2 {242 YEARBOOK of the HEATHER SOCIETY 1996 ISSN 0440-5757 THE HEATHER SOCIETY Registered charity No 261407 Affiliated societies Nederlandse Heidervereniging ‘Ericultura’ Gesellschaft der Heidefreunde North American Heather Society President Mr David McClintock TD, FLS, VMH. Vice-Presidents Mr T. A. Julian Mrs D. Metheny Major-General P. G. Turpin CB, OBE. COUNCIL 1995-1996 Chairman Mr D. J. Small Honorary Secretary Mrs P. B. Lee Honorary Treasurer Mr A. Hall Mr R. J. Cleevely Mr A. R. Collins Mrs D. Everett Mr A. W. Jones Mrs D. H. Jones JP. Mr P. L. Joyner Mr D. J. T. Mayne Dr E. C. Nelson (co-opted) Dr R. Nichols Mr D. B. Oliver Mr D. H. E. Rope Miss J. Sharpe Mr A. J. Stow eae ur pin me we Ne st yo a gx ~ y Ti igly 4 Tec j + 2 7 V ? Nix ~ ¢ 4 ie:) ‘ 4 4 IDA Z WN ss IF DE #) ‘. BZ tet ; rn Sa aed Yearbook. of The Heather Society 1996 Editor Dr E. Charles Nelson Assistant Editor R. J. Cleevely ISSN 0440-5757 The Heather Society c/o Denbeigh, All Saints Road, Creeting St Mary, IPSWICH, Suffolk, IP6 8PJ © The authors & The Heather Society The Heather Society and the editors take no responsibility for the views expressed by authors in papers and notes published in this Yearbook. COVER PHOTOGRAPH Erica kogelbergensis is a showy species, occurring on the southern slopes of Kogelberg Peak only 80 km southeast of Cape Town. |E.G.H. Oliver] Yb. Heather Soc. 1996: 1-5. Studies in the Ericaceae (Ericoideae), XX. A rare new species of Erica from South Africa. E. G. H. OLIVER & I. M. OLIVER Compton Herbarium, National Botanical Institute, Private Bag X7, CLAREMONT 7735, South Africa. Erica kogelbergensis is a showy species, very restricted in its distribution occurring only on the southern slopes of Kogelberg Peak and the adjacent ridges and lesser peaks to the east and southwest, only 80 km southeast of Cape Town. There it is confined to moist, peaty areas that receive a considerable amount of moisture, not only during the rainy winters but also from the frequent clouds that are swept over the summit slopes by the southeast winds during the dry summers. This mountain is situated within the area of highest diversity of species for the Cape flora as a whole and for Erica. There are about 175 species of Erica in this area (Oliver et al. 1983). Another restricted endemic on this peak is the well known, yellow-flowered E. pageana (see Yearbook of the Heather Society 1995) which, however, flowers in October. History There has been some confusion with material of this species in herbaria. Erica serratifolia was described and figured by Andrews in 1798 from material of unknown origin growing in London. Like many of the cultivated specimens illustrated by him, this entity is difficult to place in any of the currently accepted species known from wild populations. In these cases I have to regard them as being of hybrid origin raised in a garden. The unappendaged anthers, long lateral flowering branchlets, smooth corolla and serrate leaves clearly do not fit the wild populations of E. kogelbergensis. Bolus placed his variety under Andrews’ name, but did remark that the latter was known only from garden specimens. Andrews’ E. serratifolia apparently flowered in spring whereas E. kogelbergensis is autumn- flowering. ees <= a a2 Fig. 1. Erica kogelbergensis: yellow form Fig. 2. Erica kogelbergensis: bicoloured form The early. collections im herbaria (includins the types)mwenre obtained from flower sellers in Cape Town with consequent lack of, or incorrect, locality data. However, one from 1936 was said to have come from the mountains between Steenbrass and Kogel Bay, which is reasonably accurate. Erica kogelbergensis is related to the group of tubular-flowered species that have 4-nate leaves, hairy corollas and anthers with very small appendages; E. perspicua Wendl., E. macowant Cufino, E. leucotrachela H. A. Bak., E. colorans Andr. and E. bibax Salisb. The first three have rather coarser and longer hairs on the corolla and E. colorans is a lowland species from the Bredasdorp region with white to pink flowers. E. bibax occurs on the middle northern slopes of the Kogelberg complex and is probably the closest allied species. However, it is a more delicate species producing long slender branches with narrower, soft leaves and flowers which are pale yellow, sometimes tinged orange, with white