Typification of three Linnaean names in the genus Euphorbia (Euphorbiaceae)

The typification of eleven Linnaean names of taxa belonging to the current circumscription of Liliaceae is discussed. Lectotypes are designated from the Linnaean herbarium at LINN (Lilium bulbiferum, L. candidum, L. martagon), the Burser herbarium at UPS (Bulbocodium serotinum, Fritillaria pyrenaica, Lilium bulbiferum), the Van Royen Herbarium at L (Fritillaria persica, Lilium chalcedonicum, Uvularia amplexifolia), the Clifford Herbarium at BM (Lilium pomponium) and from the Sloane herbarium in BM­SL (Bulbocodium autumnale). A specimen in BM is designated as the neotype of Lilium camschatcense. Each type choice maintains the present usage of the corresponding Linnaean name.

The typification of ten Linnaean names of taxa belonging to the Valerianaceae is discussed. Lectotypes are designated from the Linnaean herbarium at LINN (Valeriana dioica, V. locusta var. discoidea, V. phu, V. tripteris), the Burser Herbarium at UPS (V. montana, V. tuberosa), and from the Clifford Herbarium at BM (V. rubra). An illustration in a pre‐Linnaean work is designated as the lectotype of both V. locusta var. mutica and V. locusta var. pumila. Valeriana mixta, often treated as ambiguous, is discussed and will be proposed for formal rejection. Each type choice made here maintains the present usage of the corresponding Linnaean name.

Linnaean names appearing in Flora Nordica in the families Brassicaceae ‐ Apiaceae (in the conventional family sequence of the Flora) are typified. The main sources for types are the Linnaean Herbarium (LINN), the Clifford Herbarium (BM), the Burser Herbarium (UPS) and the Iter lapponicum herbarium in Paris (LAPP), and cited illustrations. The study forms part of the “Linnaean Plant Name Typification Project” based at The Natural History Museum, London (BM). ‐ Flora Nordica notes No. 31.

NOMENCLATURE OF CULTIVATED PLANTS: A HISTORICAL BOTANICAL STANDPOINT

Arctium lappa L. in its present interpretation is a widespread, very distinct species; for diagnostic characters see Duistermaat (1996: 78). So far, no lectotype of A. lappa has been designated (see Linnaean type register on the Natural History Museum's Web site: http:// www.nhm.ac.uk/botany/linnaean/). Moreover, the specimen named A. lappa in the Linnaean herbarium (964.1, LINN!) and which appears to have been in Linnaeus' possession prior to 1753 (Savage, 1945: 141), belongs to what is now known as A. tomentosum Mill. Later authors never appear to have had any difficulty in distinguishing this species from A. lappa (Duistermaat, 1996). Other original material, associated via Linnaeus' (1753: 816) citation of Hortus Cliffortianus (Linnaeus, 1738: 391), includes two specimens in the Clifford herbarium at BM (391, Arctium 1; and 391, Arctium 1 3; BM!), images of which can be viewed at http:// www.nhm.ac.uk/botany/databases/clifford/). Both specimens are of A. tomentosum. Linnaeus (1753: 816) also cites: Roy. Lugb. 141., i.e., Flora Leydensis (van Royen, 1740: 144) and two synonyms from Bauhin's Pinax (Bauhin, 1623: 198), the second being the basis of the P variety recognized by Linnaeus. No material of Arctium exists today in the van Royen herbarium (at L). Van Royen's reference to Morison (1699: 3, s7, c33) does lead to two specimens in the Morison herbarium (OXF, photographs sent to me through Prof. D. Mabberley) that are referable to A. minus Bemh. (146, 1), and A. tomentosum (147, 2), but, not being seen by Linnaeus, these do not constitute original material. The Bauhin synonyms correspond to two specimens in the Burser herbarium (UPS, L microfiche!; see also Savage, 1937), which Linnaues used, and represent Arctium minus (X, 159), and A. tomentosum (X, 160), the latter representing the synonym cited by Linnaeus under his 3 variety. Linnaeus (1753) also cited two works containing illustrations of the species as he understood it. The earliest is an illustration of Bardana, siue Lappa major by Dodonaeus (1583: 38)-the page mistakenly cited by Linnaeus as 58. It is a very sketchy woodcut, which could fit either A. lappa or A. tomentosum. The identity is therefore equivocal. The illustration by Camerarius (1586: 887) (photocopy sent to me by Dr. C. Jarvis, BM) is more like A. minus. To summarize, there is no herbarium material seen by Linnaeus that concurs with the presently generally accepted interpretation of A. lappa, and the illustrations in the works cited are equivocal at best. Assuming that one would not wish to apply the name A. lapppa to the species currently known as A. tomentosum (which would be contrary to Art. 57.1 of the ICBN, Greuter et al., 2000), there are, therefore, three options: (1) propose A. lappa for rejection under Art. 56, (2) propose the name for conservation with a new type (Art. 14.9), or (3) apply Art. 9.7. In order to avoid unnecessary nomenclatural changes, I reject the first option. Since illustrations of what could be A. lappa are available, we do not need to conserve the name, but can choose the third option instead. Consequently, I designate below the illustration by Dodonaeus (1583: 38) as the lectotype of A. lappa, and at the same time designate an epitype concurrent with the present delimitation of the species. It suits the locality mentioned in Linnaeus' (1753: 816) diagnosis: Habitat in Europae cultis ruderatis. This specimen is readily accessible for consultation through the illustration in Duistermaat (1996).

