taxonID	type	description	language	source
03AC0268C365D543FFC6FF349BD0FAD7.taxon	description	Hibiscus sect. Furcaria DC., Prodr. 1: 449 (1824); Furcaria (DC.) Kostel., Allg. Med. - Pharm. Fl. 5: 1856 (1836), nom. illeg., non Desv. (1827), nec Boivin ex Baill. (1858). Type: Hibiscus furcellatus Desr., designated by T. H. Kearney, Amer. Midl. Naturalist 46: 109 (1951) [= Sabdariffa furcellata (Desr.) M. M. Hanes & R. L. Barrett]. Hibiscus [sect. Abelmoschus] subsect. Tuberculatus G. Don, Loudon’s Hort. Brit. 1: 289 (1830), (as ‘ Tuberculati’). Type (here designated): Hibiscus diversifolius Jacq. [= Sabdariffa diversifolia (Jacq.) McLay & R. L. Barrett]. Hibiscus sect. Furcaria subsect. Furcaria simplicia Hochr., Ann. Cons. Jard. Bot. Genève 4: 41 (1900), nom. inval. Hibiscus sect. Furcaria subsect. Furcaria typica Hochr., Ann. Cons. Jard. Bot. Genève 4: 41 (1900), nom. inval.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C365D543FFC6FF349BD0FAD7.taxon	description	Hibiscus sect. Furcellati Small, Man. S. E. Fl. 854 (1933). Type: H. furcellatus Desr. [= Sabdariffa furcellata (Desr.) M. M. Hanes & R. L. Barrett]. Annual herbs, perennial subshrubs, shrubs, usually erect or spreading, occasionally trailing woody vines (e. g. S. altissima, S. sudanensis, S. surattensis, S. uncinella), rarely prostrate (e. g. S. flagelliformis) or rarely small trees (e. g. S. brackenridgei, S. townsvillensis), 0.3 – 10 m high. Branchlets commonly with sparse to dense aculei 1.5 – 6 mm long (sometimes retrorse, sometimes 2 - or 3 - fid), or stellate hairs, bristles to 3 mm long, hairs whitish, yellowish or brownish, simple or 2 - forked hairs to 2 mm long sometimes present, glandular hairs present in some Australian species or branchlets sometimes glabrous. Stipules ± persistent or sometimes caducous, filiform, linear, subulate to ovate (amplexicaul in S. surattensis; sometimes 2 - lobed in S. fallax, 3 - lobed in S. elongatifolia), 0.75 – 15 (– 20) mm long, 0.3 – 2.0 mm wide, with fine and sometimes coarse bristles or sometimes glabrous. Leaves alternate, lower leaves usually petiolate, apical leaves sometimes sessile and reduced to linear bracts. Mature leaves: petiole 3 – 180 (– 220 in S. diversifolia, – 240 in S. stewartii) mm long, indumentum similar or dissimilar to that of the branchlet; lamina variable in shape, from simple to 3 – 7 (– 9) - lobed even on the same plant (rarely 2 - or 4 - lobed in S. aspera), (10 –) 35 – 260 mm long, (2 –) 25 – 260 mm wide, cuneate to obtuse at base, entire to serrate or dentate margin, acute to obtuse apex, concolourous or discolourous, lobes when present elliptic to ovate or narrowly triangular, longer than wide, attenuate to obtuse, adaxial surface indumentum of very sparse to dense simple or 1 – 4 - armed hairs, hairs sessile, sometimes with a few aculei, abaxial surface usually with conspicuous foliar nectaries (0.5 – 15 mm long) at the base of the midrib and sometimes on lateral ribs (sometimes absent in S. brackenridgei, absent in S. fabiana), indumentum of sparse to dense coarse stellate hairs, 1 – 4 - armed, hairs sessile, the indumentum commonly more dense on the abaxial surface, the abaxial surface with midrib and primary vein indumentum usually dissimilar to the interveinal regions, indumentum whitish to yellowish (rarely lamina glabrous). Flowers usually solitary in leaf axils (sometimes paired), appearing to form racemes when upper leaves reduced (e. g. S. diversifolia) or borne in clusters at the tips of branchlets (e. g. S. mustiae); pedunculate, the peduncle (0.5 –) 1 – 100 (– 130) mm long, often elongating in fruit, sometimes greatly so, commonly with coarse bristles and sparse stellate hairs, sometimes glabrous, articulation usually conspicuous; articulated