lobes. It grows alongside streams. There are two colour forms which appear to coexist in some populations, the pure yellow form and the bicoloured orange and 32°S 60 80 100 km Fig. 3. Distribution of Erica kogelbergensis in Western Cape [CT=Cape Town] yellow form. It is not possible to ascertain which colour form the type exhibited. These colours, coupled with the long tubular flowers, suggest pollination by birds, perhaps the small orange-breasted sunbirds which occur in the area (Rebelo et al. 1985). Erica kogelbergensis E. G. H. Oliver stat. & nom. nov. (§ Evanthe) Erica serratifolia Andrews var. subnuda H. Bolus, Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa 1 (1909): 158. Shrub erect up to 1.5 m tall, single-stemmed reseeder. Branches erect, internodes +2 mm long, puberulous with spreading hairs becoming glabrous, no infrafoliar ridges. Leaves 4—6-nate, semi-erect, 0.6-0.8 x 0.1 mm, linear, adaxial surface flat, abaxial surface rounded and narrow-sulcate, glabrous, the younger sparsely ciliolate; petiole appressed, 0.1 mm long, sparsely and shortly ciliate. Inflorescence with 1-4-nate flowers in 1 whorl at ends of 5 mm long lateral branchlets forming a dense pseudospike about 40-100 mm long towards ends of main branches; pedicel 0.2 mm long, pubescent; pherophyll partially recaulescent in middle position, 0.2 mm long, ovate-acute, glabrous, ciliolate, yellow-orange; bracteoles 2 just above pherophyll, 0.18 mm long, otherwise same as pherophyll. Calyx 4-partite, appressed to corolla; segments 0.6 x 0.2 mm, ovate-acute, Fig.4. Erica kogelbergensis. A, flowering branch, natural size; B, branch with some leaves removed, x12; C, leaf, x12; D, flower, x6; E, sepal, x12; F, anther, side, front and back views, x12; G, ovary with stigma above (right), x12; [del. Inge Oliver]. glabrous, edged with a few short hairs and sessile non-sticky glands, apically narrow-sulcate, yellow-orange. Corolla 4-lobed, +15 mm long, tubular, inflated below the mouth, finely puberulous, completely yellow, or orange with yellow; lobes erect to spreading, subacute to rounded, incurved when old, mostly glabrous. Stamens 8, free, included; filaments 8 mm long, slightly curved at apex, linear, glabrous, orange; anthers dorsifixed near base, appendiculate; thecae 1.5 mm long, oblong-obovate, aculeate at base and apex, brown; appendages shortly decurrent along apex of filament; pore half the length of theca; pollen shed in tetrads. Ovary 4—(5—6)-locular, 2.0 x 1.8 mm, broad-ellipsoid, 8-lobed, subemarginate, glabrous; ovules +28 per locule, spreading to pendulous; placenta < the length of axis; nectaries present around base; style 13 mm long, terete, glabrous; stigma manifest, capitellate. Capsule with valves splitting to base and spreading +30°, orange, septa free from columella; seeds ovoid, deeply reticulate, pale orange-pink. (Cover photograph & Figs. 1-4) Lectotypus: SOUTH AFRICA. Cape Colony, Caledon Division, mountains between Caledon and Hermanus, May, [near Hermanuspetersfontein, bought fresh in Cape Town, 2 May 1908] N. S. Pillans 1334 BOL! (selected here); isolectotypi NBG!, PRE, SAM!. Syntypus: SOUTH AFRICA. Cape Colony, Caledon Division, mountains between Caledon and Hermanus, fl. Sept. [bought in Cape Town, Sept. 1906], N. S. Pillans 228 BOL! Other specimens. SOUTH AFRICA. Western Cape. 3418: (-BB), Kogelberg, upper SW slopes, 1250 m, 21 April 1970, Boucher 1240 (NBG); ibid., Esterhuysen sub Baker 2638 (NBG); ibid., S slopes, 762 m, 4 May 1989, Kirsten 1192 (NBG); ibid., le Maitre 403 (NBG); ibid., upper S slopes, 1150 m, 26 May 1989, Oliver 9137, bicoloured form, (BM, K, MO, NBG, PRE) & 9137a, yellow form, (NBG, PRE); ibid., ridge S of Kogelberg, E slopes, 9 May 1966, Powrie 3 (BOL); ibid., May 1939, Stokoe 7158 (BOL, K); Spinnekopsnes Range, steep S slopes near summit, 670 m, 8 July 1970, Boucher 1330 (K, NBG); Koedoeberg, just below summit, S side, 860 m, 15 February 1973, Boucher 2114 (NBG); ibid., 13 September 1969, Vogelpoel sub Baker 2971 (BM, NBG +2). REFERENCES OLIVER, E. G. H., LINDER, H. P. & ROURKE, J. P. 1983. Geographical distribution of present-day Cape taxa and their phytogeographical significance. Bothalia 14: 427- 440. REBELO, A. G., SIEGFRIED, W. R. & OLIVER, E. G. H. 1985. Pollination syndromes of Erica species in the south-western Cape. South African journal