Skip to main content
This species is accepted, and its native range is Sumatera to Jawa.


Coode, M.J.E. 2014. Elaeocarpus for Flora Malesiana: the Monocera group in western Malesia. Kew Bulletin 69: 9487. DOI

Data Deficient (DD); there being so few recent collections suggests vulnerability, at least in Java, where only one collection is known from the last 50 years. Already extinct? This form has not been recollected for nearly 200 years.
Java, Sumatra. Known from Horsfield 8 only. There are two mountains called "Prahoe" in Java, one in central Java (known as Diëng), one in western Java (GnTangkoebanPrahoe); Horsfield is known to have visited the first (and perhaps more likely) in 1816 (and perhaps previously in 1814), and the second in 1804.
Altitude 1500 – 1900 m. No information; presumably at mid-altitude.
Morphology General Habit
Trees 10 – 13 m high
Morphology Leaves
Leaves spirally arranged, loosely grouped towards twig tips; petioles 1.7 – 4.5 cm long (the longest on Lörzing 6114), 1.5 – 2.2 mm wide, mostly short-hairy to almost velvety but sometimes ± glabrous, not verrucose when mature, rounded or flat in apical third above (the type has almost glabrous petioles and a shallow groove but is alone in this), distinct from leaf-base, not or somewhat swollen and without pegs at apex, mostly somewhat swollen at base; blades chartaceous, mostly elliptic, sometimes obovate (including type) sometimes ovate (Bünnemeyer 4567), (1.8 –) 2 – 2.7 times as long as wide, (11 –) 12 – 22 (– 27) × (4.5 –) 6 – 10 (– 12) cm, usually not acuminate (occasionally a short broad acumen present), acute at apex (60 –) 70 – 90° or ± rounded, cuneate to broadly cuneate or broadly rounded at base, or tapering towards a narrowly rounded base, dull above, usually sparsely short-hairy on nerves beneath, sometimes glabrous or with short hairs all over surface, indumentum variable — mostly spreading but adpressed on type, not verrucose when mature, with 7 – 11 pairs of main lateral veins at 60 – 80º to midrib (80° in Bünnemeyer 4567), fine venation network neither prominent nor impressed above, obscure, midrib and main lateral veins prominent beneath, veins branching three-quarters to seven-eighths inside margin, domatia absent beneath, without minute dark dots beneath, margins mostly very weakly serrate to ± entire, teeth 5 – 12 mm apart in apical half
Morphology Leaves Stipules
Stipules caducous, triangular, tough, thick, acute, hairy outside like the twigs, 2 – 3 mm long, entire
Morphology Reproductive morphology Flowers Androecium Stamens
Stamens 20 – 30, inserted ± between disk and ovary; filaments straight or somewhat incurved, 2.5 – 4 mm long (2.5 mm in Sumatra; 3.5 – 4 mm in Java), tapering from base to apex, mostly glabrous (a few short hairs may be present); anthers minutely fairly densely hairy, 4.5 – 6.5 mm long (4.5 – 5 mm in Java; 6 – 6.5 mm in Sumatra), with outer tooth clearly much longer than inner and tipped with slender awns 2.5 – 3 mm long in Sumatra, 3 – 4 mm long in Java, awns usually not more obviously hairy than the rest of the anther (but the type has spreading-asperous awns), without setae at tip
Morphology Reproductive morphology Flowers Calyx
Sepals probably falling at the same time as petals and stamens, 14 – 17 by 2 – 3 mm, indumentum outside often very minute and almost felty/velvety, sometimes almost glabrous inside (the type hairy on keel in basal area and short-hairy above), not verrucose outside at anthesis, with a low to fairly prominent keel inside at base, fading towards tip
Morphology Reproductive morphology Flowers Corolla
Petals thick-membranous, just translucent, obovate (sometimes slightly spathulate), narrowed in lower third but not usually constricted into a claw or ± parallel-sided to base, 14 – 18 mm long (14 – 15 mm in Sumatra; 16 – 18 mm in Java), 5.5 – 8.5 mm wide at widest point of limb (5.5 – 7 in Sumatra; 7 – 8.5 in Java), rounded to truncate at apex, with 10 – 12 apical divisions unequal in length and grouped into lobes or with divisions irregularly arranged and unequal in length, divisions narrow-triangular to triangular, 1 – 4 mm long, obtuse to ± rounded at tip, not verrucose in dried material, densely pilose outside in lower half or two-thirds or as far up as petal division, margins densely medium-hairy throughout, obviously hairy on keel and margins inside but with glabrous areas between (easier to see in boiled material), a single keel present inside, variably prominent, petals infolded to ± flat at midpoint, weakly 2-pocketed at base, the margins only somewhat infolded
Morphology Reproductive morphology Flowers Disc
Disk annular, 10-toothed (especially in young fruit) or in flower with 5 notched lobes, 0.8 – 1 mm high, short-hairy at least above
Morphology Reproductive morphology Flowers Gynoecium Ovary
Ovaries placed above the disk, clearly narrowed at base, 3 – 4 mm long, velvety to sericeous or densely pilose, 2-locular, ovules 8 (– 10) per loculus; style tapering to a point, 10 – 12 mm long
Morphology Reproductive morphology Flowers Pedicel
Pedicels 12 – 35 mm long in fruit
Morphology Reproductive morphology Fruits
Fruits ellipsoid, 3.5 – 3.8 cm long when dried, terete (stone flattened), rounded or obtuse at apex and at base, glabrous; mesocarp probably c- 2 mm thick when dried (very little material); stones ovoid to ellipsoid, 3.2 – 3.4 cm long, surface not fibrous, with sutures visible on surface, without longitudinal ridges, crests or wings or with 2 thick longitudinal wings alternating with the sutures, ± tuberculate, strongly tuberculate or slightly concave-sculptured, variable (Koorders 14410 more tuberculate than the rest), strongly flattened or somewhat flattened in TS, stone wall 2 – 3 mm thick, loculus 1, central, bilaterally symmetrical, the long axis across the plane of symmetry, loculus 1; seed 1, embryo straight, broad, with entire endosperm.
Morphology Reproductive morphology Inflorescences
Racemes borne behind the leaves, 5 – 12 cm long, axis 0.8 – 1.2 mm thick at about halfway, variously hairy, usually short-pubescent and not very dense (the type again ‘atypical’ — almost glabrous), 4 – 6-flowered (but no complete undamaged inflorescences seen), flowers scattered, bisexual, 5-merous; bracts early caducous, none seen; pedicels 10 – 28 mm long (variable: Bünnemeyer 4567 10 – 15 mm; Steenis 12196 & type much longer), 0.6 – 0.8 mm thick in flower; buds long-conical, acute at apex
Morphology Twigs
Twigs hairy at tip or persistently hairy behind current shoot growth (rarely almost glabrous as in the type), indumentum brownish-velvety, sometimes sparse, twigs 3 – 5 mm thick on current growth, with non-resinous, hairy terminal buds