Ferulago nodosa (L.) Boiss. (Diagn. P1. Orient. 10: 37. 1849), based on Peucedanum nodosum, is a perennial herb distributed in Sicily, Albania, Greece, and the Aegean region. The name has always been consistently and unambiguously applied and no heterotypic synonyms are known. However, the only extant original material (no effective lectotypification could be traced) is a specimen belonging to the much more widespread European umbellifer, Bunium bulbocastanum L. 1753. Therefore, if P. nodosum were lectotypified, that name would become a synonym of B. bulbocastanum, leaving the species currently known as F. nodosa in need of an entirely new name. Such a change would clearly not serve nomenclatural stability and could be prevented by conserving P. nodosum with a conserved type, as proposed here. Peucedanum nodosum was published by Linnaeus with the statement Habitat in Creta, and a diagnostic phrase name cited from one of his own works (Hort. Cliff.: 94. 1738) and from Royen (Fl. Leyd. Prodr.: 98. 1740). There is also a synonym cited from Tournefort (Coroll. Inst. Rei Herb.: 23. 1703) and Boerhaave (Ind. Alter Hort. Lugd.-Bat. 1: 51. 1720). None of the cited works includes an illustration of the plant, and no specimens could be traced in any of the other Linnaean herbaria, nor is there any material in the Royen Herbarium in Leiden (L). However, there is a specimen associated with the first reference in the Clifford Herbarium at BM (Herb. Clifford: 94, Peucedanum No. 4), which is the only extant original material for the name. It is not, however, an example of Ferulago nodosa as currently understood but a specimen of Bunium bulbocastanum. The Cretan provenance Linnaeus gave for Peucedanum nodosum, as well as the epithet he chose, both came from Tournefort, who collected his Ligusticum Creticum, Foeniculi folio, caule nodoso (the polynomial cited in synonymy in Linnaeus's protologue) in Crete in 1700. In the Tournefort Herbarium there is an excellent specimen annotated with that polynomial, mounted on two sheets (P-TRF No. 2897-2898), which is the plant now known as Ferulago nodosa. Unfortunately this specimen is not original material for P. nodosum and cannot be used to fix the application of that name, as Linnaeus never consulted Tourefort's Herbarium. The Clifford specimen was a plant cultivated in Holland and was erroneously identified with Tournefort's plant; indeed, Bunium bulbocastanum has never been recorded from Crete.

