Iris edomensis Sealy (1950: 561)

Boltenkov, Eugeny V. & Govaerts, Rafaël, 2017, Typification of names and nomenclatural notes on juno irises (Iridaceae) from Western Asia, Western Europe, and North Africa, Phytotaxa 303 (2), pp. 125-140 : 129-131

8. Iris edomensis Sealy (1950: 561)

≡ Juno edomensis (Sealy) Soják (1982: 138)

Protologue citation:—“ Transjordan. Edom : E. side of Mt. Hor (above Petra ), on sandstone, 18 April 1945, P. H. Davis 8596; above Ein Musa (near Petra ), 4000–4500 feet, 19 April 1945, P. H. Davis 8834; pass between Petra and Mt. Hor, on limestone, 27 April 1945, P. H. Davis 9199; near Shobek , 2[1] April 1945, P. H. Davis 8813. Cult. in horto Anleyensi 12 March 1946 e bulbo a P. H. Davisio lecto (typus in Herb. Kew)” .

Type (lectotype, designated here):— JORDAN. [Ma’an Governorate], Transjordan, Edom, pass between Petra and Mt. Hor, in Artemisia herba-alba —Poa sinaica assoc., on limestone, [fr.], 27 April 1945, P. H. Davis 9199 ( K 00318263!).

Syntypes:— JORDAN. [Ma’an Governorate], Transjordan, Edom, above Ein Musa (near Petra ), in Artemisia herba-alba — Poa sinaica assoc., 4000–4500 ft., [fr.], 19 April 1945, P. H. Davis 8834 ( K00318264 !, K00318267 !) ; Transjordan, Edom, Mt. Hor (above Petra ), in the E. side, sandstone, [fr.], 18 April 1945, P. H. Davis 8596 ( K00318261 !) ; Transjordan, Edom, near Shobek , in Artemisia herba-alba assoc., [fr.], 21 April 1945, P. H. Davis 8813 ( K00318265 !) .

Notes:— Iris edomensis was described by Sealy (1950) based on the plants collected at the fruiting stage by P. H. Davis on Mount Hor in Edom (southern Jordan), and on the specimens at the flowering stage from Mrs. Gwendolyn Anley’s garden in Woking (Surrey, London), which had been grown from the bulbs collected by Davis in Transjordan in 1945. This plant was sent to Kew for identification in March 1946. The protologue description was composed using flowering cultivated plants and those collected by Davis at the fruiting stage. Sealy indicated the cultivated specimens as “typus” to be housed at K, but they are currently absent from the Kew collection, whereas Davis’s specimens are present there. The specimen accompanied by a label, on which Sealy handwrote “ P. Davis 9199. Iris edomensis Sealy ”, is designated here as lectotype. Sealy (1950: 561) noted that I. edomensis is closely related to I. persica . Mathew (2012: 239) suggested that I. edomensis is most probably related to I. postii . The results of molecular studies ( Ikinci et al. 2011, Mavrodiev et al. 2014) have shown that I. edomensis , I. persica , and I. postii form a subclade with other species, but the phylogenetic relationships between I. postii and I. edomensis / I. persica have remained unresolved. At the same time, I. edomensis and I. persica , which form a supported minor subclade ( Ikinci et al. 2011), proved to be close to each other genetically. However, the relationships of all these taxa need further study.

9. Iris eleonorae Holmboe (1908: 4)

= I. persica var. galatica ( Irving 1905: 203) Dykes (1912: 191)

Protologue citation:—“An the Armenian high level, flowering in April, 1878 [M. Holmboe]”.

Type (lectotype, designated here):— TURKEY. [Trabzon Province], Armeniske höislette (Mörkt purpurröde blomster), [fl.], April 1878, [ M. Holmboe] s.n. ( O 02014439).

