The name of Carex helodes Link is neotypified. This species
has been erroneously considered as a synonym of Carex
laevigata Sm. and Carex patula Schkuhr, which the names are
also lectotypified. Each type is illustrated and discussed.Le nom de Carex helodes Link est néotypifié. Cette espèce a
été considérée de manière erronée comme un synonyme de
Carex laevigata Sm. et Carex patula Schkuhr dont les noms
sont aussi lectotypifiés. Chaque type est illustré et discuté

Escudero Lirio, Marcial

Luceño Garcés, Modesto

Muñoz Garmendia, Félix

English

idUS. Depósito de Investigación Universidad de Sevilla

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/251875204Typiﬁcation of Carex helodes Link, Carex laevigata Sm. and Carex patula Linkex Schkuhr (Cyperaceae)Article  in  Candollea · January 2009CITATION1READS1483 authors:Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:The bipolar distribution in angiosperms View projectHolocentric chromosome evolution and the origins of biodiversity in a hyper-diverse plant lineage View projectModesto Luceño GarcésUniversidad Pablo de Olavide204 PUBLICATIONS   1,433 CITATIONS   SEE PROFILEMarcial EscuderoUniversidad de Sevilla85 PUBLICATIONS   843 CITATIONS   SEE PROFILEFelix MuñozSpanish National Research Council54 PUBLICATIONS   267 CITATIONS   SEE PROFILEAll content following this page was uploaded by Marcial Escudero on 01 June 2014.The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.Addresses of the authors: ML, ME: Department of Molecular Biology and Biochemical Engineering, Pablo de Olavide University. Ctra. Utrera km 1, 41013-Sevilla, Spain.Email (ML): mlucgar@upo.esFMG: Royal Botanic Garden of Madrid, CSIC. Pza. Murillo nº 2, 28014-Madrid, Spain.Submitted on January 21, 2008. Accepted on January 12, 2009. Edited by P. BungenerISSN: 0373-2967    Candollea 64(1) : 39- 43 (2009) © CONSERVATOIRE ET JARDIN BOTANIQUES DE GENÈVE 2009 Typification of the names of Carex helodes Link, Carex laevigata Sm. and Carex patula Schkuhr (Cyperaceae)Modesto Luceño, Marcial Escudero & Feliz Muñoz GarmendiaAbstractLUCEÑO, M., M. ESCUDERO & F. MUÑOZ GARMENDIA (2009). Typification of the names of Carex helodes Link, Carex laevigata Sm. and Carex patula Schkuhr (Cyperaceae). Candollea 64: 39-43. In English,English and French abstracts.The name of Carex helodes Link is neotypified. This specieshas been erroneously considered as a synonym of Carex laevigata Sm. and Carex patula Schkuhr, which the names arealso lectotypified. Each type is illustrated and discussed.Key-wordsCYPERACEAE – Carex – TypificationRésumé LUCEÑO, M., M. ESCUDERO & F. MUÑOZ GARMENDIA (2009). Typi-fication des noms de Carex helodes Link, Carex laevigata Sm. et Carex patulaSchkuhr (Cyperaceae). Candollea 64: 39-43. En anglais, résumés anglais etfrançais.Le nom de Carex helodes Link est néotypifié. Cette espèce aété considérée de manière erronée comme un synonyme deCarex laevigata Sm. et Carex patula Schkuhr dont les nomssont aussi lectotypifiés. Chaque type est illustré et discuté.40 – Candollea 64, 2009IntroductionCarex helodes Link was described in 1800 on specimensgathered by the author in central-south Portugal, who circum-scribed this species as follows: “spicula masculae 1-3 termi-nales elongatae, squamis lanceolato-linearibus acutis fuscis;feminae 3-4, axillares, pedicellatae, erectae…”.Two months before the publication of C. helodes, thespecies C. laevigata Sm. was described from Scotland by SirJames Edward Smith. The latter taxon, distributed in westernEurope and NW Africa, is characterized by a single male spike(rarely two), acuminate, pale brown female glumes and a usu-ally pendent lower female spike.KÜKENTHAL (1909) considered Smith’s species a synonymof that described by Link, and referred all specimens analysedto C. helodes, a taxonomic decision which was followed byseveral authors (SAMPAIO, 1908-1909; MAIRE, 1957; VICIOSO,1959). Surprisingly, CHATER (1980), in his account of Euro-pean species of Carex L., only mentioned “C. helodes auct.,non Link” as a synonym of C. laevigata, but did not mentionthe genuine C. helodes.At the beginning of the twentieth century, C. intacta Samp.was described