Note: This plant was identified faster than I would have believed possible by Nuytsia (blog, Flickr photos), based on his examination of the images I posted at Flickr. Thanks, Nuytsia!
I found this plant growing in the understory of a planted pine forest. I don’t know whether it strictly fits in the “neotropical savanna” category, but I found it so curious that I wanted to identify it. The red parts reminded me of the wax lips we used to be able to buy as children.
Recently, a visiting botanist reminded me of the value of learning plant families well. If you can get at the family, then you have a much better chance of learning the genus and species. This is a viewpoint I learned in my very first botany book, Botany in a Day, by Thomas Elpel, but I had drifted away from that approach, mostly because I was finding a habitat-organized book quite useful. If it didn’t serve me, though, I was basically stumbling around with each new plant, trying to find pictures in books or images on the web to steer me in the right direction.
So, this time, I’m taking the family point of view to work through the features of this plant. Psychotria poeppigiana, commonly known as “Hot Lips,” is a member of Rubiaceae, the coffee family.
Before I start on the plant, I always like to look at the name. Rubia, the root of the family name, comes from the Latin “ruber,” referring to the red dye that comes from the root of plants in the genus Rubia. After I’ve spent a little time with the Family, I’ll look at the genus and species names.
The Rubiaceae (13,000 species) are the fourth largest family of flowering plants after the Asteraceae (Aster Family – 21,000 species), Orchidaceae (Orchid Family-17,500 species) and Fabaceae (Bean and Pea Family – 16,500 species). The 13,000 or so Rubiaceae species are grouped into about 650 genera.
The features that nearly all 13,000 Rubiceae species have in common are these: opposite leaves with no teeth or lobes on the edges and…here it becomes really botanical and I’ll break this down…interpetiolar stipules. (A Field Guide to the Families and Genera of Woody Plants of Northwest South America, by Alwyn H. Gentry)
First, here are the opposite leaves with entire margins (no teeth or lobes on the edges):
Second – the stipules. These are small appendages or outgrowths found near the base of the leaf stalk, or petiole. Stipules may be between the petiole bases (interpetiolar) or between the petiole and the stem (intrapetiolar). Make sense? Not all plants have stipules, but the ones found in Rubiaceae are found between the petiole bases, which, remember, are on opposite sides of the stem.
Since this is such an important characteristic of the family, I went back to the plant to shoot a picture of the stipules.
Another feature of Rubiceae is that the flowers are radially symmetrical, as in a daisy or in a starfish. In animals, we’re used to bilateral symmetry – the left side is a mirror image of the right side. But in some animals such as jellyfish and starfish we see radial symmetry, in which pie-shaped wedges are like each other. In plants, we see radial symmetry more often than we see bilateral symmetry. A tulip is an example of radial symmetry. A pea flower is an example of bilateral symmetry.
In this plant, the flowers are so small and numerous that I could not document their symmetry. Remembering that the coffee plant is a Rubiceae, I went here for an illustration of the flowers. They’re small and a little hard to see, but they have 5 petals, an odd number, which itself shows the flowers could not be bilaterally symmetrical.
Once we’ve shown the plant is a member of Rubiceae, we need to figure out what makes it a Psychotria.
First, about the name, Psychotria. According to Dave’s Botanary, it means “Life, referring to medicinal qualities of some species.” Perhaps the best known species of Psychotria used for medicinal purposes is Psychotria ipecacuanha, which has been used to treat amoebic dysentery. Psychotria poeppigiana itself has been said to have medicinal properties in Belize and in the Guianas.
Regarding the species name, poeppigiana, Dave’s Botany did not have an entry, but it did suggest one for “poeppigii,” which is named for Eduard Friedrich Poeppig, 19th century German explorer and botanist. Knowing the meaning of Psychotria will probably help me remember it, but since I had never heard of Poeppig and the references to him in a google search are scanty, I can imagine that I’ll have a harder time remembering that name. I may just think of it as Poppy Guiana. Having no idea of the proper pronunciation lets me call it what I want!
Now about the plant itself. A useful introduction to the Rubiceae is from the National Botanic Garden of Belgium. Here’s where I learned that the flowers in one particular group of Rubiceae are protected by a set of bracts, an involucre. “The involucre is coloured a brilliant red and helps the plant to attract pollinators. In fruit stage, the red involucre contrasts strongly with the blue berries, attracting dispersers.” So those Hot Lips are an involucre, eh, bracts that attract pollinators and later, dispersers. I’m sure there’s a comment to be made here, but I won’t.
A New South Wales site has a key to the Rubiceae family, which allows one to get down to the genus level. From that key, I picked the characteristics of Psychotria that are useful to me in the field:
1. Woody plant, usually more than 1 m high
2. Flowers terminal or terminal and axillary in upper leaf axils, usually united into terminal inflorescences; ovules attached at base of ovary
No mention in this key of those conspicuous bracts, nor even of the other feature that struck me when first looking closely at the plant – the “hairy” nature of every visible part of the plant – stems, leaves, bracts. I guess plants with hairs occur in too many families to be an identifying characteristic.
