Cryptanthus sinuosus L.B.Sm.
Taxonomic Change:
- Unresolved species: This name was created for part of the concept of C. undulatus (see comments about this name on excluded names section). Apparently it represents plants coming from Cabo Frio, following some identifications of material from that area by L. B. Smith. All material from that area has been identified as C. acaulis. However, I have not included C. sinuosus as a synonym of C. acaulis because it is not clear if it represents the same species.
—See Ramirez 1996 p. 229
Literature references:
*move your mouse pointer over the page numbers to see comment
Comments:
- Possibly not distinct from Cryptanthus acaulis (Lindley) Beer .
ON C. SINUOSUS by Warren Loose Beaumont, Texas, in Crypt Soc Journ. 4(1): 1989
In 1828 in London, J. Lindley described in the Botanical Register a new species of Tillandsia, calling it acaulis or the "Stemless Tillandsia" He wrote:
A pretty little epiphyte, native of Rio de Janeiro, for which we are indebted to Mrs. Arnold Harrison, who obligingly communicated it in August 1827.
It never grows more than 3 or 4 inches high, producing suckers freely, by which it is easily increased. If suffered to grow without these being removed, it soon forms broad patches hanging over the sides of the pot. Its leaves are a dull sea-green; its flowers white, in a sessile cluster in the bosom of the leaves; they appear at uncertain seasons, chiefly in March, April, and August.
Requires the heat of the stove, and a light, sandy, poor soil.
The species was moved into its proper genus in September, 1836 when, in Berlin, Otto and Dietrich created the new genus, Cryptanthus, in Allgemeine Gartenzeitung. They noted: In addition ... the botanical garden has also two other plants that undoubtedly belong to this genus. The first is Tillandsia acaulis Lindley Bot. Reg. t. 1157... and they gave it the new name Cryptanthus undulatus. The plant they described, however, was not the same as that described by Lindley. His original description in the Botanical Register was of the plant now named C. acaulis var. acaulis. (See CS Journal 1: 1 ).
To solve the name problem, in 1955 Lyman B. Smith described Cryptanthus sinuosus but even in his new description he noted that C. sinuosus was possibly not distinct from C. acaulis. The holotype at Vienna, lost, he instead referred to an herbarium specimen collected by Ule (4808) from Cabo Frio in October 1899, as well as collections by Glaziou from Guanabara, by Reitz from the Barra da Tijuca, and by Foster from Cabo Frio.
It is no wonder that there has been so much confusion. Recent collections have shown C. sinuosus to be even more variable than previously thought. Examples range from small, stemless, scurffy green plants closely resembling C. acaulis var. acaulis to large, crawling, shiny, red plants with far-reaching stolons. Others will undoubtedly appear.
Cryptanthus sinuosus versus C. acaulis A clarification? by Harry E. Luther Curator of Bromeliaceae; Director, BIC Sarasota, Florida in Crypt Soc Journ. 4(1): 12. 1989
Two very problematic taxa in the genus Cryptanthus are the species C. sinuosus L. B. Smith (C. undulatus Otto & Dietrich, nomen illegitimum) and C. acaulis (Lindley) Beer. Both species are based upon cultivated plants and both lack preserved types. Both species are mostly small to medium in size, both evidently vary greatly in overall habit and both are reported from the vicinity of Rio de Janeiro.
Several characters have traditionally been used to separate these entities. Overall flower length is reported to reach 40 mm in C. acaulis but only 23 mm in C. sinuosus. Unfortunately this character is not always preserved on all herbarium specimens. Degree of sepal connation is not very useful or reliable either; this varies among the flowers of a single inflorescence. The central (male) flowers may be up to 2/3 connate ( = C. acaulis) while the lateral (perfect) flowers may be 1/3 connate ( = C. sinuosus) all on a plant which I believe to be C. acaulis. Sepal serration is a bit more useful; all plants that I believe to represent C. acaulis have entire sepals. Some, but not all plants of C. cf. sinuosus have serrate sepals.
