1. Family: Myrtaceae Juss.
    1. Genus: Eugenia P.Micheli ex L.
      1. Eugenia salacifolia Bünger & Mazine

        This species is accepted, and its native range is Brazil (Minas Gerais).


    de Oliveira Bünger, M., Mazine, F.F. & Stehmann, J.R. Kew Bull (2018) 73: 38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12225-018-9760-7

    Type: Brazil, Minas Gerais, Itamarandiba, 18°13'51""S, 42°51'54""W, 13 Jan. 1998, (fl.), J. R. Pirani et al. 3954 (holotype BHCB 027616!, isotype SPF!).
    Treelets to 3 m tall; young twigs rusty, glabrous
    Leaves with petioles 7.7 – 13.1 × 2.1 – 2.3 mm, canaliculate, glabrous; blades elliptic, 105.2 – 154 × 42.1 – 61.4 mm, coriaceous, discolorous, glabrous, glandular dots scarcely visible on both sides, apex acute; base acute; margin revolute; midvein sulcate adaxially, raised abaxially; lateral veins 14 – 23 on each side, visible on either side, sometimes faintly raised adaxially; marginal vein 2.0 – 2.61 mm from the margin
    Inflorescences auxotelic, terminal, pedicels 10.5 – 20.3 mm long, rusty-pubescent; deltate bracteoles concealing the ovary, 3.4 – 11.9 × 2.9 – 10 mm, apex rounded, rusty-pubescent, not ciliate, persistent at anthesis
    Buds not seen; calyx lobes 4, of equal size, ovate, apex acute, 10.6 – 14.4 × 9.7 – 12.8 mm, rusty-pubescent, not ciliate; petals not seen; ovary c- 4 × 7.8 mm, rusty-tomentose; style c- 7.4 mm long, staminal ring subquadrate
    Fruits globose, 15.6 – 23.5 mm diam., rusty pubescent, 1 seed c- 11.1 mm diam.; embryo with two fused cotyledons and no visible hypocotyl.
    Eugenia salacifolia is related to E. macrantha O. Berg (E. sect. Umbellatae O. Berg), however the new species has auxotelic (vs fasciculate) inflorescences, larger (3.4 – 11.9 mm long vs c. 2 – 4 mm long), persistent bracteoles (vs caducous) and larger calyx lobes (10.6 – 14.4 mm long vs 4 – 8 mm long).

    Eugenia salacifolia belongs to Eugenia sect. Phyllocalyx which is characterised by showy calyx lobes and bracteoles and fruits with persistent bracteoles. This section has auxotelic inflorescences in which the axis of the inflorescence continues growth beyond the flowering region. Eugenia sect. Phyllocalyx is also distinct in the degree of branching and/or number of internodes or their inflorescence elongation. In young branches, species have 2 – 4 or even more flowers united in lateral or terminal “inflorescences”. But, when the shoots are well developed, these appear as solitary flowers along the branch. This inflorescence arrangement is particularly important to distinguish E. salacifolia from E. macrantha which belongs to Eugenia sect. Umbellatae. The latter species has flowers arranged in determinate inflorescences: fascicles, glomerules or racemes. Besides the morphology of the inflorescence, E. salacifolia differs from E. macrantha in having larger bracteoles (3.4 – 11.9 mm long vs c. 2 – 4 mm long) and larger calyx lobes (10.6 – 14.4 mm long vs 4 – 8 mm long).

    Eugenia salacifolia is so named in recognition of its leaves that are similar in shape and size, to the leaves of species of Salacia (Celastraceae).

    Eugenia salacifolia occurs in the municipality of Itamarandiba, Minas Gerais, Brazil (Map 1).
    Between 1000 – 1135 m a.s.l. in the north-centre of the state of Minas Gerais, Brazil. This region is tropical with two rainy periods during the year (IBGE 2016). The municipality of Itamarandiba forms part of the central portion of the Espinhaço Range and is heavily influenced by the Cerrado biome.
    Specimens of Eugenia salacifolia, collected as E. magnisepala, were found outside a protected area surrounded by Eucalyptus plantations. Eugenia salacifolia is considered Endangered (EN) under the IUCN (2016) conservation status criteria B1ab(iii). Criterion B1 recognises an extent of occurrence of less than 5,000 km2, criterion “a”, occurrence in less than five localities and “b(iii)”, a continuing decline in the area and quality of the habitat.
    Eugenia salacifolia is known to flower in January and fruit in August.


    Native to:

    Brazil Southeast

    Eugenia salacifolia Bünger & Mazine appears in other Kew resources:

    First published in Kew Bull. 73(3)-38: 2 (2018)