pedicel (rarely absent), 1 – 15 mm long, with fine to coarse bristles, pedicels sometimes marginally wider distally, indumentum of peduncle and pedicel commonly distinct and diagnostic; epicalyx commonly with coarse bristles and aculei, 5 – 22 - lobed, (1 – 2 mm long in S. aphela) (5 –) 9 – 37 mm long at anthesis, 0.5 – 2.5 mm wide, the lobes free or sometimes fused at the base for up to 5 mm, 1 - or 3 - nerved, linear to subulate (the apex then flattened), entire or distinctly 2 - lobed at the apex (the two lobes 0.5 – 10 mm long), channelled in many species (channelled inside in S. gossypiifolia), commonly appressed to the calyx or spreading to reflexed, with sparse, coarse simple hairs persistent in fruit or glabrous; calyx 5 - lobed, 7 – 35 (– 55 in S. gossypiifolia) mm long at anthesis (often enlarged in fruit), lobes ± linear, lanceolate, narrowly triangular, triangular or spathulate, free to the base or sometimes fused for 1 – 7 mm, 10 - ribbed at base, with thickened ribs, the midrib of each sepal being raised and from the receptacle to the notch of each sinus, and continuing along each margin of the sepals (ribs not conspicuous in S. goossensii), indumentum of sparse to dense, simple and stellate, whitish, appressed, erect or apically curved hairs or sometimes glabrous, nectary present or absent, calyx persistent and leathery (or fleshy in S. acetosella and S. gossypiifolia) in fruit; corolla usually large, open and showy (salverform in S. uncinella, funnelform in S. greenwayi), sometimes pendulous; petals obovate, (20 –) 35 – 95 mm long, 15 – 65 mm wide, white, creamy yellow, yellow or pale to dark pink (deep magenta in S. australensis to purple-red in S. radiata and red in S. uncinella), prominently veined, with a thin red horizontal stripe at the base or a reddish-brown to deep purple petal spot, glabrous adaxially, glabrous or with sparse stellate hairs abaxially or sometimes with fine simple hairs; staminal column shorter than or equal to the petals, straight, (10 –) 12 – 60 mm long, usually the same colour as the petal spot (if present), stamens distributed throughout the column, the filaments 0.5 – 3.0 mm long, anthers red or yellow; style exserted 1 – 6 mm beyond apex of staminal column (or rarely included), sparsely hairy (hairs clavate in S. sudanensis), 5 - branched, branches 2 – 12 mm long, stigmas feathery, capitate, wide, the hairs 0.1 – 0.5 mm long. Capsule 5 - celled, loculicidally dehiscent, ovoid to globose, (6 – 11 in S. scotellii) 12 – 32 mm long, (6 – 10 in S. scotellii) 12 – 23 mm in diameter, shortly beaked, sparse to moderately dense erect or appressed, simple, coarse hairs all over (glandular hairs present in some South American species), glabrescent (or glabrous in S. kirstyae and S. meraukensis). Seeds several per cell, light brown to dark brown, reniform to angular, 2 – 5 mm long, 2 – 4 mm wide, sometimes striate, often scaly or variously marked but rarely hairy, with white to cream, light brown or tan funiculus. (n = 18, 36, 54, 72, 90; Skovsted 1944; Menzel and Wilson 1969; Menzel and Hancock 1984; Wilson 1994, 1999; Krapovickas and Fryxell 2004; Lavia and Fernández 2004; Wilson 2006). Diagnostic characters Sabdariffa is most readily recognised by the prominence of the calyx nervation, where particularly the midrib and margins of each sepal are raised and rib-like (not raised in most other Hibisceae). Most species bear stout simple hairs on a thickened base on the stems and in some cases (e. g. S. diversifolia) the hairs are thickened into prickles. Nectary glands are present on the abaxial surface of the leaf midrib and on the midrib of the sepals in most species. The fruit valves are usually setose and the fruiting calyx is usually leathery (fleshy in S. acetosella (Welw. ex Hiern) M. M. Hanes & R. L. Barrett and S. gossypiifolia). Forked epicalyx lobe apices are diagnostic when present but this character is only found in selected species.