–146.
––––––. 1978. Lauraceae. Pages 1–13 in E. Nasir
and S. I. Ali, eds. Flora of West Pakistan, No.
118. Department of Botany, University of Karachi,
Karachi.
––––––. 1986. A monograph of the genus Cinnamomum
Schaeff. (Lauraceae), Part I. Ginkgoana 6: 1–171.
Academia Scientific Book Inc., Tokyo.
Kubitzki, K. and S. Renner. 1982. Lauraceae I (Aniba
and Aiouea). Fl. Neotrop. Monogr. 31: 1–124.
Kurz, H. 2000. Revision der Gattung Licaria
(Lauraceae). Mitt. Inst. Allg. Bot. Hamburg 28/29:
89–221.
Lambert, A. B. 1821. An illustration of the genus Chin-
chona; comprising Descriptions of all the officinal
Peruvian barks, including several new species.
Baron de Humboldt’s account of the Cinchona
forests of South America: and Laubert’s memoir
of the different species of quinquina. To which are
added, several dissertations of Don Hippolito Ruiz,
on various medicinal plants of South America.
With several plates. And a short account of the
Spikenard of the Ancients, with a plate. Printed for
John Searke; and Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme,
and Brown, Paternoster-Row, London.
Li, L., J. Li, J. G. Rohwer, H. van der Werff,
Z.-H. Wang, and H.-W. Li. 2011. Molecular
phylogenetic analysis of the Persea group
(Lauraceae) and its biogeographic implications on
the evolution of tropical and subtropical Amphi-
Pacific disjunctions. Am. J. Bot. 98: 1520–1536.
Lorea-Hernández, F. G. 1996. A systematic revision
of the Neotropical species of Cinnamomum
Schaeffer (Lauraceae). Unpublished Ph.D. thesis.
University of Missouri, Saint Louis.
Lukmanoff, A. de 1889. Nomenclature et
Iconographie des Cannelliers et Camphriers.
Typographie F. Debons et Cie, Paris.
Madriñán, S. 2004. rhodostemonodaphne
(Lauraceae). Fl. Neotrop. Monogr. 92: 1–102.
Martius, C. F. P. von. 1837–[1841]. Herbarium
Florae Brasiliensis. Plantae brasilienses
exsiccatae, quas denominatas, partim diagnosi aut
observationibus instructas Botanophilis offert Dr.
C. Fr. Ph. de Martius. Monachii. 1837: Flora 20(2,
Beibl.): 1–128; 1838: Flora 21(2, Beibl.): 49–96;
1839: Flora 22(1, Beibl.): 1–64; 1841: Flora 24(2,
Beibl.): 1–112.
––––––. 1843. Systema Materiae Medicae Vegetabilis
Brasiliensis. Apud Frid. Fleischer, Lipsiae, apud
Frid. Beck in comm., Vindobonae.
McNeill, J., F. R. Barrie, H. M. Burdet, V.
Demoulin, D. L. Hawksworth, K. Marhold, D.
H. Nicolson, J. Prado, P. C. Silva, J. E. Skog,
J. H. Wiersema, and N. J. Turland, eds. 2006.
International Code of Botanical Nomenclature
(Vienna Code) adopted by the Seventeenth
International Botanical Congress Vienna, Austria,
July 2005. Gantner Verlag, Ruggell, Liechtenstein.
[Regnum Vegetabile 146].
Meissner, C. F. 1864. Lauraceae. Pages 1–260 in
A. L. P. P. de Candolle, ed. Prodromus Systematis
Naturalis Regni Vegetabilis, Vol. 15(1). Sumptibus
Victoris Masson et filii, Paris.
––––––. 1866. Lauraceae et Hernandiaceae. Pages
137–302, 309–310, tab. 45–107 in C. F. P. von
Martius and A. G. Eichler, eds. Flora Brasiliensis,
Vol. 5(2). Typographia Regia C. Wolf et fil. in
Offic. Lithograph. S. Minsinger tum B. Keller,
Munich & apud Frid. Fleischer in Comm., Leipzig.
Mez, C. C. 1889. Lauraceae americanae. Jahrb.
Königl. Bot Gart. Berlin 5: 1–556.
––––––. 1892. Spicilegium laureanum. Arbeiten
Königl. Bot. Gart. Breslau 1: 71–166.
Moraes, P. L. R. de. 2005. Lectotypification of names
of Brazilian species of Cryptocarya (Lauraceae).
Taxon 54: 789–795.