from south Portugal. He differentiated the new species from C. laevigata by having “spicae masculae 2-7, ferruginae [...] ceterae 2-3 feminae, interdum androgynae[...] omnes squamis castaneis, oblongis, obtusisve emarginatiset longe mucronatis”. However, some years later, SAMPAIO(1921) himself, based on Links diagnosis, reduced C. intactato synonym with C. helodes.LUCEÑO (1992), using morphological and cytogenetic data,emphasized the taxonomical status of C. helodes as a separatespecies different from C. laevigata and lectotypified Sampaio sC. intacta. Furthermore, LUCEÑO (1992) added a diagnosticcharacter, viz. epiphyllously rough throughout, to those givenby SAMPAIO (1908-1909, 1921). Subsequent DNA sequenceand ecological analyses (ESCUDERO & al., 2008a; ESCUDERO& al., 2008b) have been conducted, based on Portuguese pop-ulations and recently found Moroccan and Spanish populationsof C. helodes (LUCEÑO & ESCUDERO, 2006; LUCEÑO & al.,2007). These studies revealed not only the monophyly of thisspecies but also its clear and well supported independence fromC. laevigata.Most of Link’s herbarium is conserved at B (CHAUDHRI &al., 1972; STAFLEU & COWAN, 1981), but no C. helodesmaterialcollected by Link is maintained, and C. helodes is not includedin the Cyperaceae checklist of B (BOECKELER, 1867-1868, 1869-1870, 1871-1873, 1874, 1875, 1876, 1877). Moreover, KÜKEN-THAL (1909), who undoubtedly revised the Carexmaterial in B,did not mention any herbarium specimens of C. helodes collectedby Link. Hence, one can conclude that type material of C. helodeswas probably never preserved at B.On the other hand, C. patula Schkuhr was described in Portugal. Schkuhr did not exclude the possibility that the Portuguese specimens received from Link, which he used for thedescription of this species, could also belong to C. helodes. How-ever, he emphasized the presence of solitary male spikes in thecollections examined, in contrast to Link’s diagnosis of C. helodes(1-3 male spikes), and admitted that he had never seen C. helodesmaterial. As there is no specimen of C. patula in Schkuhr sherbarium at HAL (BRAUN & WERNER, 2007), we designate thefigure 116 as the lectotype. This figure shows a rather typicalspecimen of C. laevigata, which is concordant with BOECKELER,1867-1868, 1869-1870, 1871-1873, 1874, 1875, 1876, 1877) thatC. patula is just a synonym of C. laevigata.We have consulted numerous herbaria in addition to thosethat conserve plants collected by Link, but failed in finding anyauthentic collections attributable to C. helodes. Based on thedescription given by Link, C. helodes does not correspond to C. laevigata, since this species displays 1(-2) male spikes anda pendent lowest female spike including pale brown glumesinstead of “fuscis” glumes as stated in Link’s protologue.For the above mentioned reasons, we consider C. helodesbeing the adequate binomial for the sedge species occurringin the SW of the Iberian Peninsula and the NW of Morocco,which was later described by SAMPAIO (1908-1909) as C. intacta. Due to a low likelihood to find type material of C. helodes, the selection of a neotype is, in our opinion, thebest solution to solve an old nomenclatural problem and the confusion about two well defined species. Furthermore, itseems that C. helodes is now extinct at its classical locality(Setubal). Consequently, we propose a neotypification.TypificationsCarex helodes Link in J. Bot. (Schrader) 2: 309. 1800.Neotypus (designated here): PORTUGAL. Algarve: betweenBispo and Barranco Velho, seasonally inundated grasslandin forest of Quercus suber, 37º13 47”N 7º55 59”W, 491 m,23.V.2006, Luceño, M., M. Escudero & P. Jiménez s.n.(UPOS 1925; iso-: B, BC, BM, C, COI, G, K, LE, LISE,LISI, LISU, MA, NY, O, P, SEV, UPOS) (Fig. 1).= C. intacta Samp. in Bol. Soc. Brot. 24: 118. 1908-1909.Lectotypus (designated by LUCEÑO, 1992): PORTUGAL.Baixo Alentejo: Odemira, Pego das Pías, IV.1905,s.coll. (O[0563GS]).Typification of the names of Carex helodes Link, Carex laevigata Sm. and Carex patula Schkuhr (Cyperaceae) – 41Fig. 1. – Neotype of Carex helodes Link.