of botany 51: 270- 280. Yb. Heather Soc. 1996: 6. The position of Bruckenthalia versus Erica. E. G. H. OLIVER Compton Herbarium, National Botanical Institute, Private Bag X7, CLAREMONT 7735, South Africa. During a revision of the genera of the subfamily Ericoideae (the true heaths and heathers) in Africa, I was obliged to look at the two monotypic genera in Europe, Calluna and Bruckenthalia to assess their positions. Calluna is clearly a distinct and enigmatic genus that has numerous characters not shared by any other ericoids. However, there was a problem with the second genus. Bruckenthalia is currently separated from Erica species in Europe by having no bracteoles on the pedicel and a partially fused calyx. This holds true for European ericoids but not for the African species. A close investigation reveals that the two bracteoles are not lacking, but are fully recaulescent and actually the two lateral sepals. This situation occurs in some 100 species in Africa, mainly the wind- pollinated species which also have partially fused calyces. The only unique character which Bruckenthalia possesses is its chromosome complement of n=18 as opposed to n=12 in Erica and allies and n=8 in Calluna. With only 30 or so of the 860 ericoids having been counted so far, the chromosome complement is a rather poor character to use to uphold the genus. In a generic revision of the Ericoideae to be published later this year, I will be reducing Bruckenthalia to synonymy under Erica, in which genus it was originally described by Salisbury in 1802 before Reichenbach erected Bruckenthalia for it in 1831. There is thus no need for any new combination and the species should be referred to as Er« 2 spiculifolia Salisb. Yb. Heather Soc. 1996: 7-16. Threatened Ericaceae in southern Africa. C. HILTON-TAYLOR Conservation Biology Research Unit, National Botanical Institute, Private Bag X7, CLAREMONT 7735, South Africa. Southern Africa, with more than 750 species of Ericaceae, is a major centre of diversity for the family and certainly the global centre for the subfamily Ericoideae (Oliver 1991). This diversity is not evenly distributed over the entire sub-continent, but is instead concentrated at the southern tip in the Cape Floral Region (Goldblatt 1978). More than 620 species of Erica and perhaps 96 species in the other minor genera are known to occur in the Cape Floral Region (Oliver 1991; Schumann etal. 1992). The Ericaceae are important constituents of both the fynbos and renosterveld vegetation types which are characteristic of the region. Many species of Ericaceae are fairly widespread within the Cape Floral Region, whereas others that are more restricted are often locally dominant, but the majority of species tend to be restricted habitat specialists and generally occur in small numbers. It is hardly surprising, therefore, given the enormous land transformations that have taken place since European settlers first colonised the Cape, to find that a large number of species of Ericaceae are threatened with extinction. Hall et al. (1980) listed 92 taxa (species, subspecies and varieties) of Ericaceae in the southern African Red data book, five of which were considered to be extinct. Hall & Veldhuis (1985) listed 134 taxa of Ericaceae as threatened and an additional five as extinct in the Fynbos Biome (an area roughly equivalent to the Cape Floral Region). One of the extinct species (Erica bolusiae) listed in Hall et al. (1980) had been rediscovered, but the number of extinctions remained the same in Hall & Veldhuis (1985) because E. jasminiflora had become extinct and was added to the list (see below). Since the last Red data book was published, a number of new species have been described and there have been many taxonomic and nomenclatural changes as a result of the systematic work being done by Ted Oliver, particularly on the minor genera (Oliver 1991). Since 1985 there has also been considerable expansion of urban areas, extensive coastal developments, the ploughing of new land for agricultural crops and numerous other land transformations which have resulted in many more species becoming threatened with extinction. A new Red data book for the Fynbos Biome is long overdue and as a precursor to such a work, all the available information on threatened species in southern Africa (i.e. the area