Fosterella rojasii (L.B.Sm.) L.B.Sm.
Literature references:
*move your mouse pointer over the page numbers to see comment
Comments:
- Fosterella rojasii was known from Paraguayan Chaco only, until it was registered in a recent bromeliad checklist by Krömer et al. (1999) for Bolivia: Dpto. Santa Cruz: Serranı´a Santiago, entre Santiago de Chiquitos y Robore´, 480 m, 1819S, 5939W, Oct. 1995, H. Amerhauser 5, (WU!). After careful revision of the herbarium material it turned out that this specimen does not belong to F. rojasii, but instead to F. yuvinkae. Furthermore, we decided to describe the Bolivian specimen R. Vásquez 4177, which we first assumed to be allied to F. rojasii as well (Ibisch et al. 2002) as a new species (F. elviragrossiae, see above). Hence, F. rojasii remains endemic to Paraguay. —See Peters 2009 p. 29(2): 193
- Comment on type
The Sierra de Amambay is located approx. at 22° 20'S, 55° 48' W.
See Peters et al in Selbyana 29(2): 182-194. 2008
Fosterella rojasii was known from Paraguay¬an Chaco only, until it was registered in a recent bromeliad checklist by Kromer et al. (1999) for Bolivia: Dpto. Santa Cruz: Serrania Santiago, entre Santiago de Chiquitos y Robord, 480 m, 18°19'S, 59°39'W, Oct. 1995, H. Amerhauser 5, (WU!). After careful revision of the herbarium material it turned out that this specimen does not belong to F. rojasii, but instead to F. yuvinkae. Furthermore, we decided to describe the Boliv¬ian specimen R. Vasquez 4177, which we first assumed to be allied to F. rojasii as well (Ibisch et al. 2002) as a new species (F. elviragrossiae, see above). Hence, F. rojasii remains endemic to Paraguay.
Detail from Selbyana 23(2): 204-219. 2002
This originally Paraguayan species was re¬corded in Bolivia (Santa Cruz) in a recent bro¬meliad checklist (Kromer et al. 1999). More re¬cently, plants have been collected in the humid montane forests of the La Paz department and are also morphologically referable to F. rojasii. Despite ecological and some morphological differences, we prefer to await more data be¬
fore making a taxonomic decision on these populations. —See Peters 2009
