Dianema corticatum Lister, Monogr.

Lado, Carlos & Basanta, Diana Wrigley De, 2018, Typification of the myxomycete taxa described by the Listers and preserved at the Natural History Museum, London (BM), Phytotaxa 341 (1), pp. 448-450 : 448-450

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.11646/phytotaxa.341.1.1
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/710DDF7F-FFA8-3D26-30A9-FEC3FB249BE4
treatment provided by	Felipe
scientific name	Dianema corticatum Lister, Monogr.
status

Treatment

Dianema corticatum Lister, Monogr. View in CoL mycetozoa, ed. 1, 205. 1894

— Lectotypus (designated here): NORWAY. Sande , 59º35’N 10º13’E, Sep 1894, A. Lister (three slides L:B.M.174!, one with a dry mount engraved 800, BM001089139 , the others engraved 801, BM001089141 , and engraved 802, BM001089140 ) GoogleMaps . Isolectotypus: NORWAY. Sande , 59º35’N 10º13’E, 19 Sep 1894, A. Lister ( BM 1538 !, BM001089890 ) GoogleMaps .

L:B.M.174 one dry mount engraved 800/ Dianema / corticatum List. / Sande, Norway / IX.1894 / leg. Lister. BM001089139 + 2 slides, engraved 801, BM001089141, and engraved 802, BM001089140. [BM] 1538 / Dianema corticatum Lister / Sande, Norway / leg. Lister 19 Sep. 1894 / BM001089890.

NOTES: Lister (1894: 225) noted “On rotten wood.– Norway (L:B.M.174)” and “This species was found in some abundance on rotten plants at Sande, Norway, September, 1894, in company with Licea flexuosa , to which it bears a strong resemblance under a pocket lens”. ”. In BM there are 3 slides (one is dry material mounted on a slide) labelled

L:B.M.174 which we designate as the lectotype. There is a box (BM 1538) from the same date and place which we consider to be a duplicate of the original material in the slide mount, and so it is an isolectotype. In notebook IX:

100–104 there are notes and illustrations of material with another number (Box 1256, 1257), from the same date and place, but they were not found in BM. The notes indicate that these samples were found “mixed with Licea flexuosa ”

as stated in the original description, and part of the illustrations are reproduced exactly in the publication of the species.

It is possible that the numbers were changed when the material was deposited at BM and that these are in fact what is now BM 1538 , but we can’t be sure. For this reason we chose the dry mount as the lectotype .