south of the Kunene and Limpopo Rivers) has been placed in a database developed at the National Botanical Institute, Kirstenbosch. This database is updated on a regular basis as new information is received. A summary of the information held in this database will be published shortly (Hilton-Taylor in prep.). For this paper, I have extracted the current information on the threatened Ericaceae from the database and a summary of the results is presented in Table 1, with a brief discussion of the major threats. The conservation status of southern African Ericaceae is further illustrated by two case- studies. From Table 1 it is apparent that approximately 22% of southern Africa’s Ericaceae species are under threat of extinction. Five of the threatened taxa are already extinct; one of these, E. velitaris, is a recent addition to the list, whereas E. jasminiflora was down-listed following its rediscovery (see below). In addition four of the species listed as indeterminate are also possibly extinct. Forty four taxa (6% of all taxa) are in imminent danger of extinction as they are listed under the endangered and vulnerable categories and this figure would probably be considerably higher if all the taxa in the indeterminate and insufficiently known categories were adequately investigated. The large number of taxa in the rare category on the other hand is not a true reflection of their threatened status. Many of these rare taxa are highly restricted endemics occurring on mountain tops, a habitat which is generally not threatened at present. If these taxa were evaluated using the recently proposed IUCN Red Data criteria and categories (IUCN 1994), they would probably be placed into one of the low risk categories. Comparing the data used for Table 1 with that contained in Hall et al. (1980) and Hall & Veldhuis (1985) it appears that 19 taxa have had their conservation status upgraded (i.e. they were placed in a higher category of threat) whereas only six taxa were downgraded. One of those downgraded, E. cerviciflora, is not now considered to 9 be threatened because it was sunk into synonymy under the common E. grandiflora. Two species previously listed, E. dilatata and E. praenitens, have been removed from the list as they are no longer considered to be valid species (E. G. H. Oliver pers. comm.). Taking into account the removals and additions to the list, this means that 30 taxa have been added to the list since the last Red data book by Hall & Veldhuis (1985). lim_smimportant to mote that Table 1 does not imply that the remaining 78% of Ericaceae species are all not threatened. The conservation status of many of these species, particularly those which are poorly known, has not as yet been adequately evaluated. There are also a number of new species which will have to be added to the threatened list once they are formally described. Some of these are fairly well known and they have therefore been included in the attached list. As many of the Ericaceae are local endemic species they easily become threatened by extensive resource exploitation and major disturbances to their habitats. The nature and extent of the threats to the Ericaceae have not been fully documented. Table 2, which is derived from information in the database, provides some indication of the nature of the major threats and the number of species affected by these threats. Many of the taxa are affected by more than one threat and these may have a serious cumulative effect on biological factors such as genetic decline (included here) which push species to extinction. The four threats with the greatest impact on the Ericaceae in the Cape Floral Region are (i) invasion of natural vegetation by alien plants, particularly by species of Australian Acacia and Hakea and by the cluster pine, Pinus pinaster, from southern Europe; (ii) the replacement of natural vegetation by agricultural crops especially cereals and fruits, pasture species and by ruderals; (iii) rapid urban expansion and building activities in areas of high species diversity and endemism; and (iv) the increase in the number of accidental and uncontrolled fires has resulted in a fire frequency far greater than many species can survive; many of these fires also occur at incorrect times in terms of the species’ biological cycle. 