So, without the hot lips bloom, all I’d be able to say about this plant is that it is a member of the Rubiceae family. I’m learning to be happy going that far, though. Knowing that the plant is in the coffee family offers a good deal of satisfaction. Discovering that the gardenia, the ixora, and the medicinal plant noni (the last is new to me since coming to Panama) all are members of this family pleases me no end. Just today I was in a plant nursery in San Pablo and saw rows of young ixora plants. I ran over and looked:
opposite leaves with no teeth or lobes (check!)
interpetiolar stipules (check!)
For a while, I’m sure, I’ll be running over to plants with those two characteristics in mind and asking the plant, “Are you related to Hot Lips of the Coffee Family?”





Hi!
Great post! Have to agree on the family sentiment. It’s crucial and I’m always happy if I can get something to family. Genus is great and species is very good, but family is key.
Have you seen this by the way? It’s rather fun!
To my (slight) shame my ID of this was not wholly legitimate botanising!
My immediate assumption was that this was Rubiaceae and I can’t really say why other than the overall feel of the plant. With the intrapetiolar stipules not clear in those original shots it was just gut feeling. I had a little browse through the genera, got nowhere quickly (there are SO many genera) and then decided to go with a hunch. I searched for panama lips on flickr (or something like that and variations) and eventually drew up hot lips as the common name for the plant. I then googled this and voila!
This is the second time when an obvious common name description has led me to ID something on Flickr. First time round it was seedbox (Ludwigia alternifolia).
One of my great bugbears is plants named after people. The latin is supposed to describe the organism after all. What feature of the plant tells you who originally collected it? My favourite(??) bad plant name is Sinowilsonia henryi. Fabulously descriptive of the plant?
I think not!
I was told a story a few years ago where a botanical expedition to Indonesia discover a huge number of new species of legumes (70 odd, I think) from within a single genus on a single mountain.
As the species description unfolded they did began to run a bit dry on names and one of the last few went down as incredable or some variant of that.
Yes, indeed, family is “key.” And thanks for the pointer to the Family Recognition site…really fine, and fun.
I’m finding, to my dismay, that just as I’m getting acquainted with families in one taxonomic system – the Cronquist – the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group is reworking everything! All my books use Cronquist. Wikipedia uses APG. I’m sure it’s necessary, but it’s a confusing time for a beginning botanist! All this to say…your “not wholly legitimate botanising” which now may be the method of choice for web images, with no plant at hand, may even become the method of choice for all plants in the future. I don’t know.
As far as plants named after people – yes, it’s a problem. I’ve even heard of a plant named after someone’s dog.
I guess the descriptive names have long been used up, as you suggested. For example, I learned that there’s a Psychotria pubescens, which to me would be a perfect name for Psychotria poeppigiana because so much of the plant is covered with fine hairs. Without having looked it up, I’m guessing that P. pubescens was named first. Sigh.
Part of the problem with the names given to a species is the specimen and the data recorded for it. If the taxonomist have little info on the specimen but recognises that it’s new it probably hard to attach a meaningful name. In the rush to get names out quite a few bad choices were made… I think?
Bad choices, no doubt. Also, there is a limitation imposed by our vocabulary. I have not been able to find out how many words there are in either the Greek or the Latin languages, but Ask Oxford suggests there may be 250,000 words in English, which possibly has the most words of any language.
Wikipedia estimates the number of flowering plants to be 250,000 to 400,000. I’m assuming these are named flowering plants and of course this number does not include Gymnosperms or mosses or liverworts, etc.
Naturally, not every word could possibly be used in a plant description – most pronouns and verbs, I would think, would be out. This is probably a fruitless tack to take, but sort of fun to think about.
Hmmm… well you can still build on your descriptions with a few suffixes or prefixes so that gives you a bit more play. There nothing like a good psuedo-x, x-ioides or x-issimus to give you a bit of room.
One thing that’s caught my attention is the duplication of Genera names between plants and animals.
So Prunella is a labiate and a bird, Arenaria is a Caryoph and a wader and Wilsonia is a tiny bindweed or a Warbler.
So a little source for confusion there….
hi!
interesting, often I can see these plants
I have pictures!
well but, “savana” ios better to write like “Sabana”
bye
Hi! you have a great explanation about hot Lips description, even if my english is not so good.. I found this species in pacific coast-colombia feeding some Heliconius butterflies, but in some wikipedia homepage they say it isn`t present in Pacific slope, co you know something about distribution? Regards
Hello Juli,
Nice question. If you look at the distribution map for the species at GBIF, you’ll see that it is found on the Pacific slope in Central America and northern South America. It disappears from the Pacific side of South America as you travel south.
The link is at http://data.gbif.org/species/14249807.
I hope this helps.
Mary
Ahh by the way! We call this plant in here “Beso de Negra” “Black woman Kiss”.. it has medical uses also between africanamerican communities in colombia.
Neat! I am glad to hear about the medicinal uses. Thank you, Juli, for both your comments – and for your excellent English!