Abstract:
BACKGROUND AND AIMS : The species name Gymnosporia filiformis, validly published in a 1927 revision of South African
Celastraceae, was based on syntypes representing both Maytenus cordata and a new species. Subsequent studies supported
the distinction of Gymnosporia and Maytenus as separate genera. From 1984, this new species was provisionally referred
to by the designation “Maytenus sp. A”. Maytenus in Africa comprises a diverse group of species not closely related to the
New World members of Maytenus. Here, we clarify the taxonomic identity and generic placement of G. filiformis, and
compare it with species with which it has historically been confused.
MATERIAL AND METHODS : Descriptions and observations are based on extensive field work, supported by conventional
taxonomic methods, including study of relevant literature and herbarium collections.
KEY RESULTS : The name Gymnosporia filiformis is lectotypified using a syntype representing “Maytenus sp. A”. We
describe a new monotypic genus, Marijordaania, to accommodate “Maytenus sp. A”, and propose the new combination,
Marijordaania filiformis. An amended description is provided for the species. It is morphologically quite different from
Maytenus cordata, but also from Maytenus acuminata and Maytenus abbottii, species with which it has been confused
in the past. Marijordaania filiformis grows in the understorey of evergreen Scarp Forest and is relatively rare, known
with certainty only from KwaZulu-Natal and the Eastern Cape provinces, South Africa. A preliminary conservation
assessment suggests that M. filiformis should be classified as Endangered.
CONCLUSION : Marijordaania filiformis is a taxonomically isolated species with no apparent close relatives among
African Celastraceae. While the generic status of other African members of Maytenus still needs to be resolved, it would
not impact the taxonomic status of Marijordaania. In a recent key for Celastraceae genera based on morphology and
geography, M. filiformis ran to the genus Euonymus, but this association lacks support from available molecular evidence.
