Ferrer-Gallego, P., R. Roselló, J. Gómez & J. B. Peris (2012). Revised lectotypification of Teucrium gnaphalodes L'Hér. (Lamiaceae). Candollea 67: 37–40. In English, English and French abstracts.
The original material of Teucrium gnaphalodes L'Hér. (Lamiaceae) comprises a mixture of different taxa. One element is selected and lectotypified in order to clarify the application of this binomial.
Introduction
The taxonomic and nomenclature difficulties of the genus Teucrium L. (Lamiaceae) are well known within the botany studies, which has led in some cases to a high degree of confusion and interpretation for some species throughout history, especially for those belonging to the complex sect. Polium (Mill.) Schreb.
L'Héritier (1788: 84) described Teucrium gnaphalodes for “Hispaniâ” with material collected by M. H. Vahl “In Hispaniâ legebat & communicabat semina celeb. Bot. Prof. Martinus Vahl, e quibus nonnullas obtinui plantas” and referenced as synonymous with a plant from Clusius (1601: 362) “Polium montanum 5. purpureo flore”, and plant and icon from Barrelier (1714: 35–36, tab. 1083): “Polium montanum, gnaphalodes, incisum, flore rubro, supinum”.
Vahl (1790: 41) two years after the publication of the species by L'Héritier, as well as including the references to Clusius's descriptions and Barrelier's descriptions and icon, indicates the synonymy with the plant of L'Héritier, but adding as geographic indication “circa Siguntiam & Guadalaxaram in Hispania collegi, locis montanis” town that was later cited by Willkomm & Lange (1870: 480).
Revised lectotypification
After studying Vahl's own collected material which is kept in G-DC (fig. 1), we have observed that the specimen was composed of five fragments which contain heterogeneous material, collected by different authors, and probably from different origins.
Of the different fragments included in the sheet, two of them are marked by either labels with their corresponding identifications. One of them belongs to a M. H. Vahl's collection, and the other one has a handwritten label of J.-M. L. Dufour.
The fragment located at the left bottom of the sheet has G00210216 herbarium code and belongs to a collection made by Vahl, in which there is a handwritten label by the same author, which reads “Teucrium gnaphalodes / hispaniâ” referring to the place of origin and then he adds the plant identification under Barrelier's plant and icon, and Clusius's one plants “Teucrium gnaphalodes / Polium montanum gnaphalodes / incanum flore rubro supinum / Barrl. 338. tab.. 1083 / Polium montanum V purpureo flore / Clus. hist. 362”.
The fragment located at the right of the Vahl's fragment whith G00210215 herbarium code was picked up in Spain in 1818 and catalogued as “Teucrium polium fl. blanchâtres” (sic).
The three other remaining fragments that make up the sheet, correspond to anonymous fragments of unknown origin. One of them (the upper left fragment G00210218) belongs to a erect or ascending plant, with branched inflorescence and small flowers. This plant is identified in the sheet as “Teucrium cymosum”. This plant corresponds to T. cymosum Pers. [= T. capitatum L. × T. gnaphalodes L'Hér. for Vicioso (1946: 67) and T. × conquense Mateo & Crespo for Navarro (1995: 251)].
Another one plant fragment with G00210217 herbarium code is identified as “Teucrium pseudohyssopus?”. This plant fragment in the center of the sheet belongs to known classical morphology from T. gnaphalodes but with branched inflorescence, character unusual in this species.
The upper right fragment is very similar to G00210217, but may also correspond to the Vahl's fragment. This fifth fragment did not has any label or herbarium code.
The original fragment recolected by Vahl (G00210216) is the only material that concurs with the description of species referenced by L'Héritier and Vahl. According to our interpretation, this fragment was probably used by L'Héritier to describe his species. L'Héritier includes in his description the same geographical location that accompanies the label of the Vahl's original fragment. However, he does not specify more information about the geographical location, unlike of recorded by Vahl (1790: 41) in his publication. We believe that the classification carried out by Navarro & Rosúa (1990: 584) and Navarro (1995: 219) indicating as lectotype the “only specimen in the sheet” does not meet the Art. 9.9 and 9.17(c) of McNeill & al. (2006) due to heterogeneous mixture of material that exists within the specimen. Several fragments included in the sheet belong to other taxa and not strictly to this taxon in the sense intended by L'Héritier. Therefore the fragment of Vahl should be considered as the one upon which we lectotypifie L'Héritier's species. Following the Recommendations 9A.2 and 9A.3 and according to Art. 9.9 and 9.12, the lectotype should be designated as the fragment in the specimen which best suits the original diagnosis of the taxon, without being contradicted by it, as it happens to some fragments included in the herbarium sheet.
Teucrium gnaphalodes L'Hér., Stirp. Nov.: 84. 1788 (Fig. 1).
Lectotypus (designated here): SPAIN: “Teucrium gnapha — lodes / Polium montanum gnaphalodes / incanum flore rubro supinum / Barrl. 338. ic. 1083. / Polium montanum V purpureo flore / Clus. hist. 362”, Vahl s.n. (G-DC [G00210216]!).
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the cooperation of curators of G herbarium for searching the herbarium material and for providing me the illustration of the fig. 1. We are grateful to Dr Jaime Gúemes for his help in this paper. Thanks are to Raúl Ferrer, Esther Miedes and Miguel Llop for their linguistic help and to Dr Teresa Navarro for his comments.
