(2804) Proposal to reject the name <i>Ephedra major</i> ( <i>Ephedraceae</i> )

(2804) Ephedra major Host, Fl. Austriac. 2: 671. 1831 [Gymnosp.: Ephedr.], nom. utique rej. prop. Typus: non designatus. The name Host (Fl. 1831) is currently applied by several authors to a mostly Mediterranean taxon (e.g., Widder in Phyton (Horn) 1: 71–75. 1948; Maire, Afrique N. 10–11. 1952; Coode & Cullen Davis, Turkey 85. 1965; Blečić Horvatić, Analitička Jugoslavije: 178–179. 1967; Riedl Sci. Pharm. 35: 225–228. Jalas Suominen, Atlas Europ. 40. 1973; Christensen, Mountain Greece: 49–50. 1986; Freitag Maier-Stolte Tutin al., Eur., ed. 2, 49. 1993; Price Int. J. Pl. (Suppl.) 157: S40–S49. 1996). same otherwise widely known as E. nebrodensis Tineo ex Guss. Sicul. Syn. 638. 1844) Bertoloni, Ital. 10: 392–395. 1855; Parlatore, 4: 100–108. 1867; Stapf Denkschr. Kaiserl. Akad. Wiss. Wien, Math.-Naturwiss. Kl. 56: 77–79. 1889; Amaral Franco Castrovejo Iber. 191–195. Christensen Strid Tan, Hellenica 15–17. 1997; Nouviant Bull. Murith. Soc. Valais. Nat. 116: 69–80. 1999 [“1998”]; El Oualidi Mathez Trav. Inst. Univ. Mohammed V, Sér. Bot. 36: 65. 1999; Achhal Valdés Cat. Vasc. Maroc 76. 2002; Arrigoni, Sardegna 174. 2006; Le Floc'h Tunisie: 66–67. 2010; Dimopoulos al. Englera 31: 42. 2013; Pignatti, Ital., 92. 2017). Indeed, according Greuter (Med-Checkl. 29. 1984), should be considered nomen ambiguum, although probably synonym of campylopoda C.A. Mey. (in Cl. Phys.-Math. Acad. Imp. Saint-Pétersbourg 5: 34. 1845). Note that foeminea Forssk. Aegypt.-Arab.: 219. 1775) the accepted for POWO (http://www.plantsoftheworldonline.org/, accessed 2 Jan 2020), but itself (l.c. 1997), (l.c.), and (l.c.). This confusion explicable on account lack an established type major. In protologue, (l.c.) cited polynomial Clusius [L'Écluse] (Rar. Hist.: 91. 1601), i.e., “Polygonum quartum Plinii majus”, which accompanied illustration (which original material), specimen Portenschlag collected “In Dalmatiae montibus”, thus syntype with priority lectotypification purposes (Art. 9.12 ICN, Turland Regnum Veg. 159. 2018). As did not indicate single herbarium, his “syntype” must refer entire gathering 9.6 ICN). Therefore, “type” indication (l.c.; “Type: Dalmatian mountains, Portenschlag”) does add any further element effective typification. Linzer Biol. Beitr. 25: 649–655. 1993) first, even if only implicitly, limited formerly kept at W. Unfortunately, himself 1993), was destroyed during World War II; more importantly, he formally it (lost) lectotype. located W (available online at: http://jacq.nhm-wien.ac.at/djatoka/jacq-viewer/viewer.html?rft_id=w_19590007465), also Portenschlag, material, Riedl, therefore, proposed neotype. proposal conflict Art. which, absence other imposes choice obligate cannot avoided exclusion made unless formal conservation conserved were submitted under 14.1 ICN (cf. 57.1), something suggest. has been identified fragilis Desf. Atlant. 372. 1799), first Meyer Mém. Saint-Pétersbourg, 6, Math., Seconde Pt. 260. 1849) then 1993). identification appears reliable 1899 Reverchon (Nouviant, l.c.) locality indicated Vêlez el Rubio (Spain). shows branch male individual robust twigs crowded subsessile cones. These details allow illustrated plant being either two species occurring region. are distachya L. (Sp. Pl.: 1040. 1753), bears remotely spaced pedunculate cones, nebrodensis, characterized slender cones very small spaced. Besides, observed neotype Dalmatia, labelled “E. distachya” Kotschy. addition, another gathered Dalmatia sent P from Vienna Kotschy, him “Ephedra Host” (image available http://coldb.mnhn.fr/catalognumber/mnhn/p/p01582798). argued this could regarded definitive proof lacking. Maybe reason, once again refrained designating type. case, (although separate label fragilis”, Dalmatia). Further pertinent specimens searched us B, BP, FI, G, GJO, GZU, H, MW, P, PR, Stafleu Cowan 98: 339–340. 1979); none BP (N. Bauer, litt.), FI (C. Nepi, G (F. Stauffer, PR (O. Sida, while databases reveal any. requests herbaria receive response. conclusion, one hand, yet have designated lectotype; clear intended apply name. sure fragilis. If lectotype Host's name, would persistently used sense including major, 57.1 need applied. We might propose belonging nebrodensis. However, clarify confused nomenclatural history we instead its rejection 56.1. SB, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2568-7278 EDG, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9349-1328 grateful (Botanic Garden Botanic Museum, Freie Universität, Berlin) John McNeill (Royal Garden, Edinburgh, Scotland, U.K. Royal Ontario Toronto, Canada) useful suggestions editorial comments.