(2844) Proposal to conserve the name Rubus tsangiorum against R. hatsushimae ( Rosaceae )

(2844) Rubus tsangiorum Hand.-Mazz., Symb. Sin. 7: 485. 28 Aug 1933 (‘tsangorum’), nom. cons. prop. Typus: China, Zhejiang (“Tschekiang”), Seton, Hsiadschu, 150–600 m, 1 Jun 1924, Ching 1723 (W!; isotypi: A barcodes 00040757! & 00139664!, US barcode 00095495!). (=) R. hatsushimae Koidz. in Acta Phytotax. Geobot. 1: 17. 20 Apr 1932 (‘hatsushimai’), rej. Japan, Kyushu (“Kyusiu”), Nagasaki (“Prov. Hizen”), Shimabara, Mt. Mayuyama, 1928, Hatsushima (KYO!). Hand.-Mazz. (Symb. 1933), a commonly occurring member of L. subg. Dalibardastrum Focke (in Biblioth. Bot. 17(72): 39. 1910), is widely distributed southeastern China (Lu Yu Yu, Fl. Reipubl. Popularis 37: 10–218. 1985; Lu Boufford Wu al., 9: 195–285. 2003). The name tsangiorum, the specific epithet which was named for two collectors, Wai-Tak Tsang and Uen-Kin Tsang, used dozens floras scientific papers. However, this species conspecific with type an earlier published name, 1932). binominal hatsushimae, honour collector type, S. (Hatusima), first validly by Gen’ichi Koidzumi (l.c.) collected from southern Japan. Since then, no additional plants have been found Japan except holotype one other collection same place (Naruhashi Iwatsuki Jap. 2b: 145–169. 2001 J. Phytogeogr. Taxon. 55: 103–106. 2007). In his consideration species, Naruhashi (l.c. 2007) thought that (mis-spelling it “tsangorus”) should be treated as synonym since they are has priority (Art. 11.4 Shenzhen Code, Turland al. Regnum Veg. 159. 2018). preparing taxonomic revision some after careful examinations comparisons, we further confirmed undoubtedly based upon morphological characteristics. This may accidentally spread to but stable populations formed there. Here propose conserve against because, its publication, mentioned only limited number works (e.g., Ohwi, Jap., rev. ed.: 532. 1965; Ohwi Kitagawa, New Jap.: 847. 1992; Naruhashi, l.c. 2007: 103), while much more frequently Wang, Iconogr. Cormophyt. Suppl. 2: 97. 1983; l.c.: 203; Zhang Lin, Fujianica 307. Zheng Wei He, 3: 214. 1993; Thompson HortScience 30: 1450, 1451. 1995 Ann. Missouri Gard. 84: 129, 141. 1997; Chen Wu, Guangdong 4: 210. 2000; Deighton Sci. Food Agric. 80: 1308, 1309, 1311. Finn Hort. 585: 113. 2002; Fu Hong, Higher Pl. 6: 641. 2003; Boufford, 278; Nie Lai, Jiangxi 986. 2004; Li, Guangxi 381. 2005; Wada Reed 782: 70, 73. 2008; Li Liu, Hunan 487. 2010; Deng Taxon 64: 394. 2015; Applequist 65: 169, 181. 2016; Wang Frontiers (Lausanne) 968. Sobczyk Hytönen Genomes Rosaceous Berries Wild Relatives: 17, 19. 2018; etc.). Google search “Rubus tsangiorum” hatsushimae” returned 561 174 hits on 30 December 2020, Scholar 7 2 results, respectively, them date. addition, now seems there might wild plant (Naruhashi, 2001), whereas very common China. Conserving would stabilize long-term, popular usage great benefit those who not yet familiar genus Rubus. X-HX, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7795-4863 BX, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3507-9321 X-FG, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5703-1639 work funded Second Tibetan Plateau Scientific Expedition Research program (Grant No. 2019QZKK05020107) Biodiversity Survey Assessment Project Ministry Ecology Environment, 2019HJ2096001006).