The identity of Polanisia angulata DC. is discussed and the Linnaean names Cleome fruticosa L. and C. monophylla L. (Cleomaceae) are typified. The typifications of the two Linnaean names are based on an assessment of Linnaeus' original materials and the literature cited in the protologue. Examination of type specimens and protologues of the names Cleome chelidonii var. pallae C.S. Reddy & V.S. Raju, Corynandra elegans Chandore, U.S. Yadav & S.R. Yadav, C. pulchella Schrad. ex Spreng. and Polanisia angulata showed that all are conspecific. Thus, a new combination Corynandra angulata (DC.) R.Kr. Singh, Arigela & C.S. Reddy is proposed for the first available name Polanisia angulata. Lectotypes are also designated here for Polanisia burtporensis Munro and the Linnaeus filius' names Cleome chelidonii L.f., C. felina L.f. and C. tenella L.f.

(2806) Proposal to conserve the name <i>Cistus violaceus</i> (<i>Helianthemum violaceum</i>) against <scp><i>C</i>. <i>racemosus</i></scp> (<i>Cistaceae</i>)

(2798) Cistus laevis Cav., Icon. 2: 35. Apr–Nov 1793 [Angiosp.: Cist.], nom. cons. prop. Typus: [Spain, Valencia], “in montibus Enguerae et in Collado de Bocayrente”, 30 Jul 1791, Cavanilles (MA barcode MA 475536 [2 right-hand and 2 left-hand fragments, excl. central fragment]). (=) Cistus pilosus L., Sp. Pl.: 528. 1 Mai 1753, nom. rej. prop. Lectotypus (hic designatus): Herb. Burser XXIV: 66 (UPS No. V-175838). The family Cistaceae comprises 9 genera: Cistus L., Crocanthemum Spach, Fumana (Dunal) Spach, Halimium (Dunal) Spach, Helianthemum Mill., Hudsonia L., Lechea Kalm, Pakaraimaea Maguire & P.S. Ashton, and Tuberaria (Dunal) Spach, and about 180 species distributed in the temperate, subtropical, and tropical regions of the Northern Hemisphere. The genus Fumana is one of the most diverse and least-studied genera of the Cistaceae family, comprising 21 recognized species with high morphological diversity (Arrington & Kubitzki in Kubitzki & Bayer, Fam. Gen. Vasc. Pl. 5: 62–70. 2003; APG-IV in Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 181: 1–20. 2016; Heckenhauer & al. in Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 185: 1–26. 2017). Linnaeus (Sp. Pl.: 528. 1753) published the name Cistus pilosus through a short diagnosis (“CISTUS suffruticosus stipulatus, foliis linearibus subtus bisulcatis incanis, calycibus laevibus”) cited from Sauvages (Meth. Fol.: 147. 1751), and listed two synonyms: “ChamaeCistus foliis thymi incanis” from Bauhin (Pinax: 466. 1623) and “ChamaeCistus 4” from Clusius (Rar. Pl. Hist. 1: 74. 1601). In the protologue, two varieties were also recognised: “β Cistus stipulis quaternis, foliis lineari-ovalibus incanis, calycibus tomentosis” cited from Sauvages (l.c.: 148) and followed by the synonym “Helianthemum flore albo, folio angusto hirsuto” cited from Bauhin & Cherler (Hist. Pl. 2: 17. 1651), and “γ Cistus foliis villosis lanceolatis, axillis foliosis, stipulis subulatis” quoted from Sauvages (l.c.: 148), followed by the synonym “Helianthemum s.[sive] Cistus humilis, folio sampsuci, capitulis valde hirsutis” cited from Bauhin & Cherler (l.c. 2: 20). The protologue included the geographical provenance as “Habitat Monspelii.” Linnaeus also provided the comment “Hae tres α. β. γ. vel varietates vel valde affines: certiora determinent autoptae.” Concerning the identity of Cistus pilosus, this species has been misunderstood (see, e.g., López González in Anales Jard. Bot. Madrid 50: 40, 45. 1990; Jarvis, Order out of Chaos: 421. 2007). Sampaio (in Bol. Soc. Brot., sér. 2, 7: 132. 1931) stated that the correct name for Linnaeus's plant is Helianthemum violaceum (Cav.) Pers. (see also Jarvis, l.c.), and López González (l.c. 1990: 40, 45) argued that Helianthemum pilosum Mill. is not based on C. pilosus L., making H. pilosum (L.) Pers. a later homonym of Miller's name, an argument contrary to Proctor & Heywood (in Tutin & al., Fl. Eur. 2: 288. 1968) and Greuter & al. (in Med-Checklist 1. 1984) since they consider that new names published by Miller are new combinations based on Linnaeus's names in all those cases where the epithets coincide. On the other hand, according to Jarvis (l.c.), at least some of the original material of C. pilosus is identifiable as belonging to the genus Fumana. Jafri (in Jafri & El-Gadi, Fl. Libya 48: 22. 