Difference between revisions of "Mandevilla foliosa"
Biol. Cent.-Amer., Bot. 2: 316. 1881.
imported>Volume Importer |
imported>Volume Importer |
||
Line 61: | Line 61: | ||
|publication year=1881 | |publication year=1881 | ||
|special status= | |special status= | ||
− | |source xml= | + | |source xml=https://bitbucket.org/aafc-mbb/fna-data-curation/src/master/coarse_grained_fna_xml/V14/V14_77.xml |
|genus=Mandevilla | |genus=Mandevilla | ||
|species=Mandevilla foliosa | |species=Mandevilla foliosa |
Latest revision as of 13:16, 24 November 2024
Suffrutescent perennials [shrubs], 5–20 dm; rhizomes absent. Stems eglandular-pubescent to glabrate [glabrous]. Leaves opposite [subopposite, whorled]; petiole 3–13(–18) mm, pubescent [glabrous]; blade ovate-lanceolate to elliptic or obovate, 50–130(–150) × 15–50(–70) mm, membranous, base cuneate, obtuse, or subcordate, margins not revolute, apex acute or acuminate, surfaces eglandular-pubescent abaxially and at margins [glabrous], eglandular-pubescent to glabrate adaxially. Cymes 3–9(–14)-flowered. Peduncles 2–15 mm, pubescent [glabrous]. Pedicels 5–20 mm, pubescent [glabrous]. Flowers: sepals green, lanceolate to linear-lanceolate, (3–)5–8 × 1–1.3 mm, pubescent [glabrous]; corolla yellow, glabrous abaxially, eglandular-pubescent adaxially, tube 8–12 × 2–3 mm, throat 3–5 × 3–4 mm, lobes spreading, obliquely obovate to oblanceolate to dolabriform, often falcate, 6–10 × 3–4 mm. Follicles (55–)80–120 × 2–3 mm, pubescent or glabrate. Seeds 7–10 × 1.5–2 mm.
Phenology: Flowering summer–fall; fruiting fall.
Habitat: Pine-juniper woodlands.
Elevation: 1700 m.
Discussion
Mandevilla foliosa is known in the United States from a single collection (Milson 1, ARIZ) in the Santa Rita Mountains in Santa Cruz County of southern Arizona but is widespread in Mexico.
J. K. Williams (2004c) referred populations of Mandevilla foliosa from northern Mexico to M. stans, arguing that the pubescence of stems, petioles, inflorescences, and sepals (versus glabrous in M. foliosa) and the disjunct geographic distribution (northern versus southern Mexico) were sufficient characters to justify recognition at the species level. This disposition was not followed in the most recent treatment of Mexican Mandevilla species (L. O. Alvarado-Cárdenas and J. F. Morales 2014).
Selected References
None.