Zamia monticola

Zamia monticola is one of the most enigmatic cycads of Central America. This species of the genus Zamia was described in 1926 by Charles J. Chamberlain from a single cultivated male plant, raised from a batch of seed he said he had gathered near Xalapa, in Mexico, and it has never been found again at that spot. The World List of Cycads now places it in Alta Verapaz, Guatemala, where little-known plants are attributed to it, and the IUCN rates it Critically Endangered.

Key facts about Zamia monticola

  • Accepted name: Zamia monticola Chamb. (1926), accepted by The World List of Cycads (version 2026.08.15), by GBIF and by the World Checklist of Vascular Plants, on which POWO is based; POWO could not be consulted directly
  • Former names and synonyms: none
  • Family: Zamiaceae, order Cycadales
  • Common names: no name attested, in English or in Spanish
  • Natural range: Guatemala (Alta Verapaz) according to The World List of Cycads; stated origin of the type, a mountainside near Xalapa (Veracruz, Mexico), never confirmed
  • IUCN status: Critically Endangered (CR A2cd+4cd), 2022 assessment
  • CITES and other protection: CITES Appendix II (whole genus, since 1977; seeds exempt under annotation #4); Annex B in the European Union
  • Documented hardiness: no data (see Cold hardiness)
  • Light and soil: not documented for the type; Guatemalan herbarium labels mention very humid mixed forest and steep limestone karst under semi-evergreen forest
  • Habit and adult size: the type plant in 1925 had an aerial trunk 21 cm tall and 14 cm across, 21 leaves 1.3 to 1.7 m long and 30 to 34 leaflets per leaf (original description)
  • In the UK, US and Australia: no garden recorded; declared by a single garden worldwide to BGCI, in Costa Rica
  • Toxicity: no data specific to the species; treat it as poisonous, like all cycads (see Toxicity and precautions)

How to recognise Zamia monticola

The only complete, verifiable description is that of the single plant on which Chamberlain founded the species, read in the original text. In 1925 this male plant had an aerial trunk 21 cm tall and 14 cm in diameter, well covered with the bases of old leaves, and a crown of 21 leaves, the largest 1.7 m long (1.3 to 1.7 m according to the diagnosis). Each leaf carried 30 to 34 leaflets in all, the upper twenty roughly in pairs, the others alternate or scattered; the largest were 24 to 26 cm long and 3.5 to 4 cm wide, with about thirty veins at their widest point, while the lowest could be as small as 7 cm by 1.2 cm. The lower petiole, below the leaflets, was very spiny, the leafy part bearing only a few prickles (Chamberlain, 1926).

Most leaflets have an entire margin; only some of the upper leaflets carry teeth near the tip. This detail, Chamberlain noted, gave away the Zamia in a plant whose leaflets were otherwise as entire as those of a Ceratozamia.

The male cones, oblong-ovoid, were 12 to 16 cm long. Their peduncle, 10 to 17 cm long, as long as the cone and much widened at its base, was rarely upright: usually almost horizontal and curved. The scales carried two well-separated groups of 10 to 16 pollen sacs, almost all joined in pairs. The cones appeared in series with each new crown of leaves, about a week apart, so that pollen release could be spread over two months, from mid-December 1920 to early February 1921. Female cones were unknown in 1926, and Calonje and colleagues still described them as unknown in 2009.

The plants of central Guatemala now attributed to the species look different in some respects. The naturalist Jay Vannini describes them as short-trunked, upright or leaning, with petioles heavily armed with stout spines and leaflets that may or may not be strongly sickle-shaped depending on the leaf and the light (Vannini, 2019). The 2009 revision of the Zamia of Mega-Mexico by Nicolalde-Morejón, Vovides and Stevenson also treats the species.

Hybrids

No natural hybrid is documented. Chamberlain did, however, use his plant for crosses: the spreading of pollen release over two months was, he wrote, very favourable for obtaining hybrids. What those crosses produced has not been published.

Possible confusion

From the start, Zamia monticola was born of a confusion: the type plant had come up in a batch of seed of Ceratozamia mexicana. Chamberlain explained the mix-up by the leaflets: almost all are entire like those of a Ceratozamia, and those of the lower half of the leaf could pass for them in shape; only a few upper leaflets, toothed near the tip, reveal the Zamia.

In 2009, describing Zamia decumbens from Belize, Calonje and colleagues compared it with Zamia monticola, which resembles it in leaf length, leaflet shape and size and male cone size. A detailed comparison was impossible, but according to Chamberlain’s description Zamia monticola has an upright stem 14 cm across, whereas that of Zamia decumbens lies on the ground and does not exceed 11 cm, and it carries 20 to 32 pollen sacs per male scale, against 12 to 18 in Zamia decumbens.

