The name Artemisia variabilis Ten. is here lectotypified. Observations and synonyms are given

Filigheddu, Rossella Speranza

Urbani, Malvina

English

UnissResearch

Documento digitalizzato dallo Staff di UnissResearch 
UnissResearch
Filigheddu, Rossella Speranza; Urbani, Malvina (1996) Lectotypification of 
Artemisia variabilis Ten. (Compositae). Webbia, Vol. 50 (2), p. 205-209. 
ISSN 0083-7792. 
http://eprints.uniss.it/3129/
C\I 
m 
f'-
f'-
M 
co 
o 
o 
Z 
Cl) 
~ 
50 parte 2 
raccolta di scritti botanici 
rivista internazionale 
di sistematica e fitogeografia 
international journal 
of plant taxonomy and geography 
pubblicata con iI contributo· 
del consiglio nazionale delle ricerche 
rivista fondata da u. martelli nel1905 
firenze 1996 
Webbia 
Raccolta di Scritti Botanici 
Museo Botanico dell'Universita 
Via G. La Pira, 4 
50121 FIRENZE - ITALIA 
COMITATO EDITORIALE - EDITORIAL BOARD 
GUIDO MOGGI, Direttore/Director; MAURO RAFFAELLI; 
GIOVANNI CRISTOFOUNI, PALMER MARcm, ENIO NARDI, Membri/Members. 
COMITATO DI REVISIONE - REFEREES COMMITTEE 
B. ANZALONE, Roma (I) 
P. V. AruuGONI, Firenze (I) 
G. AYMONIN, Paris (F) 
C. BALLETI'o, Genova (I) 
P. BAMPs, Meise (B) 
A. BOZZINI, Roma (I) 
A. CERUTI, Torino (I) 
F. CINELU, Pisa (I) 
C. CORTINI PEDROTTI, Camerino (I) 
A. DE PHILlPPIS, Firenze (I) 
F. EHRENDORFER, Wien (A) 
M. FOlllERI, Roma (I) 
F. GARBARI, Pisa (I) 
C. GOMEZ-CAMPO, Madrid (E) 
J. GRAU, Miinchen (D) 
W. GREUTER, Berlin (D) 
R. GROLLE, Jena (D) 
J.B. HARBORNE, Reading (GB) 
C. C. HEYN, Jerusalem (lL) 
V.H. HEYWOOD, Kew (GB) 
C. JERMY, London (GB) 
S. JOVET AST, Paris (F) 
D. LAUSI, Trieste (I) 
E. MAUGINI, Firenze (I) 
E. MAYER, Ljubljana (SLO) 
A. MEINESZ, Nice (F) 
H. MEUSEL, Halle (D) 
D.M. MOORE, Reading (GB) 
P. OZENDA, Grenoble (F) 
R. E. G. PICHI SERMOLLI, Montagnana V.P. (I) 
S. PIGNATTI, Roma (I) 
A. PmoLA, Pavia (I) 
S. RIvAS MARTINEZ, Madrid (E) 
H. RUNEMARK, Lund (S) 
G. SANESI, Firenze (I) 
W. SAUER, Tiibingen (D) 
A. STRID, Copenhagen (DK) 
B. V ALOES, Sevilla (E) 
M. VAN CAMPO, Montpellier (F) 
G. W AGENITZ, Gottingen (D) 
S. M. W ALTERS, Cambridge (GB) 
M. J. A. WERGER, Utrecht (NL) 
WEBBIA 
WEBBIA e una rivista internazionale dedicata alla botanica sistematica, specialmente delle piante vascolari, ed alla 
£itogeografia in senso ampio (con particolareriguardo all'Italia, alla regione Mediterranea ed al continente a£ricano). Ogni 
volume annuale e pubblicato in due fascicoli semestrali. 
WEBBIA e pubblicata dal Museo Botanico dell'Universita di Firenze. 
ISTRUZIONI PER GU AUTORl 
Manoscritti - I lavori presentati a WEBBIA per la pubblicazione devono essere scritti in italiano, francese, inglese, 
tedesco 0 spagnolo e devono essere inviati alla redazione dattiloscritti, in un originale e due copie, comprese le figure. 
Manoscritti e figure, salvo indicazioni contrarie, restano di proprieta della rivista. Per gli articoli scritti in lingua divers a 
dall'italiano e richiesto un riassunto in lingua inglese e un ampio riassunto in lingua italiana. Per gli articoli scritti in italiano e 
richiesto un ampio abstract in inglese ed uno breve in italiano. Le memorie di una certa lunghezza devono essere suddivise in 
capitoli. Si raccomanda di evitare le sottollneature di qualsiasi tipo, che verranno curate dalla redazione. Evitare per quanto 
possibile le note a pie di pagina. La redazione si riserva di effettuare piccole variazioni al teste per adeguarlo allo standard 
della rivista. 
I manoscritti saranno sottoposti alla revisione da parte di uno 0 piu consulenti. La responsabilita scientifica dei lavori 
resta comunque degli autori. 
Illustrazioni - Nel preparare le figure, sia a tratto che a retino, gli autori dovranno tenere conto che esse dovranno 