    Kew Bulletin
    • IBGE (2016). IBGE Cidades. http://www.ibge.gov.br/cidadesat/default.php (accessed 01 August 2016).
    • IUCN (2016). Guidelines for Using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. Version 12. Prepared by the Standards and Petitions Subcommittee. http://www.iucnredlist.org/documents/RedListGuidelines.pdf (accessed 27 June 2016).
    • Govaerts, R., Sobral, M., Ashton, P., Barrie, F., Holst, B. K., Landrum, L. R., Matsumoto, K., Mazine, F. F., Nic Lughadha, E., Proença, C., Soares-Silva, L. H., Wilson, P. G. & Lucas, E. (2016). World checklist of selected families: Myrtaceaehttp://www.kew.org/wcsp/ (accessed 01 August 2016).
    • Moro, M. F., Nic Lughadha, E., Araújo, F. S. & Martins, F. R. (2016). A Phytogeographical Metaanalysis of the Semiarid Caatinga Domain in Brazil. Bot. Rev.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12229-016-9164-z.
    • Sobral, M., Proença, C., Souza, M., Mazine, F. & Lucas, E. (2016). Myrtaceae. Lista de Espécies da Flora do Brasil. Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro. http://floradobrasil.jbrj.gov.br/jabot/floradobrasil (accessed 11 February 2015).
    • Thiers (continuously updated). Index Herbariorum: a global directory of public herbaria and associated staff. New York Botanical Garden’s Virtual Herbarium. Available from: http://sweetgum.nybg.org/ih/ (accessed 01 August 2016).
    • Tuler, A. C., Peixoto, A. L. & Proença, C. E. B. (2016). A new endangered species of Psidium (Myrtaceae, Myrteae) from Bahia, Brazil. Phytotaxa 288: 161.Google Scholar
    • Bünger, M. O., Einselohr, P., Neves, M. L. & Stehmann, J. R. (2015). Resolving Species Delimitations in the Eugenia involucrata Group (Eugenia sect. Phyllocalyx - Myrtaceae) with Morphometric Analysis. Syst. Bot. 40(4): 995 – 1002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
    • Coutinho, K., Oliveira, M. I. U & Funch, L. S. (2015). Four new species of Eugenia (Myrtaceae) from the Caatinga and Atlantic Forest of northeastern Brazil. Phytotaxa 234(3): 215 – 226.  https://doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.234.3.2
    • Lucas, E. J. & Bünger, M. O. (2015). Myrtaceae in the Atlantic forest: their role as a ‘model’ group. Biodivers. Conservation 24: 2165 – 2180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
    • Mazine, F. F., Souza, V. C., Sobral, M., Forest, F. & Lucas, E. (2014). A preliminary phylogenetic analysis of Eugenia (Myrtaceae: Myrteae), with a focus on Neotropical species. Kew Bull. 69(1) 9497: 1 – 14.Google Scholar
    • Bünger, M. O., Sobral, M. & Stehmann, J. R. (2013). Two new Atlantic Forest Myrtaceae from Brazil. Phytotaxa 147(2): 55 – 60.  https://doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.147.2.3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
    • ESRI (2011). ArcGIS Desktop: Release 10. Environmental Systems Research Institute, Redlands.Google Scholar
    • Oliveira-Filho, A. T. (2009). Classificacao das fitofisionomias da America do Sul cisandina tropical e subtropical: proposta de um novo sistema — pratico e flexivel — ouumainjecao a mais de caos? Rodriguésia 60: 237 – 258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
    • Macedo, G. E. L. (2007). Composiçãoflorística e estrutura do componentearbóreolianescente de um trecho de florestaestacionalsemidecidual no município de Jequié, Bahia, Brasil. Tese de doutorado, Programa de Pós-GraduaçãoemBotânica da Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco.Google Scholar
    • Oliveira-Filho, A. T. & Fontes, M. A. L. (2000). Patterns of floristic differentiation among Atlantic forests in southeastern Brazil, and the influence of climate. Biotropica 32: 793 – 810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
    • Giulietti, A. M. et al. (1997). Espinhaco range region. In: S. D. Davis et al. (eds), Centres of Plant Diversity, Vol. 3: 397 – 404. The Americas. WWF-IUCN, Washington.Google Scholar
    • Mori, S., Boom, B., Carvalho, A. M. & Santos, T. (1983). Ecological Importance of Myrtaceae in an Eastern Brazilian Wet Forest. Biotropica 15: 68 – 70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
    • Radford, A. E., Dickison, W. C., Massey, J. R. & Bell, C. R. (1974). Vascular plant systematics. Harper & Row Publishers, New York.Google Scholar
    • Kiaerskou, H. (1893). EnumeratioMyrtacearumbrasiliensium. In: E. Warming (ed.), SymbolarumadFloramBrasiliae Centralis Cognoscendam 39: 1 – 200. Vidensk. Meddel. Naturhist. Foren. Kjøbenhavn. Google Scholar
    • Niedenzu, F. (1893). Myrtaceae. In: A. Engler & K. Prantl (eds), Die NatürlichenPflanzenfamilien, Vol. 3: 57 – 105. Wilhelm Engelmann, Leipzig.Google Scholar
    • Berg, O. (1856). RevisioMyrtacearumAmericae. Linnaea 27: 1 – 472.Google Scholar


    Kew Backbone Distributions
    The International Plant Names Index and World Checklist of Selected Plant Families 2020. Published on the Internet at http://www.ipni.org and http://apps.kew.org/wcsp/
    © Copyright 2017 World Checklist of Selected Plant Families. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0

    Kew Bulletin
    Kew Bulletin

    Kew Names and Taxonomic Backbone
    The International Plant Names Index and World Checklist of Selected Plant Families 2020. Published on the Internet at http://www.ipni.org and http://apps.kew.org/wcsp/
    © Copyright 2017 International Plant Names Index and World Checklist of Selected Plant Families. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0