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C365D543FFC6FF349BD0FAD7.taxon	distribution	Distribution A genus of 117 species with a primarily tropical distribution, a few species extending to temperate or arid zones. Several species are widely cultivated outside natural ranges for agronomic or horticultural use.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C365D543FFC6FF349BD0FAD7.taxon	etymology	Etymology Fryxell (1988) credits Don (1831) in stating that Sabdariffa is a Turkish name for S. gossypiifolia (Hibiscus sabdariffa), though this name does not seem to be in current use in Türkiye (Pezen Özdogan et al. 2011). Drury (1858) also concluded that Sabdariffa was a Turkish name and believed H. sabdariffa to have been an early introduction to India by the Mohammedans. As the name is not classically formed, this is interpreted as feminine in accordance with Kosteletzky (1836) who combined two species names under this genus with feminine terminations. The name ‘ Sabdariffa’ appears in classical literature such as de L’Obel (1576, p. 375) but no explanation or origin is provided for the name in that publication. Notes De Candolle (1824, p. 449) included nine species in Sect. Furcaria. Kearney (1951, p. 109) stated that Sect. Furcaria was ‘ typified by H. furcellatus Desr. ’ However, Fryxell (1988, p. 195) stated that the concept of the section was first restricted to only three species (Hibiscus surattensis, H. furcatus and H. radiatus) by Kosteletzky (1836, p. 1856) when the section name was raised to generic rank (and thereby taxonomically redefined), excluding H. furcellatus, therefore Fryxell concluded that the first valid selection of a type species was by Borssum Waalkes (1966, p. 57), who designated one of the three species included by Kosteletzky (1836) as the type species. However, the Code does not state that such taxonomic circumscriptions define later choices of type species (Turland et al. 2018), therefore the first known selection, that of Kearney (1951) must stand. Don’s (1830) subsection Tuberculatus included a broad range of species, many of which are not closely related or even congeneric under our current concepts. Three of the nine original species belong to our concept of Sabdariffa, therefore we consider one of those species to be a logical choice as the type species of subsection Tuberculatus. We here designate H. diversifolius Jacq. as the type species to fix the application of the name. Infrageneric names published with two words (e. g. ‘ subsect. Furcaria simplicia ’ and several other infrageneric names published by Ulbrich) are not validly published (see Turland et al. 2018, Art. 21.2, Ex. 2). Hibiscus sect. Furcaria series Friesia Ulbr. (Ulbrich 1921, p. 402) is a synonym of Cravenia McLay & R. L. Barrett (see Hanes et al. 2024).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36CD548FFD2F9849D8EF867.taxon	description	(Fig. 4, 7 a, b.) Hibiscus acetosella Welw. ex Hiern, Cat. Afr. Pl. 1: 73 – 74 (1896). Type citation: ‘ Golungo Alto, – In stations clothed with short brushwood, alongside roads, also in neglected fields, and occasionally cultivated by the natives; Varzea do Isidoro, in flower-bud in March 1856, and in May 1855 in fl. near Mussengue. No. 5270. At the moist borders of thickets between Sange and Zanga, fr. Dec. 1854; and in open wooded places on the lower mountains of Queta, Oct. 1855. No. 5271. By fences and thickets near Sange, in seed Dec. 1854. Coll. Carp. 249, 250, 252. ’ Type: Angola: Cuanza Norte, Golunga Alta, on the lower mountains of Queta, Oct. 1854, F. M. J. Welwitsch 5271 (lecto: LISU 206160; isolecto: BM 014117363), designated by A. W. Exell & F. A. Mendonça, Consp. Fl. Angol. 