Cnidoscolus urens

Maya-Lastra, Carlos A. & Steinmann, Victor W., 2018, A Nomenclator of Cnidoscolus (Euphorbiaceae), Phytotaxa 346 (1), pp. 1-30 : 21-22

94. Cnidoscolus urens (L.) Arthur, Torreya 21: 11 (1921).— Cnidoscolus urens subsp. urens — Jatropha urens L., Sp.

Pl. 2: 1007 (1753).— Cnidoscolus quinquelobus Pohl, Pl. Bras. Icon. Descr. 1: 63 (1827), nom. illeg. superfl.— Bivonea urens (L.) Arthur, Torreya 22: 30 (1922). Type:— BRAZIL. America calidiori, in Brasilia & c., without date, without collector s.n. (lectotype LINN 1141.13!, designated by Wijnands (1983)).

Cnidoscolus marcgravii Pohl, Pl. Bras. Icon. Descr. 1: 58 (1827).— Jatropha urens var. marcgravii (Pohl) Müll.Arg. in DC., Prodr. 15(2): 1101 (1866). Type :— BRAZIL. Rio de Janeiro: without locality, without date, H.W. Schott 4108 (lectotype W-0060512!, designated here; isolectotype BR-583961!).

Cnidoscolus osteocarpus Pohl, Pl. Bras. Icon. Descr. 1: 63 (1827).— Jatropha osteocarpa Pohl, Pl. Bras. Icon. Descr. 1: 63 (1827).— Jatropha urens var. [as β] marcgravii f. osteocarpa Müll.Arg. in DC., Prodr. 15(2): 1101 (1866).— Jatropha urens var. osteocarpa Müll.Arg., Fl. Bras. 11(2): 500 (1874). Type:— BRAZIL. Minas Gerais: Prope Arrayal S. Miguel ad Rio Jequitinhonha, without date, H.W. Schott 4107 (holotype W!).

Jatropha urens var. brachyloba Müll.Arg., Fl. Bras. 11(2): 500 (1874). Type:— BRAZIL. Without locality, without date, C.F.P. von Martius s.n. (holotype G-00434339!).

Cnidoscolus loefgrenii (Pax & K.Hoffm.) Pax & K.Hoffm., Nat. Pflanzenfam. ed. 2, 19c: 166 (1931).— Jatropha loefgrenii Pax & K.Hoffm., Pflanzenr. IV. 147. I (Heft 42): 107 (1910).— Cnidoscolus loefgrenii (Pax & K.Hoffm.) Pax & K.Hoffm. ex Fern.Casas, Fontqueria 55: 72 (2002), comb. superfl. (see under C. acrandrus for discussion). Type:— BRAZIL. São Paulo: Araraquara, 20 March 1899, A. Löfgren 4300 (holotype SP-002773!).

Cnidoscolus neglectus Pohl, Pl. Bras. Icon. Descr. 1: 60 (1827).— Jatropha urens var. neglecta (Pohl) Müll.Arg., Fl. Bras. 11(2): 501 (1874).— Cnidoscolus urens var. neglectus (Pohl) Lourteig, Ark. Bot. 3(5): 85 (1955). Type:— BRAZIL. Goiás: Provinciae Goyas prope Villa Boa s. Goyas, without date, J.B.E. Pohl 3918 (holotype W!).

Cnidoscolus tubulosus var. trilobus (Müll.Arg.) Lourteig & O´Donell, Lilloa 9: 113 (1943).— Jatropha tubulosa var. triloba Müll.Arg., Linnaea 34: 212 (1865); syn. nov. Type :— PERU. without locality, without date, H. Ruíz & J. A. Pavón s.n. (lectotype G-00434340!, designated here; isolectotype BM-000820445!). See justification about synonymization under Cnidoscolus tubulosus . When describing this variety, Müller cited two duplicates of a Pavón specimen: “hb. Pavon, hb. Ruiz.” The only duplicate that we have seen is the one from the Pavón herbarium, now at G .

Cnidoscolus vitifolius var. repandus Griseb., Abh. Königl. Ges. Wiss. Göttingen 24: 53 (1879).— Jatropha vitifolia var. repanda (Griseb.) Pax, Pflanzenr. IV. 147. I (Heft 42): 88 (1910); syn. nov. Type:— ARGENTINA. Salta: Andines Gebiet: Nordwestargentinien , Salta, am Juramento , 16–20 February 1873, P. G. Lorentz & G. Hieronymus 329 (holotype GOET-009564!; isotypes CORD-00005952!, F-V0056816 F!, GOET-009565!) .

Distribution:— Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, French Guiana, Guatemala, Guyana, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Venezuela.

Notes:— Webster & Huft (1988) suggested that the holotype is in the Hortus Cliffortianus Herbarium, but according to The Linnaean Plant Name Typification Project ( Jarvis 1992) the type is LINN 1141.13. The lectotype was chosen by Wijnands (1983), but it does not correspond to the circumscription of the species as it has been interpreted for more than two hundred years. In order for this name to continue to be used as it has been traditionally done, it will have to be conserved with a new type, and we are preparing a proposal to do so. In Herbarium Cliffortianum (BM-000647405) there is a specimen that does represent the current concept of this species and could serve as nomenclatural type. Despite the fact that C. loefgrenii is treated in the last checklist of the Brazilian flora as a synonym of Cnidoscolus urens var. neglectus ( Cordeiro & Secco 2015) , Melo & Sales (2008) suggest it as being distinct. They mention that C. loefgrenii differs from C. urens by the pistillate perianth, which has fused tepals as opposed to the free tepals of C. urens . Further study of C. urens across its wide range would be beneficial for resolving this problem and for better understanding the variation within this taxon.

94.1. Cnidoscolus urens subsp. adenophilus (Pax & K.Hoffm.) Breckon, Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 75: 1114 (1988).— Jatropha adenophila Pax & K.Hoffm., Pflanzenr. IV. 147. VII (Heft 63): 400 (1914).— Cnidoscolus adenophilus (Pax & K.Hoffm.) Pax & K.Hoffm., Nat. Pflanzenfam. ed. 2, 19c: 166 (1931). Type:— PANAMA. Panamá: Chepo, October 1911, H. Pittier 4740 (holotype US-00027209!).

Distribution:— Panama.