essere riportate alle dimensioni della pagina stampata (cm 12,7 X 18). 
Webbia 50(2): 205-209. 1996 
Lectotypification of Artemisia variabilis Ten. (Compositae) 
ROSSELLA FIUGHEDDU and MAL VINA URBANI 
Dipartimento di Botanica ed Ecologia Vegetale dell'Universita 
Via Muroni 25 1-07100, Sassari 
Accettato per la stampa it 3 Luglio 1995 
Lectotipificazione di Artemisia variabilis Ten. (Compositae) - Viene proposta in 
questo lavoro la lectotipificazione del nome Artemisia variabilis Ten. Vengono 
discus si i sinonimi e fornite numerose osservazioni. 
Key words: Artemisia variabitis, Compositae, lectotypification. 
Artemisia variabilis was described by TENORE in 1826. In the same page of 
the protologue of this species, TENORE (1826) invalidly described a variety of 
A. procera for the area of Naples: A. procera var. foliis camosulis rigidis ... , with 
which he put in synonymy another invalid name, i.e. A. neapolitana Ten. in 
litteris. 
In 1829, TENORE established two varieties of Artemisia variabilis: A. variabi-
lis var. virescens and A. variabilis var. canescens, both validly published. 
A reading of later works published by TENORE after the protologue (TEN-
ORE, 1829; 1830; 1831 and 1834-35), suggests that he still had some doubts 
about the possible relations between his A. variabilis and another two similar 
species, A. procera Willd. and A. campestris L., and that it was only later that he 
pronounced his opinion with certainty on the matter. It seemed interesting 
therefore to us, with a view to reconstructing the history of this name, its 
typification and that of its synonyms, to understand what knowledge TENORE 
had of these other two entities, that have at different times been considered 
very close or have at any rate provided reasons for questioning his A. variabilis. 
A. procera was been described by WILLDENOW in 1803 and together with A. 
paniculata Lam. is at present considered a synonym of A. abrotanum L. (TUTIN, 
1976). In describing A. procera Willd. for the Pyrenees in 1813, LAPEYROUSE 
reproduced the entire protologue of the species with the addition of a few 
characteristics which he observed in Spanish individuals. 
The synonymy suggested by TENORE in 1826 (A. procera var. foliis carnosulis 
rigidis ... = A. neapolitana Ten. in litteris) is justified by the consideration that, as 
he himself explained later (TENORE, 1830; 1831), he had submitted his A. 
neapolitana to the judgement of botanists who considered it very similar to A. 
206 R. FILIGHEDDU, M. URBANI 
procera. It can reasonably be supposed, however, that the affinity suggested to 
Tenore in 1826 came from botanists who by A. procera meant Lapeyrouse's 
entity. As a result of this, while in 1826 Tenore included a variety of A. procera 
among the entities of the Neapolitan area, he later excluded it officially 
(TENORE, 1830). Later DE CANDOLLE (1837) considered «A. procera Lapeyr.» a 
synonym of A. variabilis Ten.; but according to BENTHAM (in DE CANDOLLE op. 
cit.: 94) this entity is a synonym of A. campestris L.; BESSER (1845: 467 and 
469) on the other hand hypothesises a possible labelling error on the Lapeyr-
ouse specimen reviewed by Bentham and makes the quotation official: «A. 
procera Lapeyr. non Willd. = A. variabilis Ten.» 
The problem of the affinity between A. variabilis and A. campestris is 
perceived by TENORE in 1829. About A. variabilis he writes: «A. campestri 
nostra plant a potius simillima dici potest ... ». He states here that A. variabilis is 
different from A. campestris only in its « ... lignosum caudice brachii crassitu-
dinem ... » but he specifies neither author nor possible infraspecific taxa for the 
latter species. 
In 1830 TENORE quotes two varieties of A. ca mpestris, both «in arenosis 