Notes:— Iris eleonorae was described by Holmboe (1908) based on plants collected in 1878 by his father, M. Holmboe, in the Kop Dagh or Wawuk Dagh Mountains, western Armenia (currently, north-eastern Turkey). The specimen that contains one plant with a dark-blue flower is designated here as lectotype of I. eleonorae , since no evidence exists to accept it is the only specimen on which the description was made. The note in the label indicates that flowers are dark-violet (“mörkt purpurröde blomster”). Mathew (1984: 408, 1989: 149) placed I. eleonorae in synonymy of I. galatica Irving (1905: 203) . In fact, the Kew collection includes specimens similar to I. eleonorae under the name of I. stenophylla subsp. stenophylla , which can be considered a variety of I. persica ( Dykes 1912: 192) . These specimens were collected by A. Güner et al. in the provinces Karaman (12873), Konya (12879–12884), and Mersin (12859, 12863, 12865), Turkey, in March 2001. Thus, I. eleonorae refers to I. persica and is one of its numerous colour varieties.

10. Iris galatica Irving (1905: 203)

≡ I. persica var. galatica (W.Irving) Dykes (1912: 191) ≡ Juno galatica (W.Irving) Rodionenko (1994: 105)

Protologue citation:—[ TURKEY] “… by the river Halys [Kizilirmak], in the mountainous regions of Galatia, in Northern Cappadocia”.

Type (lectotype, designated by Mathew 1984: 409 as “type”):—[Specimen from a cultivated plant collected originally in Turkey]. Iris galatica Siehe , fl. purp. violac. fol. albo-margin, in regione montana Galatiae Cappadoc. … ad. fluv. Halys, 1200–1600 m, [fl.], 1904, [Siehe] s.n. ( K 01045487!).

Notes:— Iris galatica was described by Irving (1905) based on specimens from plants collected by W. E. Siehe in Central Anatolia Region, south-central Turkey. It is probable that I. galatica was collected in Kayseri Region of Turkey. Siehe distributed bulbs of I. galatica in 1904 ( Irving 1905). Mathew (1984) indicated the specimen from a cultivated plant at the Kew collection as “type”. The information on the label was apparently handwritten by Siehe and supplemented by a handwritten comment “ = persica , forma”, made by W. R. Dykes. The lectotype specimen also contains a label with the printed note “Cult. in hort. bot. reg. Kew., a. 1905”, on which Dykes handwrote: “ Iris persica, Linn. , forma, 15 February ”. In the course of the present study it has been established that the author of the citation of I. galatica is not Siehe (1905: 115), but Irving (1905: 203), whose work was published a few months earlier (8 April 1905). Iris galatica is variable in colour of flowers, and can be considered a part of the variation range of I. persica . For this reason, Dykes (1912: 191) placed I. galatica as a variety of I. persica , a solution that is provisionally accepted here. However, this assumption contradicts the results of the molecular analysis ( Ikinci et al. 2011, Mavrodiev et al. 2014), a further studies are needed to establish the systematic values of this taxon.

11. Iris issica Siehe (1905: 115)

≡ I. persica var. issica (Siehe) Dykes (1912: 191) ≡ Juno issica (Siehe) Kamelin (1973: 252)

Protologue citation:—“Selten in Ostcilicien, Berge bei Issus”.

Type (neotype, designated here):— TURKEY. [Adana Province], Berge provischen Issus, u. Missis, Cilicia, [fl.], February 1912, W. Siehe s.n. ( E 00332991!).

Notes:— Iris issica was described by Siehe (1905) based on plants collected in the mountains near Issus, Hatay Province, south-central Turkey. Siehe sent duplicates of his gatherings to several European herbaria ( Baytop 2010: 201). However, no original material of I. issica was found at BM, E, GB, JE, K, W, or WU. The original material for that name was probably destroyed during the World War II. Hayek (1914: 180) cited the exsiccatum of I. issica , collected by Siehe in the southern coastal region of Asia Minor (Cilicia) in 1912. A specimen of this exsiccatum was found at E and is designated here as neotype of I. issica . As indicated in the protologue ( Siehe 1905), I. issica resembles I. bolleana but it is distinguished by its bright straw-yellow flowers without pattern and leaves that lack the white edging along margins.