1977) indicated the sheet No. 689.55 (LINN; image: http://linnean-online.org/6475/) as the type of Cistus pilosus. However, as pointed out by Jarvis (l.c.), this collection lacks the relevant Species plantarum number (in this case “25”); thus, this specimen was a post-1753 addition to the herbarium and therefore not original material. So Linnaeus's Cistus pilosus has not been typified (see López González, l.c. 1990; Jarvis, l.c.). A reference to Clusius (l.c.) cited in the protologue provided an illustration, “Chamaecistus IIII”, that can be considered original material used by Linnaeus to describe Cistus pilosus. This drawing illustrates a complete plant, with opposite leaves, flowers and fruits (image available at http://www.plantillustrations.org/illustration.php?id_illustration=237597). This illustration can be identified as Fumana laevis (Cav.) Pau (in Bol. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. 1: 209. 1901), based on Cistus laevis Cav. (Icon. 2: 35. 1793). In addition, as indicated by Jarvis (l.c.), there is a herbarium sheet preserved at UPS-BURSER that contains additional original material of this name: Herb. Burser XXIV: 66. This sheet bears two plants of the same species, both with leaves and flowers. The sheet has a label annotated “Chamaecistus foliis Thymi incanis / Baun. / In Gallia. / 66”. It can also be identified as F. laevis. I have been unable to locate any further original material in any Linnaean or Linnaean-linked herbaria. Therefore, the only elements eligible for lectotypification, the Clusius illustration and the specimen at UPS, are identifiable as F. laevis. I designate above the specimen XXIV: 66 (UPS No. V-175838) as the lectotype of Cistus pilosus. This specimen shows important diagnostic characters, as, e.g., leaves unequally spaced on the stem, abruptly reduced above to form small bracts in the inflorescence, opposite, linear to linear-lanceolate, mucronate, with strongly revolute margins, stipulate; inflorescence 3- to 9-flowered, pedicels much longer than the subtending bracts. As already noted, this specimen matches the traditional concept of a taxon (see, e.g., Cavanilles, l.c.: 35, t. 145, fig. 1; Willkomm, Prodr. Fl. Hispan. 3: 744. 1880; Grosser in Engler, Pflanzenr. 14: 130. 1903) now recognized under the name Fumana laevis (see Molero & Rovira in Candollea 42: 524. 1987; Bolòs & Vigo, Fl. Països Catalans 2: 217. 1989; Güemes in Castroviejo & al., Fl. Iber. 3: 434. 1993; López González, Árbol. Arbust. Peníns. Ibér. 2: 455–456. 2001; Mateo & al., Fl. Valentina 2: 243. 2013; Mateo & Crespo, Claves Ilustr. Fl. Valenciana: 126. 2014). The name Fumana laevis applies to a species widely distributed in the Mediterranean, growing on warm, low-altitude coasts (0–800 m), on relatively deep soils (see Grosser, l.c.; Molero & Rovira, l.c.; Güemes, l.c.; Tison & al., Fl. France Médit.: 974. 2014). A first attempt to lectotypify this name was by Molero & Rovira (l.c.: 528), who cited a herbarium sheet (MA 475536) with no further specifications. However, according to Güemes & Muñoz-Garmendia (in Taxon 53: 1060. 2004), the sheet MA 475536 bears heterogeneous material of more than one gathering, and therefore another lectotypification was required. These authors designated as lectotype all plant fragments of the sheet MA 475536 except the central one (image available at http://161.111.171.57/herbarioV/visorVCat.php?img=MA-01-00475536). For the purpose of nomenclatural stability, I therefore propose conservation of Cistus laevis Cav. against C. pilosus L. under Art. 14.1 of the ICN (Turland & al. in Regnum Veg. 159. 2018). Rejection of this proposal would have an undesirable consequence because the name C. laevis would be included as a heterotypic synonym of the unknown and ignored Linnaean name C. pilosus, and therefore the well-known name Fumana laevis, used in a large number of works, would need to be replaced by a currently non-existent new combination, “Fumana pilosa”. An alternative solution, outright rejection of Cistus pilosus L. under Art. 56, has not been pursued, so that if C. laevis is conserved over it, the Linnaean basionym would still be available should it ever require segregation from F. laevis. Although based on current knowledge the two taxa are conspecific, the genus Fumana is still little known, and an in-depth taxonomic study is needed for the entire western Mediterranean area. The type of F. laevis, from France, is from a locality distant (for this genus) of the locus of C. pilosus (Valencia Province, Spain), both sites also present different environmental and ecological conditions. PPFG, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7595-9302 Thanks to Mats Hjertson (UPS, Museum of Evolution, Botany Section, Uppsala University, Sweden) for the images of the herbarium sheets. Thanks to Dr. John Wiersema and Dr. John McNeill for their advice, assistance, and valuable comments that improved this proposal.

