Amaranthus flavus var. bernhardi Moquin-Tandon (1849: 258)

Iamonico, Duilio, 2016, Nomenclature survey of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae). 5. Moquin-Tandon’s names, Phytotaxa 273 (2), pp. 81-114 : 94-95

publication ID

https://doi.org/ 10.11646/phytotaxa.273.2.1

persistent identifier

https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03C51A48-1B04-301B-3C8C-FA00E1E4FEDF

treatment provided by

Felipe

scientific name

Amaranthus flavus var. bernhardi Moquin-Tandon (1849: 258)
status

 

12. Amaranthus flavus var. bernhardi Moquin-Tandon (1849: 258) View in CoL

Type: not designated.

Nomenclatural notes and taxonomic remarks:—The taxon bernhardi is one of the three varieties recognized by Moquin-Tandon (1849: 258) under Am. flavus . A short diagnosis (“foliis anguste lanceolatis subdistantibus, paniculis minoribus”) and the citation “ Amaranthus Bernhardi in hort. Taurin!” were given. No specimens, which can be considered as part of the original material, were traced neither in the herbarium TO [Moquin-Tandon (l.c.) reported in the prologue “hort. Taurin!” (= Hortus Taurinesis), L. Guglielmone pers. comm.], nor in other collections. As a consequence a neotypification is required under the Art. 9.7 of the ICN. There is a difficult in the designation of a neotype for the name Am. flavus var. bernhardi for at least the following reasons:

1) no specimens, which can be referred to Am. flavus and seen by Moquin-Tandon, were found;

2) no citations of Am. flavus var. bernhardi were traced in literature (neglected name);

3) it is very difficult to understand the Moquin-Tandon’s concept of the var. bernhardi since the author described the new taxon on the basis of morphological characters (habitus, leaves shape, and size of synflorescences) which have not or or have very low taxonomic value in Amaranthus (see e.g., Mosyakin & Robertson 2003, Iamonico 2015);

4) the name Am. flavus , which is currently to be referred to Am. cruentus , was differently interpreted along the time (see the discussion by Iamonico 2015 a) and the description by Moquin-Tandon (1849: 258) is not clear ascribable to both A. hybridus and A. cruentus .

All things stated, I prefer to avoid a neotype designation for Am. flavus var. bernhardi and hope for a future rejection of this name, which if used, it would cause a disadvantageous nomenclatural change (Art. 56 of the ICN).

Darwin Core Archive (for parent article) View in SIBiLS Plain XML RDF