siccis», without officially validating them. They are var. B. alpina for Maiella 
and «var. C. glutinosa ad Adriatici oras: Pescara». Regarding the var. glutinosa 
he wonders whether it may be a variety of his A. variabilis. In his remarks on A. 
variabilis he returns to the issue and justifies his reasons by stating that the A. 
campestris var. glutinosa grown by him in the botanic garden of Naples « ... suum 
indumentum et glutinosam qualitatem abjecit. .. » as it looks very much like A. 
variabilis. It is this glutinosa variety of Central Italy, and in our opinion no 
other, that Tenore takes as a term of reference both in this context and 
subsequently (TENORE, 1835-36). 
TYPIFICATION 
Artemisia variabilis Ten., FI. NeapoI. Prodr. App. 5:28.1826. 
LECTOTYPUS (here designated): «Artemisia variabilis Ten. Ba;a Bagnoli» (Herb.-TEN 95/2 
NAP!). 
Among the specimens of A. variabilis with labels in Tenore's own handwrit-
ing in Florence (FI and FI-W), Bologna (BOLO) and Naples (NAP), only the 
sheet marked Herb.-TEN 95/2 NAP contains sufficient elements to state that 
the exsiccata in it were definitely in the possession of Tenore in 1826. The 
sheet contains three branches of inflorescence and the following two labels: 1) 
«Artemisia variabilis Ten. Baja Bagnoli»; 2) «A. neapolitana [later crossed out 
and corrected to] A. procera var. caulib. deb .... declinatis racemis breviss. 
Posil[l]ipo Pozzuoli». The former is referrable to the specimen placed at the 
centre of the sheet, that corresponds with the description by Tenore especially 
LECTOTYPIFICATION OF ARTEMISIA VARIABILIS TEN. 207 
in the oval-oblong angular capitula, and is here designated as the lectotype of 
the species A. variabilis (fig. 1). 
Artemisia variabilis Ten. var. virescens Ten., Index seminum 14. 1829. 
LECTOTYPUS (here designated): «Artemisia neapolitana [later crossed out and corrected to] 
nob. variabilis A» (Herb.-TEN 95/1 NAP!). 
The protologue of 1829 contains no descriptions but the variety is validated 
by the bibliographical reference to A. neapolitana and therefore to the descrip-
tion of the invalid «A. procera var. /oliis carnosulis rigidis ... » (TENORE, 1826). 
The typifiable elements are five and are all contained in NAP. The sheet 
marked Herb.-TEN 95/2 NAP, containing the type of A. variabilis, has the 
following label: «A. neapolitana [later crossed out and corrected to] A. procera 
var. caulib. deb .... declinatis racemis breviss. Posil[l]ipo, Pozzuoli» that is 
attributable to the other two exsiccata (right and left sides of the sheet), both 
corresponding to the description by Tenore especially as far as regards the oval 
capitula and the contracted racemes. The sheet marked Herb.-TEN 95/1 NAP 
contains three exsiccata, all of which definitely belong to the same entity, and 
one label on which is written: «Artemisia neapolitana [later crossed out and 
corrected to] nob. variabilis A.» These specimens Also correspond perfectly to 
the description by Tenore for the same characteristics mentioned above. We 
therefore believe we have identified five syntypes. The sample on the left in 
the sheet Herb.-TEN 95/1 NAP is chosen here as lectotype because of its 
completeness and its label that explicitly refers to the variety. 
NOTES 
According to article 26.3 of the LC.B.N. (GREUTER et aI., 1994) the 
institution of A. variabilis var. virescens involves the creation of the autonym A. 
variabilis var. variabilis. In 1829 TENORE had described another variety of A. 
variabilis, i.e. «Var. B. Canescens. A. variabilis Ten. loco citato.» This bibliogra-
phical note refers to the A. variabilis of 1826. This variety therefore automati-
cally includes the type of the species and consequently its name is not validly 
