Decalepidanthus rosulatus (Ovcz. & Czuk.) Dickoré & Hilger 2015

Dickoré, W. Bernhard & Hilger, Hartmut H., 2015, Decalepidanthus (Boraginaceae) includes and antedates Pseudomertensia; a synopsis of the genus, Phytotaxa 226 (2), pp. 131-143 : 140-141

Decalepidanthus rosulatus (Ovcz. & Czuk.) Dickoré & Hilger , comb. nov.

Basionym:— Scapicephalus rosulatus Ovczinnikov & Czukavina (1974: 65) . ≡ Pseudomertensia rosulata (Ovcz. & Czukav.) Ovczinnikov & Czukavina (1980: 104) . Type:— TAJIKISTAN. Gorno-Badakhshan: ‘Tadzhikistania, declive generale australe jugi Petri Primi, prope trajectus Gardani-Kaftar, ad ripam sinistram alvei sicci Kaftar, in pratensibus cryophilis humiliherbosis et rupibus denudates regionis alpinis (in declivibus ad occidentem et septentrionem expositis)’, 3400–3700 m, 14 August 1969, T.G.Strizhova 5194 (holo LE, iso TAD).

Icon.: — Ovczinnikov & Czukavina (1974): fig. 1. Ovczinnikov & Czukavina (1978): fig. 2 (flower). Czukavina (1984): fig. 68, 5–8.

This taxon remains problematic for several reasons. While comparing Scapicephalus with Pseudomertensia, Ovczinnikov & Czukavina (1978) had invalidly transferred it to the latter genus; the new combination being then validated by Ovczinnikov & Czukavina (1980). We have not seen the type or other authentic specimens. The nutlet illustrated by Ovczinnikov & Czukavina (1974) does not seem to differ from that of Decalepidanthus primuloides , while the relatively short corolla seems unusual, but might still comply with minimum values in this species. A study of pollen grains by Rjabkova (1974) seems inconclusive. Ovczinnikov & Czukavina (1978) presented figures of flower dissections, which unfortunately lack graphical detail and specimen reference. The flower depicted there resembles D. echioides , while the comparison given (fig. 3) was probably not of this species. The type locality of Pseudomertensia rosulata and that of one paratype ([N slope of Vakhan Mts., Tusion-Dara Valley], Kutal’, 4000 m, 10 August 1948, Yu.F.Krivotulenko 160) cited by Ovczinnikov & Czukavina (1974) are situated in the southernmost range of the Pamir mountains (Map: fig. 2c), not far distant from the known ranges of D. primuloides and D. echioides . Similar disjunct or outpost occurrences are known from several other West Himalayan or Karakorum high altitude taxa, e.g. Carex borii ( Dickoré 2011) . However, another paratype of Scapicephalus rosulatus ([N slope of Darvas Mts.] Mionadu, 3600 m, 18 July 1969, T.G.Strizhova 5044), and additional records from Eastern Tajikistan (Karateginskiy and Yazgulemo- Vanchskiy) cited by Czukavina (1984) were far distant from the known distribution of the genus Decalepidanthus . These records seem suspicious, even as to their generic assignment.

Excluded species

The following taxa described in or combined to Pseudomertensia were wrongly classified, possibly on account of lacking fruit. They do not belong to Decalepidanthus either:

Mertensia lindelofioides Rech.f. & Riedl in Riedl (1963b: 233). ≡ Pseudomertensia lindelofioides (Rech.f. & Riedl) Riedl in Rechinger (1967: 61). Type:— AFGHANISTAN. Badakhshan: Chiva , Paturage , 22 July 1959, K.Lindberg 710 (holo W!); Paratype:—[? Panjshir] Salehlang, Pandjir , 7 July 1960, K.Lindberg 994 ( W!) .

= Lindelofia olgae (Regel & Smirn.) Brand in Engler (1921: 87). ≡ Solenanthus olgae Regel & Smirnow in Regel (1882: 59) ≡ Cynoglossum olgae (Regel & Smirn.) Greuter & Stier in Hilger et al. (2015).

Icon.: — Riedl (1963b): fig. 179 ( Mertensia lindelofioides ).

Pseudomertensia drummondii Kazmi (1970: 375) . Type:— INDIA. Jammu & Kashmir: Kashmir, Pir Panjal (south side), 11000 ft., 27 June 1902, J.R.Drummond 13919 (holo E photo!).

= Lindelofia longiflora (Benth.) Baillon (1890: 378) . ≡ Cynoglossum longiflorum Benth. in Royle (1836: 305).

The holotype of Pseudomertensia drummondii is a somewhat distorted specimen of Lindelofia longiflora . The paratype cited by Kazmi (1970): PAKISTAN. Gilgit-Baltistan: Gilgit Agency, Naltar, September 1960, McVean s.n. (E!) belongs also to the genus Lindelofia , but more likely comprises a poor specimen of L. anchusoides (Lindl.) Lehmann (1850: 352) .