1 (1): 168 (1937). Residual syn: all Angola: Cuanza Norte, Golunga Alta, near Mussengue, May 1855, F. M. J. Welwitsch 5270 (BM, n. v., LISU, n. v.); Cuanza Norte, near Sange, col. carp. 249 (LISU, n. v.); Cuanza Norte, near Sange, col. carp. 252 (LISU, n. v.).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36CD548FFD2F9849D8EF867.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Durand and de Wildeman (1889, pp. 49 – 51); Ochse and Bakhuizen van den Brink (1960, p. 472, fig. 295); Hauman (1963, pp. 116 – 117); Bates (1965 a, p. 79, fig. 23); Borssum Waalkes (1966, pp. 59 – 60); Liogier (1981, p. 91); Correll and Correll (1982, p. 931); Marais and Friedmann (1987, p. 36, pl. 11 (7 )); Fryxell (1988, p. 200); Edmonds (1991, fig. 1 (2), 2 (17 )); Fryxell (1992 b, pp. 100 – 101); Sivarajan and Pradeep (1996, pp. 101 – 104, fig. 31, 32); Wilson (1999, pp. 68 – 69, fig. 2 b); Fryxell (2000, p. 14); Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 50 – 51); Leistner (2008, p. 114); Mwachala (2009, p. 32); Lejoly et al. (2010, pp. 170 – 171); Fayaz (2011, pp. 507 – 508, fig.); van der Burg (2013, pp. 56 – 57). Typification Exell and Mendonça (1937, p. 168) cited ‘ Welwitsch 5271 (BM; Lis. U, tipo) ’. Examination of the formatting in the full publication indicates that this is a deliberate choice of the sheet at LISU as the type and accepted as inadvertent lectotypification. Wilson (1999, p. 68) suggested that the BM specimen would have been more appropriate, as the best set of Welwitsch’s specimens were retained at BM (Hiern 1896) but the choice of Exell & Mendonça (1937) cannot reasonably be overturned. The earlier publication of Hibiscus acetosella Welw. ex Ficalho (de Ficalho 1881) lacked a description and the name was subsequently validated by Hiern (1896). Notes The commonly cultivated form has red to purple foliage, calyx and corolla. However, the wild-type has green foliage, a red calyx and yellow corolla with a purple centre. Cultivated forms also have more deeply lobed and more divided leaves, suggesting a possibility that these may be derived through hybridisation with S. radiata but that remains to be critically assessed.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36CD548FFD2F9849D8EF867.taxon	distribution	Distribution Native to Angola, Burundi, Democratic Republic of The Congo, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Introduced and commonly naturalised to the Bahamas, Bangladesh, Bénin, Bolivia, Borneo, SE Brazil, Cameroon, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Florida (USA), Guinea, Gulf of Guinea Islands, Honduras, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Mauritius, Paraguay, Perú, Puerto Rico, Réunion, the Seychelles, Somalia, Sudan, Tanzania, Thailand and Vietnam.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36ED54BFF24FF749C72FC67.taxon	description	(Fig. 7 c, d.) Hibiscus aculeatus Walter, Fl. Carol. [Walter] 177 (1788), non F. Dietr. (1817), nec G. Don (1831), nec Roxb. (1832). Type: United States of America: South Carolina: 3 miles [~ 4.8 km] S of Lake City, 10 July 1927, K. M. Wiegend & W. E. Manning 1959 (neo, designated by D. B. Ward, J. Bot. Res. Inst. Texas 2: 477 (2008): GH 00247969).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36ED54BFF24FF749C72FC67.taxon	description	Walter (1788, p. 177); Michaux (1803, p. 45); Menzel et al. (1983 a, pp. 206 – 207, fig.); Edmonds (1991, p. fig. 2 (29 )); Blanchard (2015, p. 259); Hanes et al. (2024, fig. 1 o, 2 e).