212 Harvard Papers in Botany Vol. 17, No. 1
––––––. 2007. Taxonomy of Cryptocarya species
of Brazil. Belgian Development Cooperation,
Brussels. [Abc Taxa 3].
––––––. 2008. The lauraceous collections of Friedrich
Sellow. Komarovia 6: 1–67.
Nees von Esenbeck, C. G. D. 1833. Revisio
laurinarum ab Sellowio in Brasilia collectarum et
iam in Herbario Regio Berolinensi asservatarum.
Linnaea 8: 36–51.
––––––. 1836. Systema Laurinarum. Sumtibus Veitii
et sociorum, Berlin.
––––––. 1848. Laurinae in: J. F. Klotzsch, Beiträge
zu einer Flora der Aequinoctial-Gegenden der
neuen Welt. Linnaea 21: 268–269, 487–526.
Nevling, L. I., Jr. 1959. A revision of the genus
Daphnopsis. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 46: 257–
358.
––––––. 1965. A preliminary report on Funifera. J.
Arnold Arb. 46: 232–241.
Nishida, S. 1999. Revision of Beilschmiedia
(Lauraceae) in the Neotropics. Ann. Missouri Bot.
Gard. 86: 657–701.
Rohwer, J. G. 1986. Prodromus einer Monographie
der Gattung Ocotea Aubl. (Lauraceae), sensu lato.
Mitt. Inst. Allg. Bot. Hamburg 20: 3–278.
––––––. 1988. the genera Dicypellium,
Phyllostemonodaphne, Systemonodaphne and
Urbanodendron (Lauraceae). Bot. Jahrb. Syst.
110: 157–171.
––––––. 1993. Lauraceae: Nectandra. Fl. Neotrop.
Monogr. 60: 1–333.
––––––, Li, J., B. Rudolph, S. A. Schmidt, H. van der
Werff, and H.-W. Li. 2009. Is Persea (Lauraceae)
monophyletic? Evidence from nuclear ribosomal
ITS sequences. Taxon 58: 1153–1167.
Ruiz, H. and J. Pavón. 1956. Flora Peruviana, et
Chilensis, sive descriptiones et icones plantarum
Peruvianarum, et Chilensium, secundum Systema
Linnaeanum digestae, cum characteribus plurium
generum evulgatorum reformatis. Tomus IV (Pars
II). Anales Inst. Bot. Cavanilles 13: 5–70.
––––––. and ––––––. 1989. Laurographia Florae
Peruviana et Chilensis. Introducción, transcripción
y notas by A. González Bueno & M. C. Navarro
Aranda. Ayuntamento de la Villa de Belorado,
Burgos.
Sloane, H. 1725. A voyage to the Islands Madera,
Barbadoes, Nieves, St Christophers, and Jamaica;
with the Natural History of the herbs and trees,
four-footed beasts, fishes, birds, insects, reptiles,
&c. of the last of those Islands. To which is
prefix’d, and Introduction, wherein is an Account
of the inhabitants, air, waters, diseases, trade, &c.
of that Place; with some Relations concerning the
Neighbouring Continent, and Islands of America.
Illustrated with the figures of the Things described,
which have not been heretofore engraved. In large
Copper-Plates as big as the Life. By Sir Hans
Sloane, Bart. In Two Volumes. Vol. II. Printed for
the Author, London.
Sprengel, K. 1825. Caroli Linnæi, ... Systema
Vegetabilium. Editio Decima Sexta, Curante Curtio
Sprengel… Volumen II. Classis 6–15. Sumtibus
Librariae Dieterichianae, Göttingen.
Stafleu, F. A. and R. S. Cowan. 1979. Taxonomic
literature. 2nd ed. Vol. 2: H–Le. Bohn, Scheltema
& Holkema, Utrecht, dr. W. Junk b.v., Publishers,
The Hague. [Regnum Vegetabile 98].
––––––, and ––––––. 1983. Taxonomic literature. 2nd
ed. Vol. 4: P–Sak. Bohn, Scheltema & Holkema,
Utrecht/Antwerpen, dr. W. Junk b.v., Publishers,
The Hague/Boston. [Regnum Vegetabile 110].
Stapf, O. 1912. Order CXVI. Laurineæ. Pages 493–
502 in W. T. Thiselton-Dyer, Ed. Flora Capensis,
Vol. 5(1). Lovell Reeve & Co., Ltd., London.
Taulois, A. E. 1990. A Fazenda da Mandioca e
seus arredores. Pages 61–68 in: M. P. Braga,
Org., II Seminário Internacional sobre o Acervo
da Expedição Científica de G. I. Langsdorff.
