Pimelea villosa
species of plant
Pimelea villosa, also known as Pimelea arenaria, or sand daphne is a species of shrub in the family Thymelaeaceae, known in Māori as autetaranga or autetauranga. It is endemic to New Zealand. Its conservation status puts it at risk and declining, as determined by the New Zealand Threat Classification System (NZTCS). The bark of the tree was occasionally used as traditional textiles such as ribbons or ear ornaments, however was not as commonly used as the paper mulberry (aute) or Hoheria populnea (houhere).
Description
Pimelea villosa is a sprawling shrub with hairy branches. It is found almost exclusively on sand dunes and associated areas. It possesses pointed leaves that are 5 to 15 mm long and 3 to 7 mm wide. It also has white flowers and black, red, pink or white fruit.It is classified as at risk or declining there is only one natural place it remains, at Otaki beach where around 20 plants naturally remain.
Nomenclature
This plant was for many years known as Pimelea arenaria, a name published by Allan Cunningham in 1833. However, in 2009 it was pointed out by Burrows that Pimelea villosa, a name proposed by Daniel Solander but not published by him, had been effectively published by James Edward Smith in 1814, and thus has priority.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Pimelea villosa” as species of plant. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the science & nature register because the source frames it as species of plant. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
Stable identifiers, scientific names and standards terminology offer the best bridge between this overview and specialist evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Apr 18, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q17582260. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1833, 2009 and 1814.
Current terminology should not be projected backward without checking the classification used when the underlying evidence was created. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.
- Current terminology
- Classification context
- Finding cited technical literature
Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Pimelea villosa”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Pimelea villosa primary sources, Pimelea villosa archive and Pimelea research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Pimelea villosa”?
- Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
- Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Pimelea villosa” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.