SummaryThe lycopsids exemplify the instability that characterises both formal (Linnean) and informal (colloquial) nomenclatural schemes for all supra‐ordinal plant taxa. The scheme advocated here (Division Tracheophyta, Class Lycopsida; colloquial name lycopsid) reflects two underlying general principles: 1) A wide range of formal hierarchical levels should be used to indicate putative phylogenetic relationships, and 2) colloquial names should be standardised to most accurately represent the preferred Linnean names.

Ferrer-Gallego, P.P. (2016). Lectotypification of Rhus cotinus L., replaced synonym of Cotinus coggygria Scop. (Anacardiaceae). Candollea 71: 307–309.The lectotypification of Rhus cotinus L., replaced synonym of Cotinus coggygria Scop. (Anacardiaceae) is discussed. The designation of the nomenclatural type is based on an assessment of Linnaeus's original material. A specimen from the Clifford Herbarium at BM is designated as lectotype.

The typification of 14 Linnaean names is revised. Previous lectotypifications based on Burman's illustrations in Plantarum Americanarum must be superseded since those elements were not available to Linnaeus before the publication of the first edition of Species plantarum. As a result, 12 Linnaean names, Bellonia aspera, Bucephalon racemosum, Columnea scandens, Cupania americana, Mentzelia aspera, Ovieda spinosa, Renealmia paniculata, Rondeletia americana, Thalia geniculata, Tillandsia serrata, Tournefortia hirsutissima and Tournefortia humilis, are hereby typified based on original material currently held at the Library of the Rijksuniversiteit in Groningen, the Netherlands, whereas a drawing included in Plumier's Nova plantarum Americanarum genera is selected as lectotype of the name Alpinia racemosa. In addition, supporting information about the type material of a name already typified by Robert Kiger (Samyda guidonia) is provided.

(007–008) Proposals to make clearer the circumstances under which a holotype can exist

A commentary is provided on the seven formally published proposals to modify the provisions of the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (ICN) that will be dealt with by the Fungal Nomenclature Session (FNS) of the 11th International Mycological Congress (IMC11) in July 2018. The proposals deal with four issues: (1) clarification of the meaning of “original material” in relation to the typification of sanctioned names; (2) indication of the nomenclatural status of sanctioned names in author citations; (3) use of DNA sequences as nomenclatural types; and (4) use of repository identifiers as an alternative to author citations. Information is also provided on the composition and role of the Fungal Nomenclature Bureau and the operation of the FNS and the pre-Congress Guiding vote.

The development of an inventory of earth’s biodiversity—identifying and naming all living species—is a central tenet of biological science. For over 250 years, the Linnean system has been the predominant naming approach, with new species designated by a unique Latinized binomina following rules laid out by the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (Anonymous 1999; “the Code” below) for animal taxa, while the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi and plants (Turland et al. 2018) is the set of rules dealing with formal botanical names.