Conyza intermedia Lagasca (1816: 28)

Montes-Moreno, Noemí, Garcia-Jacas, Núria, Nualart, Neus, Susanna, Alfonso & Sáez, Llorenç, 2018, Typification of plant names referable to Phagnalon (Compositae) with some taxonomic notes, Phytotaxa 360 (1), pp. 1-18 : 2-3

Conyza intermedia Lagasca (1816: 28)

≡ Phagnalon lagascae Cassini (1819: 174) , nom. illeg.

≡ Phagnalon saxatile var. intermedium (Lag.) Candolle (1836: 396)

≡ Phagnalon saxatile f. lagascae Rouy (1903: 164)

≡ Phagnalon saxatile var. lagascae (Rouy) Merino (1906: 347) , comb. superfl.

≡ Phagnalon saxatile subsp. intermedium (Lag.) Rivas Mart. in Rivas Martínez et al. (2002: 705)

≡ Phagnalon × intermedium (Lag.) Pau (1931: 51) [ Ph. rupestre (L.) DC. × Ph. saxatile (L.) Cass.]

Type:—[ SPAIN.] Murcia, Portman, November 1972, Calonge, Gómez & Valdés (neotype: MA number MA 441443!, designated here).

Notes:—The locality indicated in the original description was as follows: “Loca arida sterilia, et saxorum calcareorum rimas incolit, circa Orcelim, Murciam urbem, alibique in Hispania meridionali”. Its intermediate morphology to Ph. rupestre and Ph. saxatile was indicated in the protologue. Following a detailed search, we failed to find any specimen from the original gathering in any institution. According to Stafleu & Cowan (1976 –1988), the original herbarium of Lagasca was destroyed. Therefore, we selected as neotype another specimen corresponding morphologically with the protologue, and collected from the Murcia area. The selected neotype was morphologically intermediate between Ph. rupestre and Ph. saxatile . This intermediate specimen has linear to lanceolate leaves like those of Ph. saxatile , with the outermost and middle involucral bracts wider and obtuse, similar to those of Ph. rupestre , but frequently with undulate margins, like those of Ph. saxatile .

Conyza pumila Smith (1813: 173) , nom. illeg. non Lam. ex Persoon (1807: 427) ≡ Conyza pygmaea Sieber (1823: 322) ≡ Phagnalon pumilum Candolle (1836: 397) , nom. illeg. ≡ Phagnalon pygmaeum (Sieber) Greuter (1975: 23) Type:—[ GREECE.] Sibthorp s.n. (lectotype: Sib-2049, three upper plants [digital image!], designated here). (Image available at: https://herbaria.plants.ox.ac.uk/bol/sibthorpherbarium/record/details/0e05d115-5e6d-4a48-a6a4-18dbf60b0f78). Epitype:—[ GREECE.] In summ. M. Spak, Creta, s.d., Sieber s.n. ( K barcode K 001040207!, designated here; isoepitypes: K barcode

K 00910420!, BR barcode BR 00005491223 [digital image!], M barcode M 0029838 [digital image!], GOET barcode GOET 001889

[digital image!], HAL barcode HAL 0112808 [digital image!], P barcode P 2829198 (left specimen) [digital image!]). (Image available at: http://plants.jstor.org/stable/viewer/10.5555/al.ap.specimen.k001040207).

Notes:—In the protologue, the locality was indicated as: “In cacumine montium Sphacioticorum Cretae”. The main collection of Sibthorp types is deposited at OXF herbarium according to Stafleu & Cowan (1976 –1988) but the original material is a mixture of Ph. pygmaeum (three upper plants) and Ph. rupestre subsp. rupestre (lower plant). Therefore, we chose as the lectotype the three upper specimens that morphologically agree with the original description collected by the author. Moreover, as these three upper specimens do not have capitula, an epitype is here designated in order to avoid any ambiguity coming from the taxonomic interpretation of the lectotype, following Art. 9.8 of the ICN ( McNeill et al. 2012).