This is one of the few species of Erithalis that are quite distinct morphologically, with narrow acuminate leaves and relatively large fruits, and one of few with a distinctive habitat, in montane forest at 800-1100 m. Its distribution was given by Howard (1989) as endemic to Martinique and St. Vincent, and by Negrón-Ortiz (2005) as also found on the Grenadines and Trinidad. The type specimen of Chiococca pulcherrima was originally said to be from Trinidad, and this may be the basis for the report from there but this specimen was cited by Howard as actually from St. Vincent, without explanation. The plants named as Chiococca pucherrima were apparently cultivated in the Antilles in the 19th century, so the original locality information may be confused with cultivated plants. 

This species was treated as Erithalis acuminata by Howard (1989), then that name was synonymized without comment with Erithalis angustifolia by Negrón-Ortiz (2005). Erithalis angustifolia was described based on a specimen said to be from Cuba, but the type specimen of Erithalis angustifolia (IDC microfiche 703/21) matched plants of Erithalis acuminata from the Lesser Antilles and does not match any plants from Cuba. This discrepency of range was not noted by Negrón-Ortiz, but it is of some significance. It could mean that Candolle's specimen does not agree with the Lesser Antillean plants, but it seems more likely to be a label mix-up: the specimen immediately preceding it in Candolle's herbarium agrees with Erithalis odorifera, but itis abelled as BarroW 628, June 1824, from "Montagnes de la Guadeloupe", which corresponds to the distncttive habitat of Erithalis angustifolia. Here the name Erithalis angustifolia is used for this species, and its type in the G-DC herbarium is assumed to be mis-labelled. 

The name Erithalis angustifolia was synonymized by Liogier (1962) with Erithalis fruticosa, but its type does not match that species at all. The name Erithalis angustifolia was not mentioned by Borhidi (2017).