Typification of Two Linnaean Names in the Basellaceae

Abstract

During the writing of the treatment of Basellaceae for Flora Mesoamericana it became apparent that typification of the Linnaean names alba L. and B. lucida L. required clarification. A note to formally fix the application of these two names is provided here. The genus consists of five species, four in east and southeast Africa and Madagascar, the other pantropical and widely (Sperling, 1987). The three Linnaean names for species of are now considered conspecific, and typification of two of these names is clarified below. In Species Plantarum, Linnaeus first described two species of L., B. rubra L. and B. alba L. These two species were distinguished on a single leaf character: rubra was described as Basella foliis planis, while alba in contrast was described as Basellafoliis undatis (Linnaeus, 1753: 272). A third species, lucida L., was described by Linnaeus in 1759, differing from the other two in having subcordate, rather than ovate, leaves and densely terminally branched, rather than simple, peduncles. rubra, B. alba, and B. lucida were first treated as a single species by Roxburgh (1832), who used the name B. alba. Within B. alba Roxburgh recognized five varieties, based on local taxonomic knowledge, and he listed these five subgroups as two wild sorts and three cultivated sorts (Roxburgh, 1832: 275). Graham (1839) followed Roxburgh's account, but was erroneously credited by Smith (1981) as the first to combine the names under B. alba. Baillon (1887), on the other hand, considered B. alba a variety of B. rubra, and several authors subsequently followed that work and accepted B. rubra as the name for the single species. As Roxburgh (1832) was the first author to place B. alba and B. rubra in synonymy, and in doing so adopted B. alba, it (and not B. rubra) is the correct name under Article 11.5 of the Code (see van Steenis, 1957; Smith, 1981, and references therein; Greuter et al., 1994). Additionally, B. alba is the name in current use, and the types designated here are intended to maintain this usage. rubra was lectotypified by Verdcourt (1968), who selected the unpublished drawing of a fruiting plant in Herb. Hermann 5: t. 207 (lectotype, BM) that formed the basis for Linnaeus's Flora Zeylanica account, a choice Smith (1981) also suggested as a logical lectotype and that has been followed by Kellogg (1988). rubra L. was accepted as the type of the genus L. by Jarvis et al. (1993). The types of alba L. and B. lucida L. have not previously been clarified. A single synonym from Thran (Hort. Carolsruh. 11, n. 125. 1747), Basella flore albo, foliis & caulibus viridibus, was cited in the original description of B. alba, and this has subsequently been cited as the type of B. alba (miscited as Thran, Hort. Carolsruh. 10, n. 100. 1747, by Verdcourt, 1968; Sperling, 1987; and Kellogg, 1988). However, the synonym in the protologue does not have a visual element and it cannot therefore serve as the type, which must be a single specimen or illustration (Greuter et al., 1994: Art. 8.1). There are no extant original elements for the name alba. Three specimens annotated as B. alba exist in the Linnaean herbarium in Stockholm. However, none are annotated by Linnaeus and therefore cannot be considered original material for the name and eligible for lectotypification. A neotype is therefore required to formally fix the application of the name alba. In Species Plantarum edition 2 (1762: 390), Linnaeus added a reference to an illustration ofBasella alba in Plukenet (1691: tab. 63, fig. 1). Plukenet (1696: 252) used the polynomial Mirabili Peruvianae affinis tinctoria Betaefolio scandens for the species and cited the illustration in van Rheede (Hortus Malabaricus 7, tab. 24. 1688) under that name. The plate in Plukenet clearly illustrates alba L. as it is now circumscribed. Having cited the distribution of alba as Syria? (Linnaeus, 1753: 272) in the first edition of Species Plantarum, Linnaeus followed Plukenet in 1762, stating that B. alba was from China. As possible neotypes, the Chinese specimens available were considered of rather poor quality. Therefore, the neotype selected here is a specimen with plenty of NovoN 9: 562-563. 1999. This content downloaded from 157.55.39.104 on Sun, 19 Jun 2016 05:53:46 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Volume 9, Number 4 1999 Sidwell Typification in Basellaceae 563 fertile material, and detailed locality data, from Nepal. Although lucida L. was recognized by Moquin-Tandon (1849) as a distinct species, it has otherwise been considered a synonym of B. alba L. by most authors since Linnaeus. In his treatment of the three species of Basella, Linnaeus (1762: 391) added a note that the species were clearly very closely related: Affines nimium sunt hae tres species, sed constantes se servant in hortis. The short description of B. lucida (Linnaeus, 1762) fits within the current circumscription of alba, and there is no doubt that the name should be placed