Colpothrinax aphanopetala
Colpothrinax (kol-poh-TRIH-naks) aphanopetala (ah-fan-oh-pet-AHL-ah) | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||
Scientific Classification | |||||||
| |||||||
Synonyms | |||||||
| |||||||
Native Continent | |||||||
| |||||||
Morphology | |||||||
| |||||||
Culture | |||||||
| |||||||
Survivability index | |||||||
| |||||||
Common names | |||||||
|
Contents
Habitat and Distribution
Colpothrinax aphanopetala is found in Costa Rica, Nicaragua, and Panamá. Extreme SE Nicaragua, and on both the Caribbean, and Pacific slopes, in Costa Rica and Panama, 350-1,000 (-1,400) m, typically in premontane, sometimes lowland, wet forests. Colpothrinax aphanopetala, is most frequently encountered on the upper slopes, and crests of ridges of premontane wet forests above 700 m elevation, in association with Euterpe precatoria Mart. However, C. aphanopetala has been found to as low as 350 m elevation, and sometimes occurs in areas, with little or no topographic relief. For example, at Laguna Cote in Costa Rica, C. aphanopetala is restricted to the lowlying, partially inundated margins of the lake, where it grows in saturated soil, and emerges above a low-forest, dominated by Astrocaryum alatum, H. F. Loomis, and Heliconia. Another noteworthy population of C. aphanopetala, is that on Cerro Jefe in Panama. Adult C. aphanopetala, in the windswept low-forest on Cerro Jefe, are approximately half the size of typical adults elsewhere. The same phenomenon also appears to have produced, the smaller-than-average C. aphanopetala, found on the low, but isolated, often storm-swept Cerro El Gigante, which is only about 30 km inland, from the Caribbean coast in extreme southeast Nicaragua. (R.J. Evans. 2001)/Palmweb.Description
Trunk (12+) 15-20 m tall, erect, sometimes decumbent basally, on Cerro Jefe, Panama, 15-25(-40?) cm diam. breast high, columnar, usually naked, sometimes, particularly in closed forest, upper portion partially or completely enclosed in a mat of persistent leaf-sheath fibers; trunks of juveniles less than about 6-8 m tall usually completely enclosed in this mat; when present, usually 20-30 cm thick. Leaves 12-30 per crown; petiole (0.5+) 1-1.5 (-2) m long, 2.1-3.9 cm wide at attachment to blade; sheath tomentose, the trichomes of two intermixed types: .1 soft, stellate trichomes, about 0.5 mm long, basally ferruginous, with free, white distal ends and .2 coarser, longer, wavy, twisted, compressed trichomes, these longer trichomes sparsest, shortest (about 1.5 mm long), and lightest in color (± tannish) on the basal portion of the sheath, becoming progressively denser, longer (to 9 mm long), and darker (rufous) distally; sheath disintegrating and fraying into fine, loosely woven, pendulous, filiform, typically ± terete fibers, 0.3-0.5 mm in diam.; hastula appressed to or slightly elevated above the blade, 1.6-3.0 x 1.9-4.3 em, 1.1-1.6 times as wide as long, very broadly to depressed-triangular, usually cuspidate apically; costa (12.0+) 17.5-28.0 cm long; blade 95-152 cm long centrally, 36-74 em long laterally, divided into single-fold segments, except for lateral-most 1(-5) segments of each blade half composed of 1-3 folds; central division extending to within 33-70 cm of (1/2-2/3 to) base, the lateral-most division extending to within 6.5-10.5 (-23.5) cm of [about (2/3+) to 7/8 base; folds per blade half 26-35; widest single-fold segment 4.1-6.0 cm wide. Inflorescences with flowers or fruit to about 5, plus about 5 marcescent per individual; primary-axis 1.5-1.9 m long; inflorescence bracts lanate, with trichomes 2-8 mm long; peduncle 0.4-0.7 m long; prophyll 8.0-28.0 x 7.0-10.0 cm; peduncular bracts 4-6, 21.0-43.5 cm long; rachis 1.1-1.3 m long; rachis bracts 9.5-49.0 cm long; first-order branches (5+?) 8-12; axes creamy pink, their primary-axes 11.5-77.0 cm long, with unbranched proximal portion 6.5-48.0 cm long, the branched distal portion 2.5-38.0 cm long; prophyll 9.5-46.0 cm long; rachillae typically 30-50 per basal first-order branch, < 10 per apical first-order branch, 2.0-15.0 cm long, tomentose, the trichomes (tannish to) ferruginous, 0.2-0.3 mm long; flower-bearing spurs 0.2- 0.4 mm long, the subtending bracteole 0.5-1.2 (-1.6) mm long, 0.3-0.9 mm wide basally. Floral receptacle 0.9-1.7 mm long; calyx 2.7-3.4 mm long, free distally from corolla for 1/4-1/2 its length, reddish with some yellow distally, the lobes 0.3-0.9 mm long; corolla 2.9-4.2 mm long, connate basally for 1/3-1/2 its length, mostly pinkish, creamy yellow marginally below apex, adjacent lobes never touching, the lobes attenuate with acute apices, membranous, adaxially plane with slight apical thickening, persistent, filaments 2.0-3.8 mm long, connate basally for 0.6-2.0 mm (1/3-3/5 their length), cream-colored, stamen-cup shorter than or ± same length as calyx-cup, 2.4-3.0 mm in diam., anthers 2.7-4.4 x 0.8-1.1 mm; pollen 25-30 x 20-30 pm, tectum on non-apertural face coarsely perforate to reticulate; gynoecium 2.5-3.5 x 1.6-2.1 mm, carpels 1.1-1.8 x 0.9-1.4 mm, reddish, styles 1.4-2.0 mm long, cream-colored. Fruit 1.6-2.1 cm in diam. Seed 1.0-1.3 x 1.2-1.5 cm. (R.J. Evans. 2001)/Palmweb. Editing by edric.