Weibel also went to considerable trouble to distinguish Elaeocarpuspierrei from E. littoralis [E. macrocerus] in his notes, perhaps because previous workers had also considered this critical; in fact Adelbert (1948) wondered whether E. pierrei might not simply be a form of E. macrocerus. For me, there seems less difficulty in separating E. macrocerus (invariably a low altitude, river- or lake-side tree with narrow obovate leaves with only moderately prominent venation) from E. pierrei form 1 (from 1500 m or higher, with broader obovate-elliptic leaves and more prominent venation), than between Weibel’s ‘form 2’ and E. obtusus. It may be relevant to note that Weibel’s work on this group dates from about 1954, and he might have changed his mind had he lived long enough to complete Flora Malesiana.

Weibel, in mss, recorded a stamen count of 52; I am not sure which specimen yielded this count. He was considering recognising two ‘forms’ of Elaeocarpuspierrei. It is not often that I disagree with him; if his perception of species limits differed from mine it was that Weibel was always more impressed by floral differences than by vegetative characters, while I am suspicious of anything that cannot be recognised without dissection for details. Thus it seems that Weibel determined the specimens in Table 1as E. pierrei fa. II because for him the length of the anther-awns was more important than the appearance of the specimens. I cannot tell these specimens from E. obtusus without recourse to those anther awns, whereas E. pierrei is recognisable by its larger, relatively broader leaves with more prominent venation beneath.