In Guatemala, Vannini notes that the plants called Zamia monticola sometimes grow alongside Zamia tuerckheimii, which they superficially resemble, but that their affinities seem to lie rather with Zamia onan-reyesii, Zamia fairchildiana and Zamia gomeziana (Vannini, 2019).

Finally, the name inspired that of another species: Zamia pseudomonticola, from Costa Rica and Panama, was so named for its supposed resemblance to, and relationship with, Zamia monticola (The World List of Cycads, after Haynes, 2022).

Taxonomy

Zamia monticola is an accepted name according to The World List of Cycads, GBIF and the World Checklist of Vascular Plants, on which POWO is based (read on GBIF, version of 4 June 2026); POWO itself could not be consulted. It was described in 1926 by the American botanist Charles J. Chamberlain, one of the pioneers of cycad research, in the Botanical Gazette (81(2): 218–227), in an article entitled “Two new species of Zamia”, which also describes Zamia sylvatica, collected near Tuxtepec. Before publishing it, Chamberlain examined the Zamia collections at Kew and at the New York Botanical Garden, with the help of N.L. Britton; he did not consider himself a taxonomist, but felt a description was needed because the plant was being used for hybridisation and for a cytological study of sex determination.

The original description, based on the living plant, cites no herbarium specimen. The World List of Cycads gives a holotype (Chamberlain s.n.) at the Missouri Botanical Garden (MO); the herbarium labels published on GBIF instead describe a sheet at the New York Botanical Garden (NY), prepared in 1925 from the cultivated plant, as the lectotype, with duplicates at MO and in the Smithsonian herbarium (US). The species has no synonym and its name has never changed.

Is the Guatemalan plant the same species? The question remains open. Since at least Standley and Steyermark (1958), Guatemalan plants have been placed in Zamia monticola, and Calonje and colleagues (2009) mentioned plants from southern Alta Verapaz identified with it but still poorly understood. Vannini considers this identity “extremely questionable”: given the uncertain origin of the type and the absence of a female type, he would restrict the name to clonally propagated plants and dried specimens traced back to Chamberlain’s plant, and thinks the Guatemalan material should be described as a new species (Vannini, 2019). The transcriptome phylogeny of Lindstrom and colleagues (2024) sampled both a plant named Zamia monticola from Alta Verapaz and a “Zamia aff. monticola” from Guatemala, which the authors count as a possibly undescribed species in their subclade III-B, a group restricted to Honduras and neighbouring eastern Guatemala and western Belize.

Etymology and history

The epithet comes from the Latin mons, montis, “mountain”, and refers to the montane habitat it was thought to occupy in Veracruz (The World List of Cycads, after Haynes, 2022).

Its history is unusual. According to Chamberlain, the seed came from a steep slope six to eight miles west of Xalapa, facing the extinct crater of Naolinco: a hillside covered with shrubs and small trees over a rich herbaceous understorey, where Ceratozamia were abundant and fruiting freely. In 1906 he had gathered a large quantity of seed of Ceratozamia mexicana there; neither he nor the two botanists with him had noticed any Zamia. Since all the pots had been labelled Ceratozamia mexicana, it was only once well grown that seedling “Ceratozamia no. 10” turned out to be a Zamia.

The first cone appeared on 8 August 1915, followed by three others; the plant then produced cones almost every year (four in 1918, six in 1920 and 1922, two in 1923, five in 1924, four in 1925), each time with a new crown of leaves. The photograph of the 1920 cones published with the description was taken in a glasshouse of the University of Chicago. The text also says that this first cone appeared “nearly eleven years” after sowing, which does not match a collection in 1906: an internal inconsistency in the original description.

The species has never been found again at the locality given. According to Calonje and colleagues (2009), citing Hill (2004), either it has disappeared from that Mexican site, or Chamberlain’s seeds were mixed up in the glasshouse and the plant really came from somewhere else.

Common names

No common name is attested, in English or in Spanish.

In the wild

The World List of Cycads gives its range as Guatemala (Alta Verapaz). This attribution rests on plants collected in the south of the department, still poorly known in 2009 (Calonje and colleagues, 2009). The locality given by Chamberlain, near Xalapa in Veracruz, has never yielded another plant.

Herbarium labels published on GBIF, under this name, give a few details on the Guatemalan plants: in Alta Verapaz, a collection of 2001 at about 475 m on a steep limestone karst slope under semi-evergreen forest, and others of 2012 at 339 to 844 m in very humid mixed forest and regenerating forest; another collection of 2013 comes from the neighbouring department of Izabal, at 312 m. Vannini describes scattered populations in premontane tropical wet forest in central Guatemala (Vannini, 2019).

