| |
Musa livingstoniana
Musa livingstoniana J. Kirk, Journal of the Linnean Society 9: 128 (1867).
Accepted name |
none
- type nomen confusum. |
Synonyms |
Ensete livingstonianum (J. Kirk) E. E. Cheesman, Kew Bulletin 2 (2): 101 (1947). |
Authorities |
The
authority for rejecting the species is Baker & Simmonds 1953.
The synonym is from Cheesman 1947a. |
Section |
|
Distribution |
south-east
Tropical Africa - Mozambique-Malawi (Lake Nyassa region). |
Description |
Stem conical, twice the height of a man, 2 - 3 ft. in diam.
at the base. Leaves narrow oblong, crowded, as long as the trunk, with bright red
sap. Petioles short, broad-clasping, deeply channelled, red. Fruits 4 in.
long. Seeds many, comparatively small, globose, angled by pressure in the lower
half, tubercled, 1/3 in. diameter, dull brown, hilum depressed and surrounded by
prominent edges
(Kirk 1867, Baker 1893, Williamson 1955). |
References |
Baker 1893: 207, Baker 1894a:
241, Baker 1898: 330, Baker & Simmonds 1953: 408, Burkill 1935, Champion 1967:
41, Cheesman 1947a: 101, De Wildeman 1912, Fawcett
1913: 275, Foskett 1965: 606, GRIN,
Kirk 1867, Lebrun & Stork 1995, Lock 1993, RHS 1956, Rossel 1998: 92, Sagot 1887 :
328, Williamson 1955. |
Comments |
This
was one of a number of African Musa transferrred to Ensete by Cheesman
in his 1947 paper reviving the genus Ensete. It is now recognised that
there are no wild Musa native to Africa, only Ensete. Baker and
Simmonds 1953 however reject the name Musa livingstoniana as nomen confusum
and the story of the plant is indeed somewhat confused. The
original description of M. livingstoniana was based "only
from Sir John Kirk's sketches and notes, and seeds which he brought home" from
Mozambique (Gorongozo) and Malawi (Lake Shirwa) (Baker, 1893 1894a, 1898) when, in around
1858, he was a member of Dr. Livingstone's second expedition (Foskett 1965, Rossel 1998).
Fresh
seeds of the species were later collected by Buchanan and Mahon in Malawi (Zomba) and
grown at Kew (Baker 1898: 330). Seeds from Kew, presumably
from Buchan and Mahon's collection, were also sent to the Jardin des Plantes in Marseille
in 1887 (De Wildeman 1912). In cultivation the plant was noted to have bright red
sap in its leaves .
One
might have thought that having been grown at Kew and Marseilles that the species would
have been reasonably well characterised but apparently not. Without referring at all
to the plants seemingly cultivated from it, Baker & Simmonds regard Mahon's material
as the type (a packet of seeds collected from the ground by J. Mahon at Zomba, Nyasaland
[now Malawi] in the Herbarium RBG Kew). Baker & Simmonds do not say why they do
not regard Kirk's seed as the type unless it has perhaps been lost. This may also
explain Cheesman's somehat cryptic comment that "the
seeds of this species are described as "tubercled"; but I have examined what
appears to be authenticated material at Kew and the "tubercles" are very
obscure, certainly not prominant enough to confliect with the generic description of Ensete
seeds as "smooth".
Mahon's
seed, say Baker & Simmonds, matches Ensete gilletii but the description (they
don' say whether they mean Mahon's or Kirk's) could only refer to Ensete edule [=
E. ventricosum]. Sir John Kirk does indeed comment that "in habit [Musa
livingstoniana] is indistinguishable from Musa Ensete [= E. ventricosum]
native of the same region", i.e. the mountains of equatorial Africa. And the
distribution of E. ventricosum and E. gilletii (Champion 1967, map
facing p. 10), and the variation in seed size observed in E. ventricosum (Baker
& Simmonds 1953: 409-410), also reinforce the suggestion that we are dealing here with
E. ventricosum. Champion himself (1967: 41) citing Simmonds 1953 (sic),
gives Ensete gilletii as the accepted name but the citation is definitely and his
interpretation is apparently not correct on this occasion.
For
a nomen confusum the plant does appear to have been reasonably well known for a
time and must have been quite widely cultivated. Burkill discusses Musa
livingstoniana as a potential commercial source of fibres. The RHS Dictionary
(2nd edition, 1956) mentions the plant. Conversely, Musa livingstoniana is
not mentioned in Lock 1993 presumably falling just outside the range of that flora.
It
is rather a shame that a plant commemorating the great African explorer David Livingstone
and named for him by one of his most trusted and able lieutenants should be consigned to
the taxonomic ignominy of nomen confusum.
Type: J. Mahon, Zomba, Nyasaland (in Herb. Kew) |
Compiled
partly with information from Gerda Rossel
| |
|