4.3 Article

Diversity of Bolivian Orchidaceae - a challenge for taxonomic, floristic and conservation research

期刊

ORGANISMS DIVERSITY & EVOLUTION
卷 3, 期 2, 页码 93-102

出版社

URBAN & FISCHER VERLAG
DOI: 10.1078/1439-6092-00061

关键词

Orchidaceae; Bolivia; biodiversity; endemism; taxonomy; conservation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bolivia belongs to the least studied and, in terms of biodiversity, most underestimated countries of the tropics. This fact is reflected by the history of knowledge on the Orchidaceae, the most diverse botanical family of the country (possibly about 10% of the total flora). In 1929 about 300 species were known, and until 1958, when a first floristic checklist was compiled, this number increased to 450. Although floristic and taxonomic research has not been very intensive and in about 80% of the territory no orchid specimen has been collected, four decades later about 1,500 species are recorded (in 191 genera; more than 1,200 named and identified species; about 33% endemic to the country). Almost 80% of the species are epiphytes, and among these endemism is more common (36.6%) than in terrestrial species (22.8%). According to current estimates there are about 2,000-3,000 orchid species in the country. The available information on discovery rates and geographic distribution of the species reveals challenging facts for taxonomy and conservation. Almost 50% of the species belong to only 4% of the genera, and more than 60% of the species (almost 80% of the endemics) are concentrated in only 4% of the national territory, the Yungas montane rain forests, an evolution center of Neotropical orchids. The situation of some of the taxonomically most problematic genera is described. A multiplication of research capacities is required in order to achieve adequate treatment. The paper includes a preliminary checklist and first diversity and endemism maps, One new species, Epidendrum adolfomorenoi R. Vasquez & P. L. lbisch, sp. nov., is described and illustrated.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据