The IUCN action plan for cycads (Donaldson, 2003) already treated the species as Guatemalan, with fewer than 250 plants, no population in a protected area and a severe threat from habitat destruction; it recalled that the species had been listed as extinct (“Ex”) in the 1997 Red List.

Conservation status and regulation

Zamia monticola is rated Critically Endangered (CR) by the IUCN under criteria A2cd+4cd, in an assessment by J.D. Bösenberg published in 2022 (The World List of Cycads); these criteria reflect a steep past and projected decline in the population, linked to a loss in the area or quality of its habitat and to actual or potential exploitation. In 2003 the IUCN already rated it CR (criterion C2a(ii)).

Like all Zamia except Zamia restrepoi, which is in Appendix I, Zamia monticola is covered by the listing of the genus in CITES Appendix II, in force since 4 February 1977. Annotation #4 (the version adopted at CoP20, in force on 5 March 2026) exempts seeds, pollen, seedlings and tissue cultures obtained in vitro and transported in sterile containers, and cut flowers of artificially propagated plants; international trade in the plants themselves requires an export permit. In the European Union the species falls under Annex B of Regulation (EC) No 338/97, whose current list is set by Regulation (EU) 2026/1383, applicable since 29 June 2026. Species+, the official CITES database, has a page for the species and confirms this status (checked on 11 October 2026).

This general information does not replace the official texts: check the regulations in force before buying or exchanging plants or seeds, ask the seller for proof of origin and prefer plants raised from cultivated seed.

Growing Zamia monticola

The only cultivation documented in detail is that of the type plant, raised from seed gathered in 1906, which coned almost every year from 1915 in Chamberlain’s collection; the photograph of its 1920 cones was taken in a University of Chicago glasshouse. In 2003 the IUCN action plan recorded at least one plant in a botanic garden or public institution, without saying which.

Plants under this name are still grown today, but rarely. Vannini cites it among the regional species that remain rare in private collections and public gardens, notes that very small numbers of Guatemalan plants are cultivated in Guatemala, where both sexes have now produced cones, and illustrates a female cone on a cultivated plant (Vannini, 2019). In Thailand, Nong Nooch Tropical Botanical Garden has held male and female plants under this name: two herbarium vouchers of 2004, one male and one female, record its accession 11198, with no provenance given, and a voucher of 2011 from the same accession has fruits kept in the carpological collection of the Vienna herbarium (W); the Guatemalan sample studied by Lindstrom and colleagues (2024) came, like all their material, from a plant of wild origin grown at Nong Nooch.

Simon Lavaud, of the French specialist nursery Cycadales.eu, places Zamia monticola among the Zamia of the lowland forests of Central and South America, a group he rates difficult outside the tropics. For this group he recommends a free-draining compost and water both neutral to acid, nights at about 22 °C (72 °F), with brief drops to about 15 °C (59 °F) tolerated, days at 28 to 30 °C (82 to 86 °F) and air humidity of 70 to 90 %, in a glasshouse, a conservatory or a bright, heated room (Lavaud, 2023). This is advice for a group of species, given without a published trial on this one.

Outdoor and in-ground cultivation

No outdoor planting is documented outside Guatemala. The habitat described on Guatemalan labels, humid forest at a few hundred metres, suggests a plant for frost-free tropical gardens only.

Container cultivation

Elsewhere it is a plant for a warm glasshouse. A free-draining compost and the conditions Lavaud recommends for his lowland group are a reasonable starting point; Guatemalan plants found on limestone karst may also tolerate a less acidic compost, but no grower has published a result.

In cultivation in the UK, US and Australia

In short: absent from the gardens of these three countries.

  • United Kingdom: no record in BGCI or in the online catalogues of British gardens. Trebrown Nurseries, a British nursery, rates it USDA zone 10a; this is a commercial classification, not a measured result.
  • United States: no record in BGCI, and the online catalogue of Montgomery Botanical Center does not list it.
  • Australia: no record in BGCI.

The only garden that declares it to BGCI is the Robert and Catherine Wilson Botanical Garden at Las Cruces, in south-western Costa Rica (queried on 25 October 2026), far from Alta Verapaz; a declaration does not prove that the plant is still alive or correctly named.

Propagation

Like all Zamia, the species is dioecious: propagation requires fertile seed, and therefore pollination between a male and a female plant. Chamberlain’s plant was male, and no germination data have been published. Seeds are exempt from CITES under annotation #4; make sure they come from cultivated plants.

Pests and diseases

No pest or disease is documented. For the Zamia of this group, Lavaud mainly warns of the risk of root rot in compost that stays wet in cool weather.

Cold hardiness

No cold-tolerance data exist for Zamia monticola, either in the wild or in cultivation, and even its true origin is uncertain. Without data, any hardiness figure would be invented.