Secretaria da Ciência e Tecnologia, Presidência da
República, Brasília.
Urban, I. 1894. Biographische Skizzen. II. 2. Georg
Heinrich von Langsdorff (1774–1852) und 3.
Ludwig Riedel (1790–1861). Bot. Jahrb. Syst.
18(44, Beibl.): 6–21.
––––––. 1906. Vitae itineraque collectorum
botanicorum, Notae collaboratorum biographicae,
Flora Brasiliensis ratio edendi chronologica,
Systema, Index Familiarum. Pages 1–268 in C. F.
P. von Martius, A. G. Eichler, and I. Urban, eds.
Flora Brasiliensis, Vol. 1(1). Apud R. Oldenbourg
in comm., Munich et Leipzig.
van Dam, J. A. C. 2002. The Guyanan plant
collections of Robert and Richard Schomburgk
in M. J. Jansen-Jacobs, ed. Flora of the Guyanas.
Supplementary Series. Fascicle 3. Royal Botanic
Gardens, Kew, London.
van der Werff, H. 1987. A revision of Mezilaurus
(Lauraceae). Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 74: 153–
182.
––––––. 1993. A revision of the genus Pleurothyrium
(Lauraceae). Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 80: 39–118.
––––––. 2002. A synopsis of Persea (Lauraceae) in
Central America. Novon 12: 575–586.
Weber, J. Z. 1981. A taxonomic revision of Cassytha
(Lauraceae) in Australia. J. Adelaide Bot. Gard. 3:
187–262.
Willdenow, C. L. von. 1799. Caroli a Linné Species
Plantarum exhibentes plantas rite cognitas
ad genera relatas cum differentiis specificis,
nominibus trivialibus synonymis selectis, locis
natalibus secundum Systema Sexuale digestas.
Editio quarta, post Reichardianam quinta Adjectis
vegetabilibus hucusque cognitis Curante Carolo
Ludovico Willdenow. Tomus II. [Pars I]. Impensis
G. C. Nauk, Berlin.
Wuu-Kuang, S. 2011. Taxonomic revision of
Cinnamomum (Lauraceae) in Borneo. Blumea 56:
241–264.
2012 de Moraes, BRAZILIAN LAURACEOUS COLLECTIONS OF RIEDEL 213

Index to Scientific Names for Part I

Current accepted names in boldface italics. Synonyms and doubtful names in italics.
Unpublished (herbarium) names in regular typeset. Numbers in parentheses indicate the entries of
the respective species.
Acrodiclidium armeniacum (Nees) Mez (24)
Acrodiclidium parviflorum (Meisn.) Mez (24)
Acrodiclidium puchury-major (Mart.) Mez (25)
Aiouea brasiliensis Meisn. var. attenuata Meisn. (1)
Aiouea elliptica Meisn. (2)
Aiouea laevis (Mart.) Kosterm. (1)
Aiouea riedelii Mez (1)
Aiouea saligna Meisn. (2)
Aiouea trinervis Meisn. (3)
Ampelodaphne macrophylla Meisn. (22)
Aniba affinis (Meisn.) Mez (5)
Aniba canelilla (Kunth) Mez (4)
Aniba citrifolia (Nees) Mez (5)
Aniba firmula (Nees & Mart.) Mez (6)
Aniba intermedia (Meisn.) Mez (7)
Aniba parviflora (Meisn.) Mez (8)
Aniba puchury-minor (Mart.) Mez var. intermedia (Meisn.) Kosterm. (7)
Aydendron affine Meisn. (5)
Aydendron citrifolium Nees (5)
Aydendron firmulum Nees & Mart. (6)
Aydendron floribundum Meisn. (16, 46)
Aydendron intermedium Meisn. (7)
Aydendron parviflorum Meisn. (8)
Aydendron sellowii Meisn. (6)
Aydendron verrucosum Nees (48)
Aydendron verrucosum Nees var. attenuata Meisn. (48)
Beilschmiedia emarginata (Meisn.) Kosterm. (9)
Caryocar amygdaliferum Mutis (34)
Cassytha americana Nees (10)
Cassytha americana Nees var. puberula Meisn. (10)
