Year-end Sale % OFF 
Abstract
In this article I reconsider the lectotypification of the name Carex ledebouriana C. A. Mey. ex Trevir. (Cyperaceae). In 1833, Meyer described an unnamed variety of C. capillaris L. based on the gatherings of Ledebour from two localities (river Koksun and near Riddersk) in what is today the Kazakhstan Altai. In 1863, Treviranus validly published the name C. ledebouriana, referring to Meyer's unnamed variety and erroneously citing a gathering by Bunge “in summis alpibus Kuraicis”. A herbarium sheet at LE with barcode LE 01006839 was proposed as the (lecto)type of C. ledebouriana by Egorova in 1999 and this was confirmed by Grabovskaya-Borodina in 2012. In studying the original material, I found that sheet LE 01006839 in fact consists of three fragments belonging to two different gatherings and has an incorrect label. These two gatherings are further represented at LE by sheets LE 01006840 and LE 01006841, respectively. I argue that sheet LE 01006839 is not eligible as a type specimen because it consists of two gatherings. Instead, I designate here as the lectotype sheet LE 01006841, which contains well-preserved plants collected by Ledebour with mature utricles.
Highlights
Typification is one of the pillars of plant systematics
In 1833, Meyer described an unnamed variety of C. capillaris L. based on the gatherings of Ledebour from two localities in what is today the Kazakhstan Altai
Relevant literature was examined, including the published diaries of the members of the 1826 Altai expedition (Ledebour 1829, 1830) for information on the collections mentioned by Meyer
Summary
Version of record first published online on 7 November 2018 ahead of inclusion in December 2018 issue. In 1833, Meyer described an unnamed variety of C. capillaris L. based on the gatherings of Ledebour from two localities (river Koksun and near Riddersk) in what is today the Kazakhstan Altai. In 1863, Treviranus validly published the name C. ledebouriana, referring to Meyer’s unnamed variety and erroneously citing a gathering by Bunge “in summis alpibus Kuraicis”. In studying the original material, I found that sheet LE 01006839 consists of three fragments belonging to two different gatherings and has an incorrect label. These two gatherings are further represented at LE by sheets LE 01006840 and LE 01006841, respectively.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
