Crocus biflorus Mill. var. estriatus (Herb.) Tchich., Asie Min., Bot. 2: 520 (1860),

Roma-Marzio, Francesco, Harpke, Doerte & Peruzzi, Lorenzo, 2018, Rediscovery of Crocusbiflorusvar. estriatus (Iridaceae) and its taxonomic characterisation, Italian Botanist 6, pp. 23-30: 26-27

publication ID

persistent identifier

treatment provided by

Italian Botanist by Pensoft

scientific name

Crocus biflorus Mill. var. estriatus (Herb.) Tchich., Asie Min., Bot. 2: 520 (1860)


Crocus biflorus Mill. var. estriatus (Herb.) Tchich., Asie Min., Bot. 2: 520 (1860) 

≡ Crocus annulatus Herb. subvar. estriatus  Herb., Botanical Magazine 67: t. 3862. (1841)

Crocus annulatus Herb. var. estriatus  (Herb.) Herb., J. Hort. Soc. London 2: 286 (1847)

Crocus biflorus Mill. var. estriatus  (Herb.) Maw comb. superfl. Gard. Chron. 16: 749 (1881)


(here designated): Crocus pusillus  . Edward’s Bot. Reg., 23: plate 1987 [icon] (image available at: Epitype (here designated): Empoli (Firenze), sul Lungarno poco prima di giungere alla Tinaia provenendo da Empoli (WGS84: 43.734473 N, 10.964509 E), incolto con prevalenza di Dactylis glomerata  e Artemisia verlotiorum  , 27 m s.l.m., 28 January 2018, L. Peruzzi et F. Roma-Marzio (PI n° 011333; isoepitypes PI n° 011334; PI n° 011335; PI n° 011336. Image of epitype and isoepitypes are available at:

In the protologue, Herbert (1841) refers to an iconography of " Crocus pusillus  " published by Lindley (1837) and quotes two specimens: a first one collected in “Tiflim” (probably Tiflis, an old name for Tiblisi the capital of Georgia) in the Her barium of J.D. Hooker (1817-1911), and a second one from an unspecified eastern locality ("Spec. orientale") collected by P.S. Pallas (1741-1811) and preserved in the Herbarium of A.B. Lambert (1761-1842).

In all the investigated herbaria we did not find specimens recognisable as original material (Art. 9.3 of ICN, Turland et al. 2018), so that we selected as lectotype the illustration published by Lindley (1837), i.e. the only available original material. This illustration clearly shows cultivated plants with unstriped tepals, whose original provenance is indicated as "native of the southern parts of Italy" by Lindley (1837). Anyway, to avoid any possible ambiguity concerning the application of this name (Art. 9.8 of ICN), we also designated an epitype collected in Empoli, not far for Firenze, a locality explicitly cited in the protologue by Herbert (1841).