The fact remains that two taxa occur near Rio de Janeiro. Because of the lack of type specimens it is impossible to solve their identity problem in a certain, unambiguous way. The literature and available illustrations offer no final solution either .
I very tentatively propose that the two, evidently common, Cryptanthus species from the coastal forest of Rio de Janeiro state be separated as follows:
Leaf blades with a broad, succulent median zone that collapses and becomes somewhat paler when dried; sepals serrate or entire; floral bracts on lateral branches slightly carinate.... C. cf. sinuosus
Leaf blades without a succulent median zone; sepals always
entire; floral bracts ecarinate C. cf. acaulis
Representative horticultural selections of C. acaulis include the common scurfy, green cultivar (var. acaulis) and at least three reddish cultivars (var. ruber hort. ex Beer).
Available selections of C. sinuosus exhibit much more varietion. These include the plant long grown as 'Cascade', the common "glaziovii imposter" and Bob Whitman's Cabo Frio cabbages (see In Search of Cryptanthus in Habitat, page 14).
Cryptanthus sinuosus by Harry Luther in Crypt Soc Journ 11(3): 13-15. 1996
In February 1995, a number of participants from the Fourth Brazilian Bromeliad Symposium (David Benzing, Peter Krugel, Pedro Nahoum, Walter Till and myself) visited a very interesting habitat of cryptanthus in Restinga Forest between Cabo Frio and Bouzios in Rio de Janeiro state. Here on the floor of a low and dense evergreen forest were masses of the taxon I provisionally accept as Cryptanthus sinuosus L. B. Smith (Luther 1989). In some areas more than 100 mature and semi-mature rosettes grew on a square meter of sandy, leaf-littered soil. Other bromeliad denizens of this small patch of woods were the epiphytes Aechmea floribunda,A. lingulata (occasionally terrestrial), Tillandsia stricta and T. globosa. The plants of A. floribunda often perched on rather small trees (8 - 10 cm DBH) but produced leaves to over 2 meters long !
The gross habit of the cryptanthus in this forest was somewhat different from any that I had seen before. Mature rosettes consisted of 7 to 12 narrow, erect to spreading, somewhat stiff leaves that were either dull green or slightly reddish. The plants varied from essentially stemless to very slightly caulescent and produced two or three offsets on 2 - 5 cm long stolons. From a horticultural viewpoint, the plants are interesting but too ragged and few-leaved to be of much value as an ornamental plant. Two plants, a red (actually light brown) and a green were collected from this population for the research collection of the Marie Selby Botanical Gardens.
Fourteen months later the two cryptanthus have grown and changed their appearance dramatically. Under higher light levels, and likely higher levels of moisture and fertility, the formerly sparse specimens have grown into what are essentially oversized versions of the old horticultural favorite, Cryptanthus 'Cascade'. Under greenhouse conditions, the plants have produced many more leaves that are shorter, broader, stiffer, more lustrous and more undulated along the margins; stolons now approach 20 cm in length. The green plant is darker green and the red plant has a much stronger suffusion of color especially toward the center of the rosette. Everyone who has observed the changes of appearance of these collections has been amazed. Luckily, both collections have maintained the majority of their "wild" foliage and a drawing of a pair of leaves is presented in the accompanying figure. Both leaves are from the same plant.
The phenotypic plasticity exhibited by these cryptanthus is one of the major problems facing a taxonomist working with an inadequate sample (there are never enough specimens) of dried specimens. It also illustrates the problems often encountered when trying to name cultivated plants even when the plants are known to be of wild origin and to most likely represent known and named taxa.
A separate but related problem applies to bromeliad show judging; which growth form is "correct"? And why?
Figure Caption:
Cryptanthus sinuosus
A. Leaf produced in Restinga Forest habitat
B. Leaf produced under greenhouse conditions.
Both leaves collected from the same plant. —See Smith & Downs 1979