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36ED54BFF24FF749C72FC67.taxon	distribution	Distribution Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina and Texas, USA.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36ED54BFF24FC6C9F0AF867.taxon	description	(Fig. 7 e, f.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36ED54BFF24FC6C9F0AF867.taxon	description	Fryxell and Krapovickas (2004, pp. 58 – 59, fig. 1); Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 102 – 103). Typification Fryxell and Krapovickas cited Krapovickas & Schinini 31722 held at CTES as the holotype of Hibiscus adscensionis. However, this gathering comprises two specimens with separate herbarium accession numbers and barcodes. Therefore, these specimens represent syntypes rather than the holotype and the name is lectotypified here. We selected CTES 3775 B (barcode 0001521) over CTES 3775 A (barcode 0001520) by the presence of an open flower, showing the disposition of stamens, an important trait to identify some groups within Hibiscus and Sabdariffa.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36ED54BFF24FC6C9F0AF867.taxon	distribution	Distribution Santa Cruz, Bolivia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36ED54BFCD5FF749B11FC47.taxon	description	(Fig. 8 a, b.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36ED54BFCD5FF749B11FC47.taxon	description	Hornby (1946, pp. 55 – 56); Wilson (1999, p. 53, fig. 1 d). Typification A holotype was not specified in the protologue, therefore we here designate the sheet at PRE with the most fertile material as lectotype.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36ED54BFCD5FF749B11FC47.taxon	distribution	Distribution South Africa (KwaZulu – Natal) and Mozambique.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36ED54BFCE4FC2A9DEAF958.taxon	description	Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, p. 80, fig. 10); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024). Typification A holotype was not specified in the protologue, therefore we here designate the sheet at G as lectotype as this has the most ample material and is labelled with the original epithet.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36ED54BFCE4FC2A9DEAF958.taxon	distribution	Distribution Paraguay.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36ED54DFCC2F92C9CE7FDE0.taxon	description	Barra do Garças, 24 Feb. 1982, P. I. Oliveira 444 & W. R. Anderson (holo: MBM 073730!, iso: CTES 0001523!, CTES 0001522!, ESA 2337, NY 00021176!). Descriptions and illustrations Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 90 – 92, fig. 15); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36ED54DFCC2F92C9CE7FDE0.taxon	distribution	Distribution Mato Grosso, Brazil. Notes The name ‘ Hibiscus andersonii’ is sometimes used in popular literature for the cultivar Hibiscus × rosa-sinensis ‘ Andersonii’ but we have found no valid publication of the name in that form that might invalidate Hibiscus andersonii Krapov. & Fryxell. The potential for confusion is unfortunate but should be reduced by the transfer of this name to Sabdariffa.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C368D54DFFD8FDEA9CE2FC12.taxon	description	Craven et al. (2003, pp. 188, fig. 1); Craven (2022).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C368D54DFFD8FDEA9CE2FC12.taxon	distribution	Distribution Northern parts of the Northern Territory, Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C368D54DFFC2FBC49C4DF97E.taxon	description	(Fig. 8 c, d.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C368D54DFFC2FBC49C4DF97E.taxon	description	Wheeler (1992, pp. 223, fig. 61 f, as Hibiscus sp. C); Craven et al. (2003, pp. 188, fig. 3); Craven (2022).