(2798) Proposal to conserve the name Cistus laevis ( Fumana laevis ) against C . pilosus ( Cistaceae )

(2798) Cistus laevis Cav., Icon. 2: 35. Apr–Nov 1793 [Angiosp.: Cist.], nom. cons. prop. Typus: [Spain, Valencia], “in montibus Enguerae et in Collado de Bocayrente”, 30 Jul 1791, Cavanilles (MA barcode MA 475536 [2 right-hand and 2 left-hand fragments, excl. central fragment]). (=) pilosus L., Sp. Pl.: 528. 1 Mai 1753, rej. Lectotypus (hic designatus): Herb. Burser XXIV: 66 (UPS No. V-175838). The family Cistaceae comprises 9 genera: Crocanthemum Spach, Fumana (Dunal) Halimium Helianthemum Mill., Hudsonia Lechea Kalm, Pakaraimaea Maguire & P.S. Ashton, Tuberaria about 180 species distributed the temperate, subtropical, tropical regions of Northern Hemisphere. genus is one most diverse least-studied genera family, comprising 21 recognized with high morphological diversity (Arrington Kubitzki Bayer, Fam. Gen. Vasc. Pl. 5: 62–70. 2003; APG-IV Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 181: 1–20. 2016; Heckenhauer al. 185: 1–26. 2017). Linnaeus (Sp. 1753) published name through a short diagnosis (“CISTUS suffruticosus stipulatus, foliis linearibus subtus bisulcatis incanis, calycibus laevibus”) cited from Sauvages (Meth. Fol.: 147. 1751), listed two synonyms: “ChamaeCistus thymi incanis” Bauhin (Pinax: 466. 1623) 4” Clusius (Rar. Hist. 1: 74. 1601). In protologue, varieties were also recognised: “β stipulis quaternis, lineari-ovalibus tomentosis” (l.c.: 148) followed by synonym “Helianthemum flore albo, folio angusto hirsuto” Cherler (Hist. 17. 1651), “γ villosis lanceolatis, axillis foliosis, subulatis” quoted 148), s.[sive] humilis, sampsuci, capitulis valde hirsutis” (l.c. 20). protologue included geographical provenance as “Habitat Monspelii.” provided comment “Hae tres α. β. γ. vel varietates affines: certiora determinent autoptae.” Concerning identity pilosus, this has been misunderstood (see, e.g., López González Anales Jard. Madrid 50: 40, 45. 1990; Jarvis, Order out Chaos: 421. 2007). Sampaio (in Bol. Brot., sér. 2, 7: 132. 1931) stated that correct for Linnaeus's plant violaceum (Cav.) Pers. (see l.c.), 1990: 45) argued pilosum Mill. not based on C. making H. (L.) later homonym Miller's name, an argument contrary to Proctor Heywood Tutin al., Fl. Eur. 288. 1968) Greuter Med-Checklist 1. 1984) since they consider new names Miller are combinations all those cases where epithets coincide. On other hand, according Jarvis (l.c.), at least some original material identifiable belonging Fumana. Jafri El-Gadi, Libya 48: 22. 1977) indicated sheet 689.55 (LINN; image: http://linnean-online.org/6475/) type pilosus. However, pointed collection lacks relevant Species plantarum number case “25”); thus, specimen was post-1753 addition herbarium therefore material. So typified González, l.c. l.c.). A reference (l.c.) illustration, “Chamaecistus IIII”, can be considered used describe This drawing illustrates complete plant, opposite leaves, flowers fruits (image available http://www.plantillustrations.org/illustration.php?id_illustration=237597). illustration identified Pau Esp. Nat. 209. 1901), Cav. (Icon. 1793). addition, there preserved UPS-BURSER contains additional name: 66. bears plants same species, both leaves flowers. label annotated Thymi incanis / Baun. Gallia. 66”. It F. laevis. I have unable locate any further Linnaean or Linnaean-linked herbaria. Therefore, only elements eligible lectotypification, UPS, designate above V-175838) lectotype shows important diagnostic characters, as, unequally spaced stem, abruptly reduced form small bracts inflorescence, opposite, linear linear-lanceolate, mucronate, strongly revolute margins, stipulate; inflorescence 3- 9-flowered, pedicels much longer than subtending bracts. As already noted, matches traditional concept taxon Cavanilles, l.c.: 35, t. 145, fig. 1; Willkomm, Prodr. Hispan. 3: 744. 1880; Grosser Engler, Pflanzenr. 14: 130. 1903) now under Molero Rovira Candollea 42: 524. 1987; Bolòs Vigo, Països Catalans 217. 1989; Güemes Castroviejo Iber. 434. 1993; Árbol. Arbust. Peníns. Ibér. 455–456. 2001; Mateo Valentina 243. 2013; Crespo, Claves Ilustr. Valenciana: 126. 2014). applies widely Mediterranean, growing warm, low-altitude coasts (0–800 m), relatively deep soils Grosser, l.c.; Rovira, Güemes, Tison France Médit.: 974. first attempt lectotypify 528), who 475536) no specifications. Muñoz-Garmendia Taxon 53: 1060. 2004), heterogeneous more gathering, another lectotypification required. These authors designated fragments except http://161.111.171.57/herbarioV/visorVCat.php?img=MA-01-00475536). For purpose nomenclatural stability, propose conservation against L. Art. 14.1 ICN (Turland Regnum Veg. 159. 2018). Rejection proposal would undesirable consequence because heterotypic unknown ignored well-known laevis, large works, need replaced currently non-existent combination, “Fumana pilosa”. An alternative solution, outright rejection 56, pursued, so if conserved over it, basionym still should it ever require segregation Although current knowledge taxa conspecific, little known, in-depth taxonomic study needed entire western Mediterranean area. France, locality distant (for genus) locus (Valencia Province, Spain), sites present different environmental ecological conditions. PPFG, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7595-9302 Thanks Mats Hjertson (UPS, Museum Evolution, Botany Section, Uppsala University, Sweden) images sheets. Dr. John Wiersema McNeill their advice, assistance, valuable comments improved proposal.