10 Fig. 1. Erica jasminiflora Fig. 2. Erica verticillata In the eastern montane grasslands of southern Africa, the few Erica species present (six threatened taxa in KwaZulu-Natal, four in the Eastern Transvaal and two in Swaziland) are largely threatened by afforestation with commercial timber species. Case studies 1. Erica jasminiflora Salisb. As its name indicates this is an extremely attractive species with flowers resembling those of jasmine. It was at one time probably fairly common in the area around Caledon, although only two populations have ever been recorded. Francis Masson was one of the first to collect this species and plants were cultivated in England as early as 1796 from seed which he had collected. The population from which Masson collected the seed is now extinct as a result of agricultural activities, particularly the cultivation of wheat. The remaining population on Shaw’s Pass was monitored for a number of years as it declined from 150 plants in 1977 to 50 in 1981, 15 in 1982, eleven in 1983, one in 1984 and the sole survivor was reported as dead in early 1985 (Hall & Veldhuis 1985). The construction of a lal road destroyed part of the population and the use of fire to create grazing for sheep in the adjacent farming areas resulted in the demise of plants as the fire invariably spread into the population. The area was fenced off to protect the species from grazing animals and attempts were made to restore and extend the population by burning and re-seeding the area in 1978, but these efforts were apparently unsuccessful. The species was thought to be extinct until after the area was accidentally burnt in the late 1980s and a number of seedlings appeared many of which grew to maturity, flowered and presumably set seed. There has been a subsequent fire and once again it was feared that the species was extinct, but strong regeneration has allayed those fears. The remaining population, confined to an area of less than one hectare, is very small and numbers probably less than 100 plants, but the species is very difficult to find when not in flower. The land on which the population occurs belongs to the Caledon Divisional Council and for a number of years they leased the site to Cape Nature Conservation. In 1992, Cape Nature Conservation decided not to renew the lease of the land, and the area was then leased to a local school teacher who intended developing part of the site as an outdoor school camp. When these plans became known, the South African Botanical Society and Caledon Wildflower Society lobbied the Caledon Divisional Council, Cape Nature Conservation and the Department of Agriculture about the conservation importance of the site (an endangered species of Proteaceae, Leucadendron cryptocephalum L. Guthrie, also occurs in the area). It was recently resolved that Cape Nature Conservation will purchase the land and manage it as a nature reserve. Although the future of E. jasminiflora seems more secure, it may well be too late to save this species from extinction. The population is surrounded by farmland, frequently burnt vegetation and roads and as a result may have become isolated from its pollinators and could thus be regarded as non-viable. It has also been suggested that the failure of a mycorrhizal associate may also be a factor in the survival of this species (Hall & Veldhuis 1985). To add to its problems, it is also very difficult to germinate seed of this species and even if successful, it is difficult to maintain this species in cultivation and the last plant in cultivation at the Kirstenbosch National Botanical Garden died recently. Some seed of this species is preserved in seed banks, but the continued existence of E. jasminiflora is uncertain. WZ. 2. Erica verticillata P. J. Bergius This is also a beautiful species that was once common on the damp sandy flats south of Cape Town. This handsome plant was regularly sold as a cut flower until 1948 after which samples dwindled rapidly as its natural habitat was replaced by urban development and market gardens. Today the area where E. verticillata once occurred is all urban sprawl. Fortunately plants of this species have been maintained in cultivation in a number of botanic gardens around the world including Kew, Edinburgh, Berlin-Dahlem, St Petersburg (Leningrad), Belvedere Palace in Vienna, Tresco in the Isles of Scilly and