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C368D54DFFC2FBC49C4DF97E.taxon	distribution	Distribution Kimberley region, Western Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C368D54DFF30F9639B32FE25.taxon	description	(Fig. 8 e, f.) Hibiscus arnhemensis F. D. Wilson, Austral. J. Bot. 22: 175, fig. 3, 8 (1974). Type: Australia: Northern Territory: among sandstone boulders along East Alligator River (12 ° 29 ′ S, 132 ° 58 ′ E), 18 May 1968, N. B. Byrnes 812 (holo: DNA A 0014527; iso: CANB 246023, PERTH 01599852, US). Descriptions and illustrations Wilson (1974, p. 175, fig. 3, 8); Wilson and McLay (2022).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C368D54DFF30F9639B32FE25.taxon	distribution	Distribution Northern parts of the Northern Territory, Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C368D54FFC82FDCB9F8AFC95.taxon	description	(Fig. 9 a, b.) Hibiscus asper Hook. f. in W. J. Hooker, Niger Fl. 228 (1849). Type: Sierra Leone: Miss Turner s. n. (holo: K 000240763).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C368D54FFC82FDCB9F8AFC95.taxon	description	Hooker and Bentham (1849, p. 228); de Wildeman (1915, p. 35); Baker (1939, p. 22); Sprague (1913, pp. 418 – 419); Wilson (1999, p. 68, in minor part, excl. fig. 2 c);? Leistner (2008, p. 114); van der Burg (2013, pp. 57 – 59, fig. 16); Lee et al. (2014, pp. 275 – 276, fig. 1, 3 a – f). Typification Baker (1939) cited material at BM and COI as the type of H. malangensis, therefore a lectotype may be selected. We here designate BM 014117362 as this specimen has a label stating, ‘ type’, a copy of the protologue is attached to this sheet and the material is in fertile condition. Notes The boundaries between Sabdariffa aspera and S. cannabina have been a matter of contention in the literature, especially regarding the placement of synonyms under each name. Fryxell (1990) noted that S. cordofana (Turcz.) Mwachala & R. L. Barrett was likely the same as S. aspera (a view not supported here) and distinct from S. cannabina. Leistner (2008, p. 114) placed H. malangensis Baker f. under S. cannabina but accepted S. aspera. Mwachala (2009) included S. aspera and the associated synonyms under a broad concept of S. cannabina and this has been followed by POWO (see https: // powo. science. kew. org /). Wilson (1999) considered the presence of a white, woolly tomentum at the base of the calyx to be diagnostic for S. cannabina and absent in S. aspera, a conclusion we support. Van der Burg (2013) also considered the two species to be quite distinct, recognising S. aspera as native to Gabon, whereas S. cannabina is only cultivated there. Van der Burg (2013) states that S. aspera can be further distinguished by leaves with 3 – 5 lobes, the lobed margins being wavy, and the reddish sepals. Assignment of synonyms is made challenging by the considerable morphological variation expressed in the relevant specimens (especially leaf morphology but also calyx and indumentum characters) and further field-based studies are likely to be required to fully resolve these debates. The synonyms listed above do all appear to conform with van der Burg’s concept of S. aspera in lacking the woolly tomentum on the calyx. Wilson (1999, p. 49) notes that several collections examined appear to be natural hybrids between S. aspera and S. cannabina. These specimens should be further investigated for hybridisation possibly resulting from S. cannabina being introduced into the range of S. aspera or whether these may actually represent a discrete taxon with ‘ intermediate’ morphology. We here consider Wilson’s (1999, p. 68) concept of S. aspera to apply mostly to S. cordofana and S. verrucosa, and only partially to the type concept of S. aspera. Although the delimitation of S. aspera, S. cordofana and S. verrucosa will require