|
| |
Ensete wilsonii
Ensete wilsonii (W. J. Tutcher,
Gardeners' Chronicle series 3, 32: 450 [fig. 151: 451] (1902), & Revue Horticole 34
(1903).)
E. E. Cheesman, Kew Bulletin 2 (2): 103 (1947).
| Accepted name |
Ensete glaucum (W.
Roxburgh) E. E. Cheesman, Kew Bulletin 2 (2): 101 (1947). |
| Synonyms |
Musa wilsonii W. J.
Tutcher, Gardeners' Chronicle series 3, 32: 450 [fig. 151: 451] (1902), & Revue
Horticole 34 (1903). |
| Authorities |
The authority for the accepted name is Simmonds but see
Comments ref. Flora of China.
The synonym is from Cheesman 1947a. |
| Distribution |
China (endemic to Yunnan). Wild or cultivated in
fertile soil in ravines; near sea level to 2,700 m. |
| Description |
Pseudostem conical, ca. 1.7 m tall (measured
to crown of leaves at maturity), 38 - 45 cm in diam. at base, 18 - 20 cm in diam.
immediately below basal leaves of crown. Petiole ca. 60 cm, deeply channeled; leaf blade
oblong, 3.3 - 4 m × 60 - 70 cm, base truncate to slightly cordate, apex acute.
Inflorescence ca. 1 m, ca. 38 cm. in diam. at base, 10 - 13 cm in diam. at apex. Bracts
green, persistent, proximal ones lanceolate, ca. 30 cm, distal ones ovate, much shorter
than proximal ones. Flowers 15 - 20 per bract. Tepals white; compound tepal ca. 5 cm, apex
3-lobed, lobes free or laxly coherent; free tepal short, less than 1/2 as long as compound
tepal, apex 3-cuspidate, central cusp linear, large. Berries golden yellow, trigonous
clavate, 9 - 11.5 × ca. 4 cm, pulpy. Seeds ca. 20, black, 1 - 1.3 cm in diam., angled,
slightly wrinkled. Fl. Jun, fr. Oct.
(Flora of China 2000.)
See also Musa wilsonii for a
description of the type. |
| References |
Champion 1967 : 43, Cheesman 1947a : 103, De Wildeman 1912 : 359, Fawcett
1913 : 266, Lancaster 1989 : 196, Li 1978 : 56, Li 1981, Flora of China, Revue Horticole 1903 : 34, fig. 10., Simmonds 1960 : 208, 212, Tutcher
1902, Wu 1997. |
| Comments |
References to this plant in the Chinese literature are very
confusing. Some references to Musa wilsonii in literature relating to Hong
Kong are actually references to Musa laterita. It is also likely that Flora
of China volume 24 is wrong to separate Ensete wilsonii from Ensete glaucum.
More to come on this.
Cheesman created Ensete wilsoni as a new combination (number 15 out of 25) in a
brief note in his 1947 paper reviving the genus Ensete. Cheesman revived
one and created 24 new Ensete species in that paper but acknowledged that field
study might reveal synonymy. Although he had not seen authentic specimens Simmonds
1960, with characteristic assurance, considered that Ensete wilsoni differed in
no essential respect from Ensete glaucum and reduced it. Wu 1997 on the
other hand maintained Ensete wilsonii as the accepted name commenting that "this species was treated by Li (1981) as Musa wilsonii
Tutcher. However, a study of the figure and the description in the original
publication of M. wilsonii clearly reveals that the species should be placed in Ensete
and not Musa. Ensete, including E. wilsonii, differs from
Musa in having a sympodial swollen stem base (vs. stoloniferous stem base), a 3-lobed
compound tepal (vs. 5-toothed compound tepal), green (vs. colored) bracts, and seeds 1 -
1.3 (vs. less than 0.6) cm in diameter". On the evidence presented above, Wu Te-lin's maintenance of Ensete
wilsonii as a species distinct from Ensete glaucum seems rather
uncritical. However, in Flora of China the botanical differences between Ensete
glaucum and Ensete wilsonii are specified as follows:
Ensete glaucum - Pseudostem to 5 m
(measured to crown of leaves at maturity); leaf blade 1.4 - 1.8 m, base cuneate; compound
tepal ca. 2.5 cm; fruit obovoid-oblong; seeds smooth.
Ensete wilsonii - Pseudostem ca. 1.7 m
(measured to crown of leaves at maturity); leaf blade ca. 3.3 m, base slightly cordate to
truncate; compound tepal ca. 5 cm; fruit trigonous clavate; seeds slightly wrinkled.
Neither
Wu Te-lin nor Flora of China comment on Simmonds' contention that this plant is Ensete
glaucum.
Flora of China volume 24 does not present a convincing case for the separation of Ensete
wilsonii from Ensete glaucum and is very likely wrong. More to come on this.
The use of the word "sympodial" by Wu to describe Ensete and its
juxtaposition with "stoloniferous" to describe Musa has the potential
for confusion. While Musa are sympodial it seems to us that Ensete
are better described as comprising a determinate monopodium. There are a few reports
of spontaneous suckering in Ensete but this is abnormal behaviour and the induced
suckering in Ensete ventricosum do not disqualify this description of Ensete.
Tutcher, Cheesman and Simmonds all use the epithet wilsoni
and the plant was named after Ernest "Chinese" Wilson. Modern practice
under the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature recommends that an epithet
commemorating a person whose name ends in a consonant should have ii added, thus M.
wilsonii and E. wilsonii as used by Mobot & Wu.
The occurence of the plant at high altitude, "below 2,700 m", implies that it
should be reasonably cold hardy. The name "Snow Banana" is sometimes
applied to it but the source for this name is not known to us. Because of its
supposed cold hardiness there have been several attempts to introduce the plant into
cultivation via seed. So far (September 2000) these attempts have been
unsuccessful. Both E. glaucum and E. wilsonii occur in Yunnan and,
although E. wilsonii occurs up to 2,700 m. and E. glaucum only to 1,100
m. there is considerable altitudinal overlap. There is the possibility for confusion
of identity in Chinese Ensete seed offered commercially although examination of
the leaf base of cultivated plants may perhaps be diagnostic. However, the seed that
has been imported into Europe up to now, under the name Musa wilsonii, has been
true Musa seed not Ensete seed.
Images:
There is one image of Musa wilsoni from Tutcher's original 1902 paper. |
| |
|