Apart from the relationship with Elaeocarpuspierrei this collection also resembles E. nooteboomii Coode (1998) from Borneo in the large flowers and long anther awns. E. nooteboomii differs from Horsfield 8 in its long, often persistent stipules, shorter petioles and generally even larger flowers. It is certainly strange that such a large-flowered variant should apparently never have been collected again.

One further collection needs mention — Horsfield Elaeoc. 8. This early 19C. collection, from ‘Mt Prahoe’ in Java, appears to have escaped attention of previous workers, including Weibel; one good specimen is in BM with two less good duplicates in K. Horsfield 8 has stamen filaments with short hairs and awns distinctly longer than 2 mm — and in these features it keys out with Elaeocarpusmacrocerus and E. pierrei. It agrees with Pierre's description in the petal division (not with Koorders & Valeton’s; the divisions are hardly tandjes = little teeth). But it differs from Pierre's description of E. dentatus (and Backer's concept as far as he gives details) in that it has much larger sepals and petals (if one can believe Pierre's measurements; he also states that the buds are 21 mm long), the leaf shape is different and the pedicels shorter (Table 3). In view of the unresolved state of this species group, and the lack of fruiting material, I have decided not to name this variant, but leave a full description in the herbarium at Kew in the hope that further material may be found to confirm my suspicions or not.

Since there is so much variation in the length of anther awns, it does not seem possible to recognise this assemblage as a taxon of any kind, and I prefer to leave these as ‘unidentified’ until new and better collections confer better understanding. I have also left Koorders 14179 (L) unidentified; there is a single fruit which I am reluctant to boil and dissect; no locality or altitude is given and the leaves resemble those of Elaeocarpusobtusus subsp. obtusus.

Presumably on the basis of Weibel’s determinations, there are also two sheets in Bogor determined (but not by Weibel) Elaeocarpuspierrei (Table 2).

Type: Java, Mt Malabar [S of Bandung, W Java], Reinwardts.n. (holotype L!).

Native to:

Jawa, Sumatera

Elaeocarpus pierrei Koord. & Valeton appears in other Kew resources:

First published in Meded. Lands Plantentuin 33: 421 (1900)

Accepted by

  • Govaerts, R. (2001). World Checklist of Seed Plants Database in ACCESS E-F: 1-50919.