Mediterranean and European experience

No cultivation in the ground has been reported in France or elsewhere in Europe, and no dated frost episode concerns the species. For readers in Mediterranean-type climates such as California or southern Australia, it should be treated as a glasshouse plant.

United Kingdom, United States and Australia

No cold record or cultivation report exists from these countries.

Toxicity and precautions

No toxicity study specific to Zamia monticola has been published. The risk is, however, well documented in cycads: Zamia contain toxic glycosides (cycasin, macrozamin), from which methylazoxymethanol is derived, a compound toxic to the liver and nervous system, and the ASPCA cites cycasin and BMAA, a neurotoxic amino acid, for Zamia furfuracea, which it lists as toxic to dogs, cats and horses, with vomiting, bloody diarrhoea and liver damage; the seeds are the most dangerous part. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, treat the plant as poisonous: keep seeds and leaves out of reach of children and animals, and wear gloves to clean seeds. If any part is swallowed, contact a poison centre, a doctor or a vet straight away.

Traditional uses

No use is documented for this species.

Frequently asked questions

Where does Zamia monticola come from?

Nobody knows for certain. Chamberlain said he gathered the seed in 1906 near Xalapa, in Veracruz, but the species has never been found there; little-known plants from Alta Verapaz, in Guatemala, are now attributed to it.

Why is it called monticola?

The name comes from the Latin montis, “mountain”: it refers to the montane habitat it was thought to occupy in Veracruz, near Xalapa.

Why is it so mysterious?

Because it was described in 1926 from a single cultivated male plant that came up by chance in a batch of Ceratozamia seed, and because the Guatemalan plants now given the name may, according to some authors, be a different, undescribed species.

What is its link with Zamia pseudomonticola?

Only the name: Zamia pseudomonticola, from Costa Rica and Panama, was so named for its supposed resemblance to Zamia monticola.

Is it endangered?

Yes. The IUCN rates it Critically Endangered (2022).

Can it be grown?

Only with difficulty, and it is hardly ever available. A few plants are grown in Guatemala and at Nong Nooch in Thailand, but no garden in the UK, the US or Australia records it, and nothing is known of its cold tolerance.

Is it poisonous?

It must be assumed so. No analysis exists for the species, but the cycads studied contain serious toxins, mainly in the seeds.

Further reading on Succulentes

Sources

Reference sites

Bibliography

  • Chamberlain, C.J. (1926). Two new species of Zamia. Botanical Gazette 81(2): 218–227. [Original description (pp. 219–223), based on a single cultivated male plant; read in full on the Internet Archive.]
  • Calonje, M., Meerman, J., Griffith, M.P. & Hoese, G. (2009). A new species of Zamia (Zamiaceae) from the Maya Mountains of Belize. Journal of the Botanical Research Institute of Texas 3(1): 31–41. [Comparison with Zamia decumbens; origin and status of Zamia monticola; full text consulted.]
  • Lindstrom, A., Habib, S., Dong, S., Gong, Y., Liu, J., Calonje, M., Stevenson, D. & Zhang, S. (2024). Transcriptome sequencing data provide a solid base to understand the phylogenetic relationships, biogeography and reticulated evolution of the genus Zamia L. (Cycadales: Zamiaceae). Annals of Botany 134(5): 747–768. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcae065 [Full text read on PubMed Central.]
  • Hill, K.D. (2004). The Cycad Pages: Zamia monticola. Royal Botanic Gardens, Sydney. [Cited by Calonje et al. (2009); not consulted.]
  • Nicolalde-Morejón, F., Vovides, A.P. & Stevenson, D.W. (2009). Taxonomic revision of Zamia in Mega-Mexico. Brittonia 61(4): 301–335. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12228-009-9077-9 [Regional revision; not consulted (paywalled).]
  • Standley, P.C. & Steyermark, J.A. (1958). Flora of Guatemala, part I. Fieldiana: Botany 24(1). [Cited by Vannini (2019) for the attribution of Guatemalan plants; not consulted.]
  • Donaldson, J.S. (ed.) (2003). Cycads. Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan. IUCN/SSC Cycad Specialist Group, Gland and Cambridge. [Tables 6.1 and 8.1; read directly.]
  • Bösenberg, J.D. (2022). Zamia monticola. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2022: e.T42114A69834332. [Assessment cited by The World List of Cycads; the Red List page could not be consulted.]
  • Haynes, J.L. (2022). Etymological compendium of cycad names. Phytotaxa 550(1): 1–31. https://doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.550.1.1 [Source of the etymology given by The World List of Cycads; not consulted directly.]
  • Calonje, M., Stevenson, D.W. & Osborne, R. (2026). The World List of Cycads, version 2026.08.15. Montgomery Botanical Center, Coral Gables. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21958524 [Reference checklist; consulted directly.]