further study by local workers, we here distinguish S. aspera from these other two species based on whether the epicalyx lobes are ± flat when dry (S. aspera) or have distinct marginal ribs (S. cordofana and S. verrucosa). The typical form of S. aspera appears to have epicalyx lobes that are almost as long as the calyx lobes at anthesis (v. ~ 1 / 2 the length in related taxa). We also tentatively list synonyms under S. aspera based on the same character states, noting that several of these may well warrant recognition as discrete taxa but resolution of these matters is beyond the scope of the current study. We note as an example that specimens at P identified as Hibiscus asper (as at April 2024) are a mix of S. aspera, S. cannabina, S. cordofana and S. verrucosa, with occasional specimens of other species including S. elongatifolia (Hochr.) Mwachala & R. L. Barrett. We have included Hibiscus malangensis and H. vanderystii De Willd. in the key to African species below under those names to encourage further study of these poorly known taxa. M. Pobegun 1032 from Guinae (P 06721267) notably has deeply lobed lower leaves and simple, almost linear leaves subtending the flowers. A specimen from the Democratic Republic of The Congo (J. Koechlin JK 3715; P 06721279) also has simple leaves subtending the flowers. Specimens from Madagascar previously assigned to S. aspera (e. g. P. B. Phillipson et al. 3890; MO, P 00554877) may represent a distinct new species endemic to Madagascar. Future studies should investigate consistency of the calyx length relative to the ovary length at anthesis, calyx indumentum (including glands and aculei), corolla colour and relative variation in leaf lobing at different growth stages (e. g. basal v. climax leaves) including lobe margins).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C368D54FFC82FDCB9F8AFC95.taxon	distribution	Distribution Based on examination of specimens at P, S. aspera as defined here occurs in Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Guinae, Liberia, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal, Sierra Leone and possibly extends south as far as Angola.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36AD54FFFCDFC7C9C02FA3B.taxon	description	(Fig. 9 c, d.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36AD54FFFCDFC7C9C02FA3B.taxon	description	Fosberg and Sachet (1966, p. 156); Wilson (1993, pp. 280 – 281); Meyer (2011; 22, pl.).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36AD54FFFCDFC7C9C02FA3B.taxon	distribution	Distribution Tubuai (Austral) Islands, French Polynesia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36AD54FFFD2FA2D9B32FF17.taxon	description	Craven et al. (2003, p. 192, fig. 4); Craven (2022).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36AD54FFFD2FA2D9B32FF17.taxon	distribution	Distribution Northern parts of the Northern Territory, Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36AD54FFC82FE989DC0FC1F.taxon	description	Fryxell and Krapovickas 2004, p. 59, fig. 2); Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 101 – 102). Typification The protologue cites the holotype of Hibiscus benensis as being held at MO, subsequently (apparently incorrectly) attributed to LPB by Krapovickas & Fryxell (2004, pp. 101 – 102).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36AD54FFC82FE989DC0FC1F.taxon	distribution	Distribution Bolivia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36AD54EFCFBFBE09F11FC0A.taxon	description	(Fig. 10 a, b.) Hibiscus berberidifolius A. Rich., Tent. Fl. Abyss. 