published and is illegitimate according to articles 26.2, 52.1 and 52.2 of 
LC.B.N. (GREUTER et aI., 1994). 
In the bibliographical data and in the labels of the original exsiccata of 
Tenore examined by us, the Author indicates the varieties typified here for the 
same site, or for very close sites, within the range of a few square kilometres. 
Moreover the environments are poorly characterised and presumably conti-
208 R. FILIGHEDDU, M. URBANI 
/' 
Fig. 1 - Photograph of the sheet containing the lectotype of A. variabilis Ten. Lectotype of A. variabilis 
Ten.: specimen at the centre of the sheet. 
LECTOTYPIFICATION OF ARTEMISIA VARIABILIS TEN. 209 
guous. Even from the observation of only one natural population of A. 
variabilis one can note its remarkable morphological variability, which in fact 
includes the characteristics considered by Tenore in describing his own varie-
ties. 
Artemisia variabilis Ten., Fl. Neapol. Prodr. App. 5:28.1826. 
(==) A. variabilis Ten. var. variabilis (==) A. variabilis Ten. var. canescens Ten, Index seminum. 
14. 1829. 
(==) A. campestris L. var. variabilis (Ten.) Fiori, Fl. Italia. 3: 250. 1903. 
(=) A. variabilis Ten. var. virescens Ten., Index seminum. 14. 1829. 
(=) A. variabilis Ten. var. neapolitana Besser, Bull. Soc. Imp. Naturalistes Moscou. 8: 21. 1834. 
(==) A. variabilis Ten. var. virescens Ten. b neapolitana (Besser) Besser, Mem. Acad. Imp. Sci. 
Saint-Petersbourg Divers Savans. 4: 469. 1845. 
(-) A. crithmifolia sensu Ucria, Hort. panhorm. 349. 1789, non L. (1753). 
The following names are excluded: 
A. sa ligna Ten. Prodr. Fl. Neapol. suppl. 1: 63. 1813, nomen nudum. 
A. neapoletana Ten., pro syn. 
LITERATURE CITED 
BESSER W. S.]. G., 1845. - Monographiae A rtemisiarum. Sectio I. Dractmculi. Mem. Acad. Imp. Sci. Saint-
Petersbourg Divers Savans. 4: 445-488. 
DE CANDOLLE A. P., 1837. - Prodromus systematis naturalis regni vegetabili. 6: 93-95. Treuttel et Wurtz, 
Paris. 
GREUTER W. et al. (ed.), 1994. - International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (Tokyo Code). Adopted by the 
Fifteenth International Botanical Congress, Yokohama, August September 1993. Regnum Veg. 131. Koeltz 
Scientific Books, Konigstein. 
LAPEYROUSE P. P., 1813. - Histoire abregee des plantes des Pyrenees. 503. De l'Imprimerie de Bellegarrigue, 
Tolouse. 
LINNAEUS C.,1753. - Species Plantarum. 2: 846. Holmiae. 
TENORE M., 1826. - Ad Florae neapolitanae prodromum appendix quinta: 28. R. Marotta et Vanspandoch, 
Neapoli. 
TENORE M., 1829. - Index seminum et plantarum viventium, quae in horto regio neapoletano -: 14. 
TENORE M., 1830. - Flora napolitana. 4: 120. Stamperia Francese, Napoli. 
TENORE M., 1831. - Sylloge plantarum vascularium florae neapolitanae: 420. Typ. Fibreni, Neapoli. 
TENORE M., 1835-36. - Flora napolitana. 5: 216-217. Stamperia e Cartiera del Fibreno, Napoli. 
TUTIN T. G., 1976. - in: TUTIN T. G. et al. (Eds.), Flora Europaea. 4: 185-186. Cambridge University Press, 
Cambridge. 
WILLDENOW C. 1., 1803. - Species plantarum. 3: 1818. 
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 
We would like to thank the Directors and Curators of the Herbaria of Neaples, Bologna, 
Florence and S. Petersbourg for providing specimens, photographs and other valuable informa-
tion and among them Dr. A. Santangelo and Dr. D. V. Geltman. We are specially grateful to 
Prof. E. Nardi for helpful discussions and critical comments to the manuscript. 
This work was supported by M.U.R.S.T. 
Summary 
The name Artemisia variabilis Ten. is here lectotypified. Observations and synonyms are 
given. 


Lectotypification of <i>Artemisia variabilis</i> Ten. (Compositae)

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

UnissResearch