The primary objective of this trip was to find the plant that was collected in 1787 and later described in Flora Peruviana et Chilensis in 1798 as Costus laevis by the Spanish explorer Hipólito Ruíz during his expeditions to Peru and Chili. This plant was found at the site (known then as Cuchero) where the Spanish explorer Hipólito Ruíz stayed for several months in the 1780's. This form is very common in the region and was found also near the site of Chacahuassi, where Ruiz collected his holotype for Costus laevis. This plant matches perfectly with Ruiz' written description of the species Costus laevis, but it does not match the holotype specimen in Barcelona. See observation #4620871 at
www.inaturalist.org/observations/4620871
for details of the plant I believe to be the same as the holotype specimen.

It is my belief that this is the plant Ruiz was describing when he named Costus laevis, but it is not at all like the the holotype for that species. I believe there were two different plants that Ruiz mixed up due to the tragic losses he experienced in the losses of specimens, drawings and in situ descriptions in the fire at Hacienda Macora in 1785 and the destruction of his materials in the sinking of the ship San Pedro Alcantar in 1786. It is yet to be determined which is the true Costus laevis or what effect these findings will bring to the taxonomy.

I am listing this observation under Costus guanaiensis var. tarmicus because that is the closest currently accepted species that it fits. Costus guanaiensis var. tarmicus (originally Costus tarmicus) was described from a collection by Weberbauer in similar habitat near La Merced, Department Junin, about 175 km to the south of this locality.