taxonID	type	description	language	source
03C987890241FFEEFCE2D893FDA9F8F9.taxon	description	Notes: Lagasca (1816 a) described Physalis parviflora Lag. based on the plants cultivated in the Botanical Garden of Madrid in the year 1815 from the seeds procured most likely from Mexico (Nova Hispania). The name was illegitimate being a later homonym of P. parviflora R. Br. Subsequently, the replacement name Physalis lagascae Roem. & Schult. was published by Roemer and Schultes (1819). Here the type of Physalis lagascae would be that of Physalis parviflora (see Art. 7.4, Ex. 4, Turland et al., 2018). In the absence of any specimen cited in the protologue of Physalis parviflora, it is necessary to designate a nomenclatural type to stabilize the precise application of the name from the specimens seen and annotated by Lagasca while describing P. parviflora. After the publication of Physalis parviflora, during his flight from Madrid to Gibraltar, Lagasca’s original herbarium was destroyed in the year 1822 (Stafleu & Cowan, 1979). However, the original Stafleu and Cowan (1981), the herbarium and types of Meyer are housed at LE, and two relevant sheets (LE 01015985, LE 01015986) were traced, bearing collection number 148. These two specimens, though were not cited in the protologue, most likely were used / studied by C. A. Meyer while describing T. monantha. Both specimens can be considered as uncited original material under Art. 9.4 of the Shenzhen Code (Turland et al., 2018). Among them, the specimen (LE 01015985) bears an annotation (dated 17.04.1986) by E. Small as T. monantha C. A. Mey. with a note “ presumably the holotype unless there is another specimen so designated at LE, in which case this is an isotype ” which is inconsistent with the provisions of article 9.1 of the Shenzhen Code (Turland et al., l. c.). In the absence of the holotype, the specimen (LE 01015986) is designated here as the lectotype.	en	P. V., Kale, Abstract, R. D. Shinde, L., Medicago, L., Physalis (2023): Typification of Medicago monantha (Fabaceae) and Physalis lagascae (Solanaceae). Rheedea 33 (3): 217-219, DOI: 10.22244/rheedea.2023.33.03.10, URL: https://doi.org/10.22244/rheedea.2023.33.03.10
03C987890240FFEDFF52DA30FD20FB86.taxon	description	Two specimens (Acc. nos. 237723, 237731), each bearing an annotation as P. parviflora in Lagasca’s handwriting (Burdet, 1976) could be traced at MA. Though these two specimens are without any collection details, the collection locality (ex Hortus Regius Matritensis meaning from the Royal Garden of Madrid) in Lagasca’s handwriting (Burdet, 1976) on the herbarium specimen with Acc. no. 237731 and the reference to P. parviflora in the Lagasca’s List (1816 b) prefixed by “ * ” and suffixed by H. R. M. indicate that live plants were cultivated in the Botanical Garden of Madrid and were available to Lagasca while describing P. parviflora. This specimen is more consistent with the protologue in having an apparently sprawling- procumbent habit, divaricate branching, weak, ridged branches, and ovate- obovate leaves with oblique bases and could be considered as its original material. Hence, the specimen with Acc. No. 237731 is selected here as the lectotype of P. lagascae under Art. 9.4 of the Shenzhen Code (Turland et al., 2018). The specimen with Acc. no. 237723 without any collection locality is more allied to P. pruinosa L. and has an apparently erect habit with glandular- hairy aerial parts and more or less circular leaves.	en	P. V., Kale, Abstract, R. D. Shinde, L., Medicago, L., Physalis (2023): Typification of Medicago monantha (Fabaceae) and Physalis lagascae (Solanaceae). Rheedea 33 (3): 217-219, DOI: 10.22244/rheedea.2023.33.03.10, URL: https://doi.org/10.22244/rheedea.2023.33.03.10