[Luceño & al. s.n., UPOS] [© University Pablo de Olavide. Reproduced with permission]42 – Candollea 64, 2009Fig. 2. – Lectotypus of C. laevigata Sm. [specimen in the left side, with the arrow].[s.coll., LINN-SM] [© Linnean Society of London. Reproduced with permission]Carex laevigata Sm. in Trans. Linn. Soc. London 5: 272. 1800.Lectotypus (here designated): SCOTLAND. Central Scot-land: marsh near Glasgow, 1796, Mackai 44 (LINN-SM[1441.196] (Fig. 2, with the arrow).= C. patula Schkuhr, Beschr. Riedgräs.: 115. 1801. Lecto- typus (designated here): [icon] Schkuhr, Beschr. Ried-gräs: 115, tab. 286, fig. 116. 1801.Note. – The sheet lacks labels, but there is a handwrittentext by Smith which reads “marsh near Glasgow. Mackai.1796. n. 44 & 1797. n. 6”. This agrees exactly with the proto-logue, except for the year (probably due to a mistake made bySmith). Nevertheless, there is no doubt that this sheet repre-sents type material.AcknowledgementsWe thank C. Jarvis (BM) and the Linnean Society of London for providing a digital picture of type material of Carexlaevigata and U. Braun for supplying valuable informationabout Schkuhrs herbarium.ReferencesBOECKELER, O. (1867-1868). Die Cyperaceen des KöniglichenHerbariums zu Berlin. Linnaea 35: 397-612.BOECKELER, O. (1869-1870). Die Cyperaceen des KöniglichenHerbariums zu Berlin. Linnaea 36: 271-512, 691-798.BOECKELER, O. (1871-1873). Die Cyperaceen des KöniglichenHerbariums zu Berlin. Linnaea 37: 1-142, 520-647.BOECKELER, O. (1874). Die Cyperaceen des Königlichen Herbariumszu Berlin. Linnaea 38: 223-544.BOECKELER, O. (1875). Die Cyperaceen des Königlichen Herbariumszu Berlin. Linnaea 39: 1-152.BOECKELER, O. (1876). Die Cyperaceen des Königlichen Herbariumszu Berlin. Linnaea 40: 327-452.BOECKELER, O. (1877). Die Cyperaceen des Königlichen Herbariumszu Berlin. Linnaea 41: 145-356.BRAUN, U. & K WERNER (2007). Type material in the Herbarium of theMartin-Luther University Halle-Wittenberg (HAL) – Carex speciesin the herbarium of C. Schkuhr. Schlechtendalia 16: 33-40.CHATER, A. O. (1980). Carex L. In: TUTIN, T. G. & al. (ed.), Fl. Eur.5: 290-323.CHAUDHRI, M. N., I. H. VEGTER & C. M. DE WAL (1972). Indexherbariorum: a guide to the location and contents of the world’spublic herbaria. Part II(3). Collectors I-L. I. Regnum Veg. 86.ESCUDERO, M., V. VALCÁRCEL, P. VARGAS &M. LUCEÑO (2008a). Evo-lution in Carex L. sect. Spirostachyae (Cyperaceae). A molecular& cytogenetic approach. Organisms Diversity Evol. 7: 271-291.ESCUDERO, M., V. VALCÁRCEL, P. VARGAS & M. LUCEÑO (2008b).Strait of Gibraltar: an effective gene flow barrier for wind-polli-nated Carex helodes (Cyperaceae) as revealed by DNA sequences,AFLP, and cytogenetic variation. Amer. J. Bot. 95: 745-755.KÜKENTHAL, G. (1909). Cyperaceae-Caricoideae. In: ENGLER, A.(ed.), Pflanzenr. IV(20).LUCEÑO, M. (1992). Estudios en la sección Spirostachyae (Drejer)Bailey del género Carex. I. Revalorización de C. helodes Link.Anales Jard. Bot. Madrid 50: 73-81.LUCEÑO, M. & M. ESCUDERO (2006). Carex helodes Link novedadpara el continente africano. Acta Bot. Malacitana 31: 209-210.LUCEÑO, M., M. ESCUDERO & P. JIMÉNEZ-MEJÍAS (2007). Hallazgo dedos nuevas poblaciones de Carex helodes: una especie declaradaextinta de la flora española. Conserv. Veg. 11: 1-12.MAIRE, R. (1957). Fl. Afrique N. 4. Paris.SAMPAIO, G. (1908-1909). Flora vascular de Odemira. Bol. Soc. Brot.24: 7-132.SAMPAIO, G. (1921). Observações sobre algumas plantas. Ann. Sci.Acad. Polytecn. Porto 14: 1-23.STAFLEU, F. A. & R. S. COWAN (1981). J. H. F. Link. Taxonomic literature 3: 65-70. W. Junk b.v.VICIOSO, C. (1959). Estudio monográfico sobre el género Carex enEspaña. Bol. Inst. Forest. Invest. Exp. 79: 1-205.Typification of the names of Carex helodes Link, Carex laevigata Sm. and Carex patula Schkuhr (Cyperaceae) – 43View publication stats

Candollea

Typification of Carex helodes Link, Carex laevigata Sm. and Carex patula Link ex Schkuhr (Cyperaceae)

https://idus.us.es/bitstream/handle/11441/87418/136.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Typification of Carex helodes Link, Carex laevigata Sm. and Carex patula Link ex Schkuhr (Cyperaceae)

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

idUS. Depósito de Investigación Universidad de Sevilla