Plantago himalaica Pilger (1937: 62–63)
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/phytotaxa.336.1.4 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03F887DC-FF8D-FB66-FF42-165F186DF8D7 |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Plantago himalaica Pilger (1937: 62–63) |
status |
|
Plantago himalaica Pilger (1937: 62–63) View in CoL
≡ P. brachyphylla Edgew. ex Decaisne (1852: 696) View in CoL , nom. illeg., non P. brachyphylla Roemer & Schultes (1818: 136) View in CoL
≡ P.major var. brachyphylla Pilger (1922: 278) View in CoL , nom. nov. pro P. brachyphylla Edgew. ex Decne. View in CoL (see Arts. 6.11, 7.4 and 58.1) Type: —COUNTRY UNKNOWN. 1843, M.P. Edgeworth 482 (lectotype [designated by Pilger 1927: 1096] G-00148297! [ Figure 3 View FIGURE 3 ]).
Distribution: —Mountainous areas in northern India and Pakistan.
Notes: — Plantago himalaica is a new name for the illegitimate later homonym P. brachyphylla Edgew. ex Decne. , which was lectotypified by Pilger (1927: 1096). The lectotype, G-00148297 ( Figure 3 View FIGURE 3 ), has three specimens, all of which must have been seen by Decaisne, and can be identified as belonging to the same species. The specimen D. Royle s.n. (P-03531359) was also mentioned in the protologue ( Decaisne 1852: 696) and therefore is also original material for the name P. brachyphylla Edgew. ex Decne. ; this specimen was erroneously indicated as the “type” of P. himalaica by Kazmi (1974: 7).
Plantago himalaica is accepted in recent literature (e.g. Rahn 1996, Gupta et al. 2017, Sharma et al. 2017), although the taxonomic knowledge of it is still deficient. The only morphological character that reliably separates this species from the more western P. tatarica (see below) seems to be the hairiness of leaves and scapes. Future studies might indicate that these two entities are co-specific; in that case, the correct name for the species would be the older name, i.e. P. tatarica .
Plantago himalaica resembles dwarf specimens of P.major , but can be easily distinguished from the latter by the pilose leaves and scapes (that also distinguishes it from P. griffithii and P. tatarica ) and very short and dense spikes (that also distinguishes it from P. asiatica and P. griffithii ). I have been unable to examine mature seeds of P. himalaica , and there are no published morphological descriptions of mature seeds of this species that I know of. The number of ovules in P. himalaica , 6–7, is much lower than in P. major ( Pilger 1937) ; Kazmi (1974) reports the number of seeds to be up to six in P. himalaica . More studies are necessary to ascertain the distribution and conservation status of this species.
Selected additional specimens examined: —COUNTRY UNKNOWN. Kanawer inférieur, s.d., D. Royle s.n. (P-03531359); Himala, June 1835 [almost illegible], Anonymous s.n. (P-03531364). INDIA. UTTARAKHAND: Kumaon , 9000 feet, s.d., R. Strachey & J. E. Winterbottom 2 (P-03531363) .
R |
Departamento de Geologia, Universidad de Chile |
J |
University of the Witwatersrand |
E |
Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh |
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |
Plantago himalaica Pilger (1937: 62–63)
Hassemer, Gustavo 2018 |
Plantago himalaica
Pilger, R. K. F. 1937: ) |
P.major var. brachyphylla
Pilger, R. K. F. 1927: 1096 |
Pilger, R. K. F. 1922: ) |
P. brachyphylla Edgew. ex Decaisne (1852: 696)
Decaisne, J. 1852: ) |
Roemer, J. J. & Schultes, J. A. 1818: ) |