EDIT

<div type="discussion"><p>Calamus temii seems to be close to C. melanochrous Burret from Guangxi in China, although the latter is known only from the brief protologue and the isotype in A (a single fruit and tiny piece of leaflet, together with a photograph of the holotype, from B, which is itself now believed destroyed). The Flora of China account is based solely on the protologue (Pei et al. 1991) and there is no published mention of any herbarium material of this species in China. Wei (1986) considered C. melanochrous a doubtful species, probably referrable to C. thysanolepis Hance, but I agree with Pei et al. (1991) that the two are distinct. Burret stated that C. melanochrous was a climber (based on the collector's notes 'creeping...on trees in a wood') and had a homogeneous endosperm. The seed interior cannot now be re-examined since only one fruit remains, so we must assume Burret noted this accurately. Another apparently related species, C. macrorhynchus Burret, also from China is noted as 'semi-erect to climbing' by Pei et al. (1991). This is an unusual character state amongst Calamoid palms, which can usually be clearly ascribed to acaulescent, arborescent or climbing types (J. Dransfield pers. comm. 2001). There is a possibility that either C. temii or C. melanochrous will also prove to show this rare, ambiguous habit given further fieldwork, in which case a reassessment of their distinctness might be appropriate. Five other arborescent Calamus species occur in or near Thailand and are perhaps more likely to be confused with C. temii by field botanists than are the three Chinese species diagnosed above. All have persistent primary inflorescence bracts with a long tubular base, lacerate to varying degrees in the distal part, and they also show the following individual differences from C. temii. C. erectus Roxb. (northern Indochina west to India) differs in its whorls of long, yellow petiole spines, leaflets usually longer than 60 cm, stiffly erect inflorescences, and larger and more strongly patterned ovoid fruit up to 3 cm long. C. arborescens Griff. (south-west Thailand and areas to the south and west) differs in its larger, ungrouped leaflets with prominent white indumentum below, much longer and thicker female rachillae, and fruits with deeply channelled scales and homogeneous endosperm. C. dongnaiensis Pierre ex. Becc. (south Vietnam) has paler rachis spines, larger and less bristly leaflets, and, in the male, a longer, flagelliform inflorescence with spiny primary bracts. C. harmandii Pierre ex. Becc. (south Laos) has different armature, regularly spaced leaflets and a very slender inflorescence with remote, almost spicate partial inflorescences and unusual, crowded, densely tomentose rachillae bearing flowers in apparently jumbled spirals. Finally, Calamus modestus T. Evans and T. P. Anh (central Vietnam) has leaflets up to 24 x 1 cm, short, stiffly erect inflorescences and small, ovoid fruits. The female plant of C. dongnaiensis is unknown but its inflorescence seems most likely to resemble the male inflorescence which is slender, flagelliform and over 170 cm long with quite slender, lax rachillae over 10 cm long. There is, however, a slim possibility that it resembles the shorter, much more robust female inflorescence of C. temii. Differences in many details of the leaflets, spines and inflorescence bracts suggest that C. dongnaiensis will remain abundantly distinct from C. temii when better known. C. temii may also occur at high altitudes elsewhere in the Petchabun range and in nearby areas of northern Thailand and northern Laos. 

There is no widely applicable sub-generic classification of the genus Calamus. Various formal or informal systems have been proposed by Beccari (1908), Furtado (1956, focussing on the Malayan species) and Wei (1986, for the Chinese species). However, ongoing modern cladistic analyses indicate that many features used by these authors, such as habit and climbing organ, are poor guides to monophyly in this subtribe (Baker et al. 2000). Calamus temii does not fit satisfactorily in any of the existing systems. In particular, the primary inflorescence bracts of C. temii are unusual in the genus since in the infructescences seen they have been almost entirely lost, leaving only a dry and tattered basal portion 0.5 - 2 cm long which is split almost to the base. Based on the limited material available this feature also appears to be shared by C. melanochrous, C. macrorhynchus and a third Chinese species, C. oxycarpus, suggesting that these four species may have close affinities. They are unusual since in most congeners the primary bracts remain mostly tubular, entire and living, sometimes splitting or becoming partially lacerate (Uhl and Dransfield 1987). Beccari (1913) believed that C. oxycarpus lay close to C. arborescens (informal grouping II of Beccari 1908) amongst the species he recognised and Wei (1986) places both C. oxycarpus and C. macrorhynchus in subgenus Protocalamus C. F. Wei, alongside C. thysanolepis Hance, C. dianbaiensis C. F. Wei, C. yuangchunensis C. F. Wei and C. guangxiensis C. F. Wei. However, because of their distinctive primary inflorescence bracts and a combination of other details C. temii and the three similar species mentioned above are perhaps better left in an unassigned position, pending a better subgeneric classification. This group of four poorly known species probably merits careful attention during the construction of such a system.</p></div>

<div type="materials_examined"><p>THAILAND (NORTH-EAST): Loei Province, Phu Luang, (fr.), Feb. 1991, T Smitinand s.n. (K, BKF); same province, Wang Sapluang Distr., Phu Luang Wildlife Sanctuary, Lou Tae, (fr.), 15 May 1998, Wongprasert s.n. (BKF); same district and sanctuary, Phu Yong Phu, (fr.), 16 May 1998, Wongprasert s.n. (BKF).</p></div>

</treatment>

</taxonxBody>

</taxonx>