Solanum wendlandii

Morphological characters such as elongated anthers and paniculate inflorescences suggest this species is closely related to S. bicorne and S. refractum. It is strongly supported as sister to S. bicorne (as “S. refractum”) in molecular phylogenetic analyses of Levin et al. (2006). It can be distinguished from both those species by its non-prickly inflorescence rhachis and pentagonal, purple flowers.

Solanum wendlandii is quite variable in appearance. Most herbarium specimens, collected from flowering twigs, have only simple, entire leaves while much of the rest of the vine carries pinnatifid to pinnate leaves. Simple-leaved collections of Solanum wendlandii can be confused with S. cobanense, but the leaves of the latter are more coriaceous and the flowers are stellate and very fleshy rather than pentagonal in outline with thin petal tissue like those of S. wendlandii. Non-flowering pinnately-leaved specimens of S. wendlandii can be very similar to S. refractum, but lack the densely prickly inflorescence of that species.

Flower size in S. wendlandii is, on the face of it, extremely variable, but this is in part due to flower growth throughout anthesis. Flowers of this species last approximately 3 days (Shelly et al., 2000), and on the first day they are both darker purple and smaller than on subsequent flowering days. Plants with small-flowered inflorescences (young ones with flowers only one day old) can be confused with S. triunfense and S. bicorne, but both of these species have stamens of equal size.

The breeding system of this species has not been closely investigated. Nearly, if not all, cultivated material seems to bear only male flowers with vestigial styles and fruit from cultivated collections is almost never seen (although immature fruits are described in the protologue; Hooker, 1887). Fruiting material is seldom collected from the wild, perhaps because the plants only produce fruit upon reaching the canopy. The species is possibly dioecious, accounting for the paucity of fruiting collections.

Solanum wendlandii is apparently native from southern Mexico to western Panama in wet forests of the Gulf Coast, but the exact range is difficult to discern since it is seldom collected in the wild, is widely planted for the showy panicles of large flowers, and label data usually do not specify whether the plants were cultivated or truly wild. It is definitely native from central Veracruz south through Central America to Panama, but all other collections outside this range seem to be either escapes from cultivation or merely cultivated plants, although not always so stated on herbarium labels. We have not cited these many collections here, but full details can be found on Solanaceae Source. We have seen cultivated or perhaps naturalized material from the following countries: Argentina, Australia, Bermuda, Brazil, Cameroon, China, Colombia, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Haiti, India, Jamaica, Kenya, Malawi, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Puerto Rico, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, United Kingdom, United States of America, Venezuela, and Zimbabwe.

Solanum wendlandii is reportedly used in cooking in Guatemala (“Leaves and flowers cooked” fide Cosminsky 112 and 128) and the plants are reported in the Flora of Guatemala to be edible (Standley & Gentry, 1974). In at least one collection (Nee & Taylor 28770) from Veracruz, Mexico, however, it was noted that the fruits are not eaten. In this location, where the plants seem to be native, the green fruits were pecked open by birds, which remove the seeds and green pulp, leaving only an empty shell (Nee & Taylor 29770).

The type collection was made by an unknown collector from a cultivated plant grown in England. The origin of the type collection was reported by Hooker (1887) as, “Living plants of this beautiful Solanum were sent to the Royal Gardens [Kew] in 1882 by Dr. Wendland, Director of the Royal Gardens at Herrenhausen, Hanover, with the information that it is a native of the cold regions of Costa Rica, where it climbs trees. This habit it has retained at Kew, where it ascends to the rafters of the Water Lily House, and flowers profusely.”

Two specimens at Kew are labeled “Type specimen of Bot. Mag. t. 6914!” and dated 28 July 1886 in an unknown hand (not J.D. Hooker’s); one (K000695647) has stem, leaves and one opened out flower, while the other (K000695646) has only stem and leaves. We select the more complete K000695647 as the lectotype for S. wendlandii. Another specimen collected from the Water Lily House in 1892 (K000788540) may have come from the same plant, but is not type material. Edmonds (2012) incorrectly cited a Kew holotype for S. wendlandii, and did not effectively lectotypify the name.

Six Guatemalan collections were cited in the protologue of S. mazatenangense: Shannon 618, Shannon 624, Heyde & Lux 4735, Heyde & Lux 3442, Donnell Smith 2263 and Donnell Smith 2669. We have chosen the US duplicate (US-1324650) of Donnell Smith 2669 as the lectotype of this species, as it is the best preserved and most widely distributed of the collections cited. It is likely that Donnell Smith used the US sheet in his description of the material annotated by Coulter as this species.