Cassytha filiformis Jacq. (10)
Cassytha filiformis L. (10)
Cinnamomum camphora (L.) J. Presl (11)
Cinnamomum erythropus (Nees & Mart.) Kosterm. (12)
Cinnamomum microneurum (Meisn.) Kosterm. (39)
Cinnamomum riedelii Lukman. (15)
Cinnamomum stenophyllum (Meisn.) Vattimo-Gil (13)
Cinnamomum tomentosum D. Don (14)
Cinnamomum tomentosum (Meisn.) Vattimo-Gil (14)
Cinnamomum tomentulosum Kosterm. (14)
Cinnamomum verum J. Presl (15)
Cinnamomum zeylanicum Blume (15)
Cinnamomum zeylanicum Breyn. (15)
Citrosma paniculata Spreng. (23)
Cryptocarya aschersoniana Mez (19)
214 Harvard Papers in Botany Vol. 17, No. 1

Cryptocarya canelilla Kunth (4)

Cryptocarya citriformis (Vell.) P.L.R. Moraes (16)
Cryptocarya emarginata Meisn. (9)
Cryptocarya hirsuta Schott (23)
Cryptocarya laevis Nees ex Mart. (1)
Cryptocarya mandioccana Meisn. (17)
Cryptocarya micrantha Meisn. (18, 46)
Cryptocarya minima Mez (16)
Cryptocarya moschata Nees & Mart. (19)
Cryptocarya pyriformis levis Nees (1)
Cryptocarya riedeliana P.L.R. Moraes (19)
Cryptocarya riedelii Meisn. (46)
Dicypellium caryophyllaceum (Mart.) Nees & Mart. (20)
Endlicheria anomala (Nees) Mez (21)
Endlicheria hirsuta (Schott) Nees (23)
Endlicheria macrophylla (Meisn.) Mez (22)
Endlicheria paniculata (Spreng.) J.F. Macbr. (23)
Evonymodaphne armeniaca Nees (24)
Goeppertia anomala Nees (21)
Goeppertia hirsuta (Schott) Nees (23)
Goeppertia macrocalyx Meisn. (46)
Hufelandia emarginata (Meisn.) Mez (9)
Laurus acutifolia Ruiz & Pav. (34)
Laurus camphora L. (11)
Laurus canelilla Willd. (4)
Laurus cinnamomum L. (15)
Laurus citriformis Vell. (16)
Laurus dysodantha Ruiz & Pav. (34)
Laurus ferruginea Ruiz & Pav. (34)
Laurus heteranthera Ruiz & Pav. (34)
Laurus iavitensis Spreng. (44)
Laurus leptobotra Ruiz & Pav. (34)
Laurus linearifolia Ruiz & Pav. (34)
Laurus multiglandulosa Ruiz & Pav. (34)
Laurus nitida Ruiz & Pav. (34)
Laurus persea L. (37)
Laurus pucheri Ruiz & Pav. (34)
Laurus purpurea Ruiz & Pav. (34)
Laurus putseri Mutis (34)
Laurus reticulata Ruiz & Pav. (35)
Laurus subcordata Ruiz & Pav. (34)
Laurus triplinervis Ruiz & Pav. (34)
Licaria armeniaca (Nees) Kosterm. (24)
Licaria puchury-major (Mart.) Kosterm. (25)
Mespilodaphne bahiensis Meisn. (47)
Mespilodaphne floribunda Meisn. (46)
Mespilodaphne parviflora Meisn. (24)
Mespilodaphne pretiosa Nees & Mart. var. angustifolia Nees (4)
Mezilaurus crassiramea (Meisn.) Taub. ex Mez (26)
2012 de Moraes, BRAZILIAN LAURACEOUS COLLECTIONS OF RIEDEL 215

Misanteca armeniaca (Nees) Lundell (24)

Misanteca puchury-major (Mart.) Lundell (25)
Mutisiopersea punctata (Meisn.) Kosterm. (40)
Mutisiopersea rufotomentosa (Nees & Mart.) Kosterm. (41)
Myrospermum balsamiferum Ruiz & Pav. (34)
Nectandra amara Meisn. var. chartacea Meisn. (33)
Nectandra amara β. subevenia Meisn. (33)
Nectandra canescens Nees & Mart. (27)
Nectandra cissiflora Nees (28)
Nectandra coriacea (Sw.) Griseb. (Remarks)
Nectandra lanceolata Nees & Mart. (29)
Nectandra latifolia (Kunth) Mez (34)
Nectandra magnoliifolia A. Rich. (27)
Nectandra magnoliifolia Meisn. (27, 31)
Nectandra mollis (Kunth) Nees var. villosa (Nees & Mart.) Meisn. (35)
Nectandra myriantha Meisn. (28)
Nectandra myriantha Meisn. var. attenuata Meisn. (28)
Nectandra nitidula Nees & Mart. (30)
Nectandra nitidula Nees & Mart. var. latifolia Nees (30)
Nectandra nitidula Nees & Mart. var. maior Nees (30)
Nectandra nitidula Nees & Mart. var. minor Nees (30)
Nectandra oppositifolia Nees & Mart. (27, 31)
Nectandra oppositifolia Nees & Mart. var. angustifolia Nees & Mart. (31)
Nectandra polita Nees & Mart. (34)
Nectandra psammophila Nees & Mart. (32)
Nectandra puberula (Schott) Nees (33)
Nectandra puchury-major (Mart.) Nees & Mart. (25)
Nectandra purpurea (Ruiz & Pav.) Mez (34)
Nectandra reticulata (Ruiz & Pav.) Mez (35)
Nectandra riedelii Meisn. (32)
Nectandra rigida (Kunth) Nees (31)
Nectandra rudis Nees (44)
Nectandra spicata Meisn. (36)
Nectandra villosa Nees & Mart. (35)
Nectandra villosa Nees & Mart. var. venosa Nees (35)
Nectandra willdenoviana Nees var. obliterata Meisn. (Remarks)
Ocotea bahiensis (Meisn.) Mez (47)
Ocotea caryophyllacea (Mart.) Kostel. (20)
Ocotea fasciculata (Nees) Mez (30)
Ocotea hypoglauca (Nees & Mart.) Mez (43)
Ocotea latifolia Kunth (34)
Ocotea macrocalyx (Meisn.) Mez (46)
Ocotea odorifera (Vell.) Rohwer (20)
Ocotea puchury-major Mart. (25)
Ocotea schomburgkiana (Nees) Mez (30)
Ocotea undulata (Meisn.) Mez (45)
Oreodaphne crassiramea Meisn. (26)
Oreodaphne dispersa Nees & Mart. var. grandifolia Nees (34)
Oreodaphne fasciculata Nees (30)
216 Harvard Papers in Botany Vol. 17, No. 1

Oreodaphne regeliana Meisn. (32)

Oreodaphne undulata Meisn. (45)
Persea americana Mill. (37)
Persea caesia Meisn. (38)
Persea caryophyllacea Mart. (20)
Persea cordata (Vell.) Mez (44)
Persea erythropus Nees & Mart. (12)
Persea erythropus Nees & Mart. var. angustata Meisn. (12)
Persea erythropus Nees & Mart. var. mixtinervia Meisn. (12)
Persea erythropus Nees & Mart. var. obovata Meisn. (14)
Persea erythropus Nees & Mart. var. triplinervia Meisn. (14)
Persea gratissima Gaertn. (37)
Persea gratissima Gaertn. var. oblonga Meisn. (37)
Persea indica (L.) Spreng. (40)
Persea lanceolata (Meisn.) Mez (40)
Persea major (Meisn.) L.E. Kopp (44)
Persea microneura Meisn. (39)
Persea puberula Schott (33)
Persea punctata Meisn. (40)
Persea pyrifolia (D. Don) Spreng. (44)
Persea pyrifolia Nees & Mart. (44)
Persea rigida Nees & Mart. (41)
Persea rufotomentosa Nees & Mart. (41)
Persea splendens Meisn. (42)
Persea splendens Meisn. var. lanceolata Meisn. (40)
Persea stenophylla Meisn. (13)
Persea venosa Nees & Mart. (43)
Persea venosa Nees & Mart. var. tersa Nees & Mart. (43)
Persea willdenovii Kosterm. (44)
Phoebe erythropus (Nees & Mart.) Mez (12)
Phoebe microneura (Meisn.) Mez (39)
Phoebe stenophylla (Meisn.) Mez (13)
Phoebe tomentosa Meisn. (14)
Phoebe tomentosa Meisn. var. minor Meisn. (14)
Pleurothyrium bahiense (Meisn.) Barroso (47)
Pleurothyrium undulatum (Meisn.) Rohwer (45)
Pomatium angustifolium (29)
Pomatium oppositifolium (31)
Rhodostemonodaphne macrocalyx (Meisn.) Rohwer ex Madriñán (46)
Siparuna paniculata (Spreng.) A. DC. (23)
Toluifera indica (34)
Urbanodendron bahiense (Meisn.) Rohwer (47)
Urbanodendron verrucosum (Nees) Mez (48)