The genus Prumnopitys (Podocarpaceae) in Malesia

With the division of the oversized genus Podocarpus into several well-marked genera (de Laubenfels, 1969) the widespread species, Podocarpus amarus needs to be reassigned. Certainly it lacks the fleshy receptacle which gives Podocarpus its name. In fact, one or more fruit are borne along a scale bearing fertile shoot, quite unlike the strictly subterminal fruit on a naked penduncle of Podocarpus sens. strict., but corresponding to the condition in the former section of the genus known as Stachycarpus. The leaves of Podocarpus amarus also lack hypoderm, as is the case in the Stachycarpus group, but not generally in the strict Podocarpus group. In spite of these distinctions, Podocarpus amarus was not included in the section Stachycarpus until 1903 when Pilger recognized its proper relationships. Florin refined the understanding of the section Stachycarpus in 1931 but Buchholz and Gray elected to erect a separate section, Sundacarpus, for Podocarpus amarus in 1948. Van Tieghem elevated the section Stachycarpus to generic rank in 1891 without P. amarus but Gaussen transferred the section Sundacarpus to Van Tieghem’s genus in 1974. The matter is still not settled, however, because Stachycarpus is not a valid genus. The proper genus for sections Stachycarpus and Sundacarpus was described in 1860 by Philippi who gave it the name, Prumnopitys. His type species was Prumnopitys elegans which has long been recognized as synonymous with the previously described Podocarpus andinus. Van Tieghem used this latter species for the type of his genus Stachycarpus, making the corresponding new specific combination. The genus Stachycarpus is therefore a synonym to the genus Prumnopitys, which ought also to include the section Sundacarpus. The necessary new combinations have yet to be made for all of the species except Prumnopitys ferruginoides (Compton) de Laubenfels, the only valid combination so far published. The taxonomy of the genus should therefore be as follows: