Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Artigo Produção Nacional Revisado por pares

BIBTEX RIS

(2830) Proposal to reject the name Stellaria intermedia ( Plantaginaceae )

2021; Wiley; Volume: 70; Issue: 4 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1002/tax.12551

1996-8175

Gustavo Hassemer, Richard V. Lansdown,

Mediterranean and Iberian flora and fauna

(2830) Stellaria intermedia F.H. Wigg., Prim. Fl. Holsat.: 2. 29 Mar 1780 [Angiosp.: Callitrich. / Plantagin.], nom. rej. prop. Typus: non designatus. Wiggers (Prim. Fl. Holsat. 1780) included species of a genus named Stellaria in two different parts of the publication. That under “DECANDRIA Trigynia” (Wiggers, l.c.: 34–35) corresponds to Stellaria L. (Caryophyllaceae), but the other, under “MONANDRIA Digynia” (Wiggers, l.c.: 1–2), reflects pre-Linnaean usage of Stellaria, formalised inadvertently by Séguier (Pl. Veron. 3: 144. 1754), for the genus that Linnaeus named Callitriche. Wiggers (l.c., Praemonita: [2]) stated that for the most part Linnaean names were used and his treatment of Stellaria Ség. (l.c.: 1–2) clearly reflects the taxonomic treatment of Callitriche first set out by Linnaeus (Fl. Suec., ed. 2: 2. 1755) and maintained in what was, in 1780, the most recent synthesis (Linnaeus, Syst. Veg., ed. 13: 51. 1774). Wiggers included Linnaeus's two Callitriche species, C. verna L. and C. autumnalis L. (Linnaeus, l.c. 1755) in his monandrous Stellaria (hence to be cited as S. verna (L.) F.H. Wigg. and S. autumnalis (L.) F.H. Wigg.), but also one new species, S. intermedia. [Although new names published in Wiggers (l.c.) are sometimes attributed to “Weber” (George Heinrich Weber, 1752–1828), we are following Stafleu & Cowan (in Regnum Veg. 116: 275–276. 1988) in attributing them to Wiggers himself.] Stellaria intermedia F.H. Wigg. (l.c.: 2) was published with a brief diagnosis: “foliis imis linearibus, superioribus ovalibus”. No information was given on provenance or habitat in the protologue, but the following was stated in the introduction to the work (Wiggers, l.c., Praemonita: [1]): “Exhibent hae Primitiae plantas per plures annos in Ducatibus Slesvicensi & Holsatico, nec non adjacentibus Terris Hamburgensi & Lubecensi lectas.” No specimens or illustrations were cited in the protologue, and no original material (specimens or illustrations) could be located for this name. Wiggers (l.c.: 2) also commented on the relationship of the three species listed above: “Quam intermediam [S. intermedia] vocavi, aut distincta species est, aut in unam omnes coalescunt” (That which I have called intermedia, is either a distinct species, or else all become one [species]). This doubt regarding the status of these three species does not disqualify Stellaria intermedia as a provisional name (Art. 36.1 of the ICN—Turland & al. in Regnum Veg. 159. 2018) as Wiggers was clearly accepting it as one of his numbered species; thus, the name S. intermedia was validly published. Also, it should be noted that species names described under an illegitimate genus name are nonetheless legitimate (Art. 55.1 of the ICN). The identity of Stellaria intermedia has never been adequately addressed or clarified. The epithet ‘intermedia’ was first combined in Callitriche by Hoffmann (Deutschl. Fl. 1: 2. 1791), whose publication, although not mentioning Wiggers or S. intermedia directly is, nevertheless, clearly a new combination based on Wiggers's name, i.e., C. intermedia (F.H. Wigg.) Hoffm. Hoffmann's diagnosis (“fol. superioribus ovalibus; caulinis linearibus, apice bifidis”) was no different from that of Wiggers (“foliis imis linearibus, superioribus ovalibus”) except that Hoffmann added the “apice bifidis” with respect to the cauline leaves. This diagnosis of C. intermedia by Hoffmann was exactly that which he had previously used for a new species, C. dubia Hoffm. (Observ. Bot.: 5. 1787), in the synonymy of which he had cited S. intermedia, making C. dubia superfluous and illegitimate. [Callitriche dubia Hoffm. is commonly cited from Roth (Tent. Fl. Germ. 1: 389. 1788), who merely accepted Hoffmann's publication of the name.] Hoffmann's (l.c. 1791) revised view was adopted by Hoppe (in Bot. Taschenb. Anfänger Wiss. Apothekerkunst 1792: 159–160. 1792), whose treatment was more explicit, citing both C. dubia and S. intermedia in the synonymy of C. intermedia. The name S. intermedia only saw a few mentions in the literature beyond those already discussed (e.g., Gmelin, Fl. Bad. 1: 5–6. 1806; Klett & Richter, Fl. Leipzig: 4–5. 1830; Steudel, Nomencl. Bot., ed. 2: 259–260. 1841; Kuntze, Revis. Gen. Pl. 3(3): 87. 1898, all as a synonym of C. intermedia or a more inclusive species), and was subsequently seemingly “forgotten” as the basionym of C. intermedia. [Not to be confused with Wiggers's species is the later homonym, S. intermedia Merino (Contr. Fl. Galicia: 30. 1897), generally considered a synonym of S. alsine Grimm (Caryophyllaceae).] On the other hand, Callitriche intermedia has seen extensive use (hundreds of publications), but has long been, and still is (e.g., Li & al. in Plants 8, e420. 2019), a source of confusion and misunderstanding. An important reason for this is that Hoffmann not only did not explicitly cite the basionym (i.e., Stellaria intermedia) but also included in the protologue reference to an illustration (“t. 1. fig. e”) in Schkuhr (Bot. Handb. 1: 6. 1791). Schkuhr, who only recognised C. verna and C. autumnalis, had considered this illustration to be of a branch of the latter. The widespread use of the name has been as “Callitriche intermedia Hoffm.”, i.e., without reference to the basionym, and has usually been either implicitly or explicitly based on the Schkuhr illustration. As a result, usage has most commonly corresponded to that of C. hamulata Kütz. ex W.D.J. Koch (Syn. Fl. Germ. Helv.: 246. 1837), which is often accepted as an infraspecific taxon of C. brutia Petagna (Inst. Bot. 2: 10. 1787). Whereas S. intermedia is absent from Plants of the World Online (http://powo.science.kew.org/taxon/urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:430007-1), “Callitriche intermedia Hoffm.” is given as a synonym of the later C. hamulata. Schotsman's consideration (in Acta Bot. Neerl. 3: 355, fig. 6. 1954) of the connection between the names Callitriche intermedia and C. hamulata is irrelevant to the application of Stellaria intermedia as it was predicated on the Schkuhr illustration being original material of C. intermedia, which it cannot be as it was published 11 years after S. intermedia, the basionym of C. intermedia. Similarly irrelevant is Lansdown's (in Watsonia 26: 111–114. 2006) citation of this figure as “type” of “C. intermedia Hoffm.” (which was in any case ineffective under Art. 7.11), and his associated epitype selection. It is clear, therefore, that only the protologue of Stellaria intermedia is relevant for determination of the application of the name. Given the very limited information that this protologue provides, the following seven taxa can be considered possible candidates for the identity of this name: Callitriche brutia, C. cophocarpa Sendtn. (Veg.-Verh. Bayer. Wald.: 230. 1860), C. hamulata, C. obtusangula Le Gall (Fl. Morbihan: 202, 822. 1852), C. palustris L. (Sp. Pl.: 969. 1753), C. platycarpa Kütz. (in Reichenbach, Iconogr. Bot. Pl. Crit. 9: 38–39. 1831) and C. ×vigens K. Martinsson (in Nordic J. Bot. 11: 151. 1991). All these species are recorded from northern Germany, and are capable of growing with lower leaves linear, the upper more ovoid and forming a rosette. Unfortunately, in the absence of original material, it is impossible to narrow this list down further, owing to the scant morphological information provided by Wiggers. All seven species names listed above, except Callitriche palustris, are posterior to Stellaria intermedia. However, considering that Wiggers (l.c.: 1–2) treated three species of Callitriche (under the generic name Stellaria), the other two (S. verna, S. autumnalis) being now recognised as synonyms of C. palustris and C. hermaphroditica L. (Cent. Pl.: 31. 1755), respectively, it is more likely, though not necessarily certain, that the name S. intermedia would refer to a different taxon and not either of these two. The name S. intermedia could possibly be neotypified with a specimen belonging to any of those seven taxa; such a typification would not be in conflict with its protologue, and thus would need to be accepted. If the specimen in question belonged to any species other than C. palustris, the name C. intermedia would then become the correct name for that species, which would be extremely disruptive to nomenclatural stability. It is clear that Stellaria intermedia should be considered a potentially disruptive name. Thus, with the objective of preventing a nomenclatural change that would be evidently disadvantageous to nomenclatural stability, and in accordance with Art. 56 of the ICN, the name S. intermedia is here proposed for rejection. It will remain impossible to ascertain Wiggers's intended identity for this name, and we consider it more appropriate to have this name rejected than arbitrarily to propose its neotypification by an element identifiable as the earlier Callitriche palustris. Acceptance of this proposal would neutralise the threat posed by the name Callitriche intermedia to a number of well-established, unequivocal names of European species of Callitriche. Rejection of this proposal would mean that the name C. intermedia could eventually come to replace some well-established, unequivocal name of a European species of Callitriche. GH, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4365-6934 RVL, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0984-4552 We are grateful to Olof Ryding (Københavns Universitet) for providing critical literature for this work, and to John McNeill (Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh) for greatly improving this proposal.