Kew Bulletin

  • (Koorders & Valeton 1900: 421, 423)
  • Adelbert (1948: 310).
  • Adelbert, A. G. L. (1948). Notes on the Flora of Java, IV. Blumea 6 (1): 310 – 313.
  • Backer, C. A. & Bakhuizen van den Brink, R. C. (1963). Flora of Java 1: 396 – 400. P. Noordhoff, Groningen.
  • Blume, C. (1825). Bijdragen tot de flora van NederlanschIndië 3: 123. Lands Drukkerij, Batavia.
  • Coode, M. J. E. (1978). A conspectus of Elaeocarpaceae in Papuasia. Brunonia 1 (2): 131 – 302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  • Coode, M. J. E. (1981). Elaeocarpaceae. In: E. E. Henty (ed.), Handbooks of the Flora of Papua New Guinea, Vol. II. Melbourne University Press.
  • Coode, M. J. E. (1995). Elaeocarpus in the Flora Malesiana area — E. kraengensis and ten new species from Sulawesi. Kew Bull. 50: 267 – 294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  • Coode, M. J. E. (1998). Elaeocarpus for Flora Malesiana — notes, new taxa, names and combinations for Borneo. Kew Bull. 53: 83 – 128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  • Coode, M. J. E. (2001). Elaeocarpus for Flora Malesiana: the Coilopetalum group in Sulawesi & Maluku. Kew Bull. 56: 837 – 874.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  • Coode, M. J. E., Dransfield, J., Forman, L. L., Kirkup, D. W. & Said, I. M. (1996). A Checklist of the Flowering Plants and Gymnosperms of Brunei Darussalam. Ministry of Industry & Primary Resources, Brunei Darussalam.
  • Corner, E. J. H. (1939). Elaeocarpus. Gard. Bull. Straits Settlem. 10: 308 – 329.
  • Elias, E. L. L. (1997). Determination of the rank and position of a species of Elaeocarpus from Palawan. BSc. Thesis, Institute of Biology, College of Science, University of the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon City. [copy at Kew!]
  • Hasskarl, J. C. (1844). Catalogus plantarum in hortobotanicobogoriensicultarum alter. Batavia.
  • Hasskarl, J. C. (1845). Adnotationes de plantishortibogoriensis. Tijdschr. Natuur. Gesch. Physiol. 12: 77 -- 139.
  • Heinrich, G. (1932). Der Vogel Schnarch. Berlin (n.v.).
  • Heinrich, G. (1943). Celebes, SeltsameJagddurchseltsames Land. Berlin (n.v.).
  • King, G. (1891). Elaeocarpus. In: Materials for a Flora of the Malay Peninsula. J. Asiat. Soc. Bengal 60: 120 – 140.
  • Knuth, R. (1940). Elaeocarpaceae novae. Decades 3 – 4. Repert. Spec. Nov. Regni Veg. 48: 72 – 79.
  • Koorders (1914: t. 423)
  • Koorders, S. H. & Valeton, T. (1894). Elaeocarpaceae. Bijdr. No. 1 tot de kennis der boomsoorten van Java. Meded. Lands Plantentuin 11: 234 – 264.
  • Koorders, S. H. & Valeton, T. (1900). Bijdr. 5 tot de kennis der boomsoorten van Java. Meded. Lands Plantentuin 33: 421, 423.
  • Koorders, S. H. (1914 – 15). Atlas der Baumarten von Java 3 (1) (part 1 published 1914, parts 2 – 4 published 1915, bound together with part 1, 1915 printed on title page). Figs 420 – 434. Buch- und steindruckerei von F. P. W. M. Trap, Leiden.
  • Kurz, S. (1874). Contributions towards a knowledge of the Burmese Flora, Part I. J. Asiat. Soc. Bengal 43: 39 – 141.
  • Kurz, S. (1877). Forest Flora of British Burma 1: 1 – 549. Calcutta.
  • Merrill, E. D. (1951). Notes on Elaeocarpus Linnaeus. J. Arnold Arbor. 32: 157 – 200.
  • Miquel, F. A. W. (1859). Flora van NederlanschIndië 1, 2: 212. C. G. van der Post, Amsterdam.
  • Miquel, F. A. W. (1860 – 1). Flora IndiaeBataviae, Suppl. 1: 1 – 656 [Part 3: 161 – 366 (1861)]. Leipzig.
  • Ng, F. S. P. (1989). Elaeocarpaceae. Tree Flora of Malaya 4: 82 – 97.
  • Phengklai, C. (1981). Elaeocarpaceae. In: T. Smitinand, T. Santisuk & K. Larsen (eds), Flora of Thailand 2 (4) 405 – 438. Forest Herbarium, Bangkok.
  • Pierre, J. B. L. (1888). FloreForestière de la Cochinchine, fasc. 9. Octave Doin, Paris.
  • Ridley, H. N. (1922). Elaeocarpus in The Flora of the Malay Peninsula 1: 309 – 321. L. Reeve & Co Ltd., London.
  • Steenis-Kruseman, M. van (1950). Malaysian plant collectors and collections: being a cyclopaedia of botanical exploration in Malaysia and a guide to the concerned literature up to the year 1950. Flora Malesiana Series I, 1: 1 – 639.
  • Turczaninow, P. K. N. S. (1846). Description des Elaeocarpées des collections asiatiques de M. M. Cuming et Zollinger. Bull. Soc. Imp. NaturalistesMoscou 19 (II): 489 – 496.
  • Vahl, M. (1794). SymbolaeBotanicae 3: 66. Impensisauctoris, excudebant N. Möller et filius, Hauniae.

Kew Backbone Distributions
The International Plant Names Index and World Checklist of Selected Plant Families 2021. Published on the Internet at and
© Copyright 2017 World Checklist of Selected Plant Families.

Kew Bulletin
Kew Bulletin

Kew Names and Taxonomic Backbone
The International Plant Names Index and World Checklist of Selected Plant Families 2021. Published on the Internet at and
© Copyright 2017 International Plant Names Index and World Checklist of Selected Plant Families.