Villa Taranto near Lake Maggiore in Italy. In South Africa, the plant was thought to be totally extinct, until plants were discovered growing in Protea Park (also known as Jan Cilliers Park), an indigenous garden in Pretoria. Cuttings were made and taken to Kirstenbosch where they were successfully propagated. Additional cuttings were also obtained from Kew so as to increase the genetic stock. Erica verticillata is extremely easy to cultivate both from cuttings and seed, and due to a successful propagation campaign at Kirstenbosch, plants are now readily available to the public. A local school whose school badge was designed after this species 40 years ago, recently decided to plant specimens of E. verticillata back on the school property, where it was formerly so abundant. A number of plants have also been planted at the Rondevlei Nature Reserve in very similar habitats to that in which they would originally have occurred. Reports indicate that these reintroductions have been fairly successful as they all survived their first dry summer and some of the plants have already started flowering. Conclusion These case-studies illustrate that although extinct in the wild, a species is not entirely lost provided enough material from different genetic stock is maintained in cultivation. Also, if suitable sites can be found, there is potential for reintroduction back into the wild even though it may only be in a highly managed situation. However, we cannot afford to be complacent and rely on the efforts of ex situ conservation to save all the Ericaceae threatened with extinction. Our botanical gardens have very limited resources and they cannot grow the increasing number of species listed as threatened. Many 13 of these threatened species are also extremely difficult to maintain in cultivation as is demonstrated by E. jasminiflora. In situ conservation efforts are therefore vital if we are to preserve the diversity of Ericaceae in southern Africa. These conservation efforts must take into account the biology of the species concerned and must also not be implemented too late as may well be the case for E. jasminiflora. Acknowledgements I am extremely grateful to Ted Oliver for patiently answering numerous enquiries about the Ericaceae and their conservation and taxonomic status. Much of the information presented here is the result of many years of research by Ted Oliver. I also wish to thank many other people who contributed information on the Ericaceae, but as they are too numerous to mention here, I would refer readers to Hilton-Taylor (in prep.) for a full list. Dave McDonald gave valuable comments on an earlier draft of this manuscript. Deon Kotze who also provided additional information, must be thanked in particular for the sterling work he does in maintaining the extremely valuable collection of threatened Ericaceae at the Kirstenbosch National Botanical Garden. References Davis, S. D., Droop, S. J. M., Gregerson, P., Henson, L., Leon, C. J., Lamlein Villa- Lobos, J., Synge, H. & Zantovska, J. 1986. Plants in danger. What do we know? IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. Goldblatt, P. 1978. An analysis of the flora of southern Africa: its characteristics, relationships and origins. Annals of the Missouri Botanic Garden 65: 369-436. Hall, A. V., De Winter, M., De Winter, B. & Van Oosterhout, S. A. M. 1980. Threatened plants of southern Africa. South African national scientific programmes report 45. CSIR, Pretoria. Hall, A. V. & Veldhuis, H. A. 1985. South African red data book: plants — fynbos and karoo biomes. South African national scientific programmes report 117. CSIR, Pretoria. Hilton-Taylor, C. (ed.) in prep. Red data list of southern African threatened plants. Strelitzia. Oliver, E. G. H. 1991. The Ericoideae (Ericaceae) — a review. Contributions from the Bolus Herbarium 13: 158-208. Schumann, D., Kirsten, G. & Oliver, E. G. H. 1992. Ericas of South Africa. Fernwood Press, Cape Town. 14 GENUS ex | eV RT Acrostemon 1 2 Coilostigma 1 | 1 Eremia 1 | I) Eremiella 1 1 Erica S Py XO) DO ko 33 147 Grisebachia 1 10 Leh Platycalyx 1 1 Scyphogyne 1 1 Syndesmanthus 1 Table 1. Numbers of threatened Ericaceae taxa recorded for each genus in southern Africa according to conservation status categories defined in Davis et al. (1986). EX = extinct, E= endangered, V=vulnerable, R=rare, I = indeterminate, K = insufficiently known. THREATS TAXA AFFECTED | Invasive alien plants Agriculture (ploughing) Urban development Uncontrolled fires Afforestation with alien trees Presumed genetic decline Grazing and browsing Trampling Quarrying and roads Commercial flower picking Flooding of valley bottoms by dams Table 2. Summary of threats affecting 90 of the threatened Ericaceae taxa in southern Africa. iS) Appendix List of threatened Ericaceae taxa in southern Africa, with their conservation status (right column) indicated by the standard abbreviations used for the IUCN Red Data categories (Davis et al. 1986). EX = extinct, E = endangered, V = Vulnerable, R = rare, I = indeterminate and K = insufficiently known. TAXON NAME Acrostemon xeranthemifolius Erica chrysocodon Guthrie & Bolus E (Salisb.) Oliv. I Erica clavisepala Guthrie & Bolus R Acrostemon sp. nov. Erica comptonii Salter R (“vernicosus” Oliver 8514) R Erica cremea Dulfer R Coilostigma zeyherianum Klotzsch Erica crucistigmatica Dulfer E var. tenuifolium (Klotzsch) Oliv. | Erica cryptanthera Guthrie & Bolus K Eremia brevifolia Benth. R Erica cyrilliflora Salisb. Vv Eremiella outeniquae Compton R Erica diotiflora Salisb. R Erica abbottii Oliv. Vv Erica dysantha Benth. I Erica abeli Oliv. V Erica eburnea Salter R Erica abietina L. Erica erlophoros Guthrie & Bolus K var. echiiflora (Andrews) Dulfer R Erica etheliae L.Bolus K Erica aghillana Guthrie & Bolus Erica fairii Bolus E var. aghillana V Erica ferrea P.J.Bergius V Erica alexandri Guthrie & Bolus Erica fervida L.Bolus K ssp. alexandri E Erica flanaganiti Bolus I ssp. acockiu (Compton) Oliv. EX Erica fontana L.Bolus R Erica alfrediti Guthrie & Bolus R Erica galgebergensis H.A.Baker R Erica amoena J.C.Wendl. R Erica gallorum L.Bolus K Erica aneimena Dulfer Vv Erica gossyptoides Oliv. I Erica annectens Guthrie & Bolus R Erica gracilipes Guthrie & Bolus ] Erica anomala Hilliard & B.L.Burtt R Erica granulatifolia H.A.Baker R Erica aspalathoides Guthrie Erica greyi Guthrie & Bolus K & Bolus K Erica heleogena Salter E Erica atrovinosa Oliv. E Erica heliophila Guthrie & Bolus K Erica bakeri Salter E Erica hendricksei H.A.Baker Erica barrydalensis L.Bolus R var. hendricksei R Erica bauera Andrews V Erica heterophylla Guthrie & Bolus K Erica beatricis Compton R Erica hibbertia Andrews V Erica berzelioides Guthrie & Bolus K Erica hillburttii (Oliv.) Oliv. R Erica blancheana L.Bolus R Erica hippurus Compton R Erica blesbergensis H.A.Baker R Erica holtii Schweick. R Erica bolusiae Salter var. bolusiae E Erica humansdorpensis Compton K Erica brachycentra Benth. I Erica inamoena Dulfer K Erica brachysepala Guthrie & BolusV Erica inordinata H.A.Baker R Erica caledonica A.Spreng. R Erica insignis Oliv. R Erica capensis Salter R Erica insolitanthera H.A.Baker R Erica capitata L. R Erica intricata H.A.Baker R Erica casta Guthrie & Bolus Erica jasminiflora Salisb. E var. casta V Erica junonia Bolus var. junonia E Erica caterviflora Salisb. E Erica keeromsbergensis H.A.Baker R Erica chlorosepala Benth. R Erica keetii L.Bolus K 16 Erica kraussiana Klotzsch Erica lagentformis Salisb. Erica latifolia Andrews Erica lenmannt Klotzsch ex Benth. Erica lerouxiae Bolus Erica leucosiphon L.Bolus Erica limosa L.Bolus Erica lowryensis Bolus var. lowryensis Erica macilenta Guthrie & Bolus Erica margaritacea Sol. Erica marifolia Sol. Erica mundu Guthrie & Bolus Erica nana Salisb. Erica nematophylla Guthrie & Bolus Erica obconica H.A.Baker Erica oblongiflora Benth. Erica occulta Oliv. Erica octonaria L.Bolus Erica oligantha Guthrie & Bolus Erica oophylla Benth. Erica ostiaria Compton Erica oxyandra Guthrie & Bolus Erica paludicola L.Bolus Erica parvulisepala H.A.Baker Erica passerinoides (Bolus) Oliv. Erica patersonia Andrews Erica pauciovulata H.A.Baker Erica pearsoniana L.Bolus Erica physantha Benth. Erica pillansti Bolus Erica pilulifera L. Erica portert Compton Erica propendens Andrews Erica pulvinata Guthrie & Bolus Erica purgatoriensis H.A.Baker Erica pyramidalis Sol. Erica pyrantha Bolus Erica quadrisulcata L.Bolus Erica regia Bartl. var. variegata Bolus Erica revoluta (Bolus) L.E.Davidson Erica rhodopis Bolus Erica riparia H.A.Baker Erica rivularis L.E.Davidson Erica rufescens Klotzsch Erica sacctflora Salisb. Erica shannonea Andrews Erica sociorum L.Bolus