Malcolmia africana var. trichocarpa (Boiss. & Buhse) Boiss., Fl.

AL-Shehbaz, Ihsan A. & Barriera, Gabrielle, 2019, Typification of Edmond Boissier’s Cruciferae (Brassicaceae) names enumerated in Flora Orientalis, Boissiera 72, pp. 1-193 : 48-65

Malcolmia africana var. trichocarpa (Boiss. & Buhse) Boiss., Fl. Orient. 1: 223. 1867.

 Malcolmia trichocarpa Boiss. & Buhse in Nouv. Mém. Soc. Imp. Naturalistes Moscou 12: 21. 1860.

 Strigosella trichocarpa (Boiss. & Buhse) Botsch. in Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Leningrad) 57: 1038. 1972.

Type: “Wüstenebene bei Dschendak, 5 und 6 April 1849 (fructifera et florens). [Buhse] No 1265”.

Holotypus: IRAN: “In desserto prope Djendak”, 1847, Buhse 1265 ( G-BOIS [ G00790354 ]; iso-: LE [ LE01037309 ]) .

[Aucher-Eloy s.n.] [© Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, Paris]

[Pictures: A: O. Karabacak; B – C: B. Özüdoǧru]

Notes. – The unicate in G-BOIS does not have collection number nor the day or the month, the year is 1847 and printed, the locality in Boissier’s handwriting was later crossed out.

As in some other cases involving taxa (e.g., Alyssum muelleri , Lepidium intricatum ) that were collected by Buhse in 1849 and described jointly with Boissier ( BOISSIER & BUHSE, 1860), pre-printed 1847 labels were used by Boissier and to which he added some or all collection data. Therefore, the specimens of such collections in G-BOIS are considered duplicates of the same collections at LE that have the full and correct collection information in the protologues of those taxa.

In some of such cases the discrepancy in the labels in G-BOIS and LE is minimal, or in the case of M. trichocarpa they are substantial. Despite that, such labeling errors are not given any importance, just as in the numerous other cases that involved collections of other collectors throughout this work.

BOTSCHANTSEV (1972: 1039) listed the type at LE and gave the full locality data as in the protologue. Image of the LE01037309 duplicate and several of its close-ups were kindly sent by Dr. D. A. German, and it consists of two plants (upper half) mounted on the same sheet with Bunge’s collection of the same species from Shahrud, Persia. None of the collection or annotation labels of that duplicate has Boissier’s annotation, indicating that he did not examine it. Therefore, the duplicate in G-BOIS, on which alone Boissier drafted the species description, has to be recognized as the holotype .