Sesleria pontica Deyl (1946: 100)

Pietro, Romeo Di, Kuzmanović, Nevena, Iamonico, Duilio & Lakušić, Dmitar, 2017, Nomenclatural and taxonomic notes on Sesleria sect. Argenteae (Poaceae), Phytotaxa 309 (2), pp. 101-117 : 108

10. Sesleria pontica Deyl (1946: 100)

Lectotype (designated here):— BULGARIA. [Plovdiv]: Montes Rhodope centrales ad vicum Bačkovo in monte “Červenata stena” et vicinis, 680–1500 m s.m., 12 June 1936, Deyl & Klášterský s.n. (PR-830109!) ( Fig. 3 ); isolectotypes PR-830106, PR-830107, PR-830108, PR-830110.

Other original material (syntypes):— GREECE. Thessaly: mont. Olymp [Olympus], in Pineto supra Kalivia Vrissula , calcareo, alt. 1500 m, 17 July 1927, Handel-Mazzetti s.n. ( PR) ; BULGARIA. [Plovdiv]: In rupibus ad Čausovo. June 1898, Stribrny s.n. (P-02657882) ; In rupibus calcareis ad Čauševo, supra urb. Stanimaka [Asenovgrad], Rhodopen centralis, June 1895, Stribrny s.n. ( PR) ; Montes Rhodope centrales, ad vicum Bačkovo, June 1936, Deyl & Klášterský s.n. ( PR). [Blagoevgrad]: In pascuis saxosis calcareis mt. Alibotuš [Slavyanka], supra pag. Petrovo , ca 1500 m s.m., 28 May 1932, Achtaroff s.n. ( PR) ; Rožen , June 1936, Deyl s.n. ( PR) ; Ad viam inter vicum Sokol et dorsum Rožen dictum, June 1936, Deyl & Klášterský s.n. ( PR) ; MACEDONIA. [Novaci]: in mt. Dobro- Pole [Nidže mt.], 30 May 1919, Mrkvička s.n. ( PR) ; Nidže planina [mountain] ( Dobro polje), April–May 1917, Mrkvička s.n. ( PR) .

Protologue information:—“Habitat in montanis usque subalpinis (Sv. Naum 1700 m, Kalivia Vrisula 1500 m), solo calcareo. Area: E. Macedonia usque in Asiam Minorem.”.

Nomenclature:— Most of the specimens cited by Deyl in the protologue are deposited in his home institution (PR). As he considered the plants growing in Bulgaria, in the vicinity of Bačkovo and at Rožen, as the most typical, we here designate as lectotype the specimen collected by Deyl and Klášterský near the village of Bačkovo, in the “Červenata stena” biosphere reserve.

Taxonomy:— The original circumscription of this species was rather broad and unclear and Deyl himself was aware of this ( Deyl 1946: 101–102). He noted his new species could be easily distinguished from S. autumnalis and S. argentea , but in the case of S. latifolia and S. anatolica the distinction was quite difficult. In fact, the plants he considered as typical (from near Bačkovo and Rožen in Bulgaria) correspond to S. latifolia (N. Kuzmanović, pers. obs.), but the localities he cited from Asia Minor are the ones where S. alba is particularly abundant. Recent databases and checklists cite this name in synonymy of S. alba ( Valdés & Scholz 2009, Clayton et al. 2016). Study of the type material of S. pontica , as well as Deyl’s notes from the protologue ( Deyl 1946: 101–103), indicate that the material from Asia Minor cited in the protologue probably belongs not to S. pontica but to S. alb a. Therefore, it would be more accurate to consider S. pontica as a synonym of S. latifolia , but further molecular and morpho-anatomical studies are needed to confirm this.

Figures

FIGURE 3. Lectotype of the name Sesleria pontica (PR-830109).