read more |
---|
Colpothrinax aphanopetala is easily and unambiguously identifiable when in flower, even if only in bud, or in fruit. The red calyx, small, pink tinted, membranous corolla lobes (unique among all palms in the subtribe Livistoninae), which are persistent in fruit, and three distinct, red carpels are diagnostic. The pinkish higher-order inflorescence branches also distinguish C. aphanopetala from both C. wrightii and C. cookii. The trunk of C. aphanopetala is not swollen as in C. wrightii. Based on the available data (Le., the relatively few, mostly incomplete herbarium specimens), C. aphanopetala, however, cannot be distinguished reliably from C. cookii when sterile. Although C. aphanopetala appears to have smaller leaf blades that are more deeply divided, at least laterally, and shorter petioles with smaller hastulas, the overlap between the two taxa for these characters is too great for them to be of any practical utility for identification purposes. This does not necessarily indicate, however, that C. aphanopetala and C. cookii have not diverged vegetatively. Extensive fieldwork involving detailed observations and measurements of individuals from multiple populations throughout the ranges of both species would probably yield subtle morphological differences in vegetative (and other reproductive) characters that cannot be represented adequately on herbarium sheets. This has proven to be the case with other genera of coryphoid palms (e.g., Cryosophila, see Evans 1995; Thrinax, see Read 1975). Fortunately, the floral morphologies of C. aphanopetala and C. cookii are so strikingly different that as long as flowers or fruit (with their persistent calyx and corolla lobes) are present, herbarium specimens are sufficient for easy and unambiguous identification to species. (R.J. Evans. 2001)/Palmweb. The reddish flowers of C. aphanopetala, are visited by large numbers of a variety of bees [e.g., Trigona (Apidae: Meliponinae), and flies (e.g., Syrphidae) during anthesis, suggesting one, or both of these groups of insects, as potential pollinators. One species of syrphid fly, has been observed visiting flowers, at various stages of floral maturation, making them particularly likely pollinators, since the stigmas do not appear to be receptive, until after the anthers have fallen. Due to the small size of the corolla lobes in C. aphanopetala, the reproductive parts are never enclosed within the corolla, as is the case with the probably beetle-pollinated C. cookii. Colpothrinax aphanopetala is easily, and unambiguously identifiable, when in flower, even if only in bud, or in fruit. The red calyx, small, pink tinted, membranous corolla lobes (unique among all palms in the subtribe Livistoninae), which are persistent in fruit, and three distinct, red carpels are diagnostic. The pinkish higher-order inflorescence branches also distinguish C. aphanopetala, from both C. wrightii and C. cookii. The trunk of C. aphanopetala is not swollen, as in C. wrightii. Based on the available data (Le., the relatively few, mostly incomplete herbarium specimens), C. aphanopetala, however, cannot be distinguished reliably from C. cookii when sterile. Although C. aphanopetala appears to have smaller leaf blades, that are more deeply divided at least laterally, and shorter petioles with smaller hastulas, the overlap between the two taxa for these characters, is too great for them to be of any practical utility, for identification purposes. This does not necessarily indicate however, that C. aphanopetala and C. cookii, have not diverged vegetatively. Extensive fieldwork, involving detailed observations and measurements, of individuals from multiple populations, throughout the ranges of both species, would probably yield subtle morphological differences, in vegetative (and other reproductive) characters, that cannot be represented adequately on herbarium sheets. This has proven to be the case, with other genera of coryphoid palms (e.g., Cryosophila, and Thrinax). Fortunately, the floral morphologies of C. aphanopetala and C. cookii, are so strikingly different, that as long as flowers or fruit (with their persistent calyx and corolla lobes) are present, herbarium specimens are sufficient, for easy and unambiguous identification of the species. (R.J. Evans. 2001)/Palmweb. |
Culture
Moist, but well drained position. Quite slow growing.
Comments and Curiosities
Etymology: The specific epithet refers to the small, membranous, and not readily apparent corolla lobes of this species.
Uses: The only reported use for C. aphanopetala, has been the leaves used for thatching.
This species was segregated from C. cookii about five years ago. My understanding of the genus in Central America is that C. cookii is restricted to the uplands of countries north of the Nicaraguan depression (eastern Guatemala, Belize, north-central Honduras, northwestern Nic), and C. aphanopetala to the south (CRica and Panamá). I'll try and post some more images of it here; very interesting to see this larger examples of this species as the dominant tree cover on the summit of Cerro Jefe at elevations between 900 and 1,000 m. It also occurs in more tropical settings further east. What struck me immediately with the younger examples growing in open shade under canopy was their strong superficial resemblance to Coccothrinax crinita. Like that sp., I understand that these palms take ages to grow to any decent size. (Jay Vannini, Guatemala City, Guatemala)
External Links
References
Phonetic spelling of Latin names by edric.
Special thanks to Geoff Stein, (Palmbob) for his hundreds of photos.
Special thanks to Palmweb.org, Dr. John Dransfield, Dr. Bill Baker & team, for their volumes of information and photos.
Glossary of Palm Terms; Based on the glossary in Dransfield, J., N.W. Uhl, C.B. Asmussen-Lange, W.J. Baker, M.M. Harley & C.E. Lewis. 2008. Genera Palmarum - Evolution and Classification of the Palms. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. All images copyright of the artists and photographers (see images for credits).
Evans, R.J.2001. Monograph of Colpothrinax. Palms 45(4): 177-195.
Many Special Thanks to Ed Vaile for his long hours of tireless editing and numerous contributions.