1: 56 (1847). Type citation: ‘ Crescit prope Sankka, in provincia Hedjou (Ant. Petit). ’ Type: Abyssinia [Ethiopia]: Sanka Berr, L. R. Quartin Dillon & A. Petit 119 (lecto, designated by F. D. Wilson, Brittonia 35: 175 (1983): P 00151946; isolecto: BR 0000006247713 (fragm. )). Hibiscus diversifolius var. witteanus Hochr. in W. Robyns, Bull. Jard. Bot. État 18: 276 (1947). Type citation: ‘ CONGO BELGE: DISTRICT DES LACS ÉDOUARD ET KIVU: … Tshamugussa, alt. 2500 m., étage des Bambous, fleurs rose violacé, août 1934, G. de Witte 1817 * (typus). ’ Type: Belgian Congo [Democratic Republic of The Congo]: Tshamugatta, 9 Aug. 1934, G. de Witte 1817 (syn: BR 0000008952356, BR 0000008952769, G 00014202 (3 sheets); G 00014721 (2 sheets )).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36AD54EFCFBFBE09F11FC0A.taxon	description	Richard (1847, p. 56); Hauman (1963, pp. 112 – 113); Maquet (1983, p. 383, fig. 121, 2 a, b), Wilson (1983, pp. 175 – 179, fig. 1), Wilson (1999, pp. 61 – 62, 67, fig. 2 a); Mwachala (2009, pp. 46 – 47). Typification There are two collections of Hibiscus diversifolius var. witteanus by de Witte at G but Robyns (1947) clarifies that only de Witte 1817 is the type number. de Witte 1320 (BR; G 00014202) is cited by Robyns (1947) but is not a type, in contrast to the citation by Wilson (1983, p. 175) and followed by Mwachala (2009, p. 47). Wilson (1983) may have presumed that the statement ‘ typus’ applied to both collections cited but we interpret this as applying only to de Witte 1817. Notes We follow Mwachala (2009, p. 47) in including Hibiscus parvilobus as a synonym of S. berberidifolia. The type collection appears to differ in the distinctly petiolate leaves that are often somewhat lobed and less prominently toothed at the apex and in a sparser stem indumentum. However, additional collections from near the type locality are currently available at EA and these characteristics are now known to intergrade with those of typical S. berberidifolia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36AD54EFCFBFBE09F11FC0A.taxon	distribution	Distribution Democratic Republic of The Congo, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36BD570FF2FFBD39C24FE17.taxon	description	(Fig. 10 c, d.) Hibiscus bifurcatus Cav., Diss. 3: 146 – 147, t. 51, fig. l (1787). Type citation: ‘ Habitat in Brasilia, observatus a Commers. V. S. communicatum a D. Thouin. ’ Type: Brazil: circa Rio de Janeiro, July 1767, P. Commerson s. n. (lecto, designated by P. A. Fryxell in R. A. Howard, Fl. Lesser Antilles, Leeward and Windward Isl. 5: 222 (1989), as ‘ holo’): P 00673709! [P-JU 12374]; isolecto: C (Herb. Vahl); MA 475799!, MPU 016507!, P 01900220!). Hibiscus bicornis G. Mey., Prim. Fl. Esseq. 231 (1818); Hibiscus bifurcatus var. bicornis (G. Mey.) Hochr., Ann. Conserv. Jard. Bot. Genève 4: 109 (1900). Type: Guyana: Essequibo River, s. dat., E. K. Rodschied s. n. (holo: GOET 007811). Hibiscus decipiens A. St. - Hil., Fl. Bras. Merid., 4 th edn, 1 (7): 247 (1828). Type citation: ‘ prope lacum vulgo Sacuarema in provincia Rio de Janeiro. ’ Type: Brazil: prov. Rio de Janiero, 1816, A. St. - Hilaire Catal. B 2 Sect. 2 n ° 475 (lecto, here designated: P 02285901; isolecto: MPU 016510, P 02285902, P 02285903). Hibiscus fluminensis Vell., Fl. Flumin. 282, n. 7 (1825 [1829]). Type citation: ‘ (Tab. 34 a T. 7.) ’. Type: ‘ Hibiscus fluminensis’ in J. V. de M. Vellozo, Fl. Flumin. 7: tab. 34 [BHL] (lecto; original parchment Plate of Florae Fluminensis in the Manuscript Section of the Biblioteca Nacional do Rio de Janeiro [catalogue number mss 1198656 _ 040], later published in J. V. de M. Vellozo, Fl. Flumin.: Icon. 7: t. 34 (1831 )), designated by Coutinho et al., Brittonia 77 (1) (2025). Hibiscus quinquelobatus Vell., Fl. Flumin. 283, n. 9 (1825 [1829]). Type citation: Habitat locis, et floret mensibus supra citatis. Type: ‘ Hibiscus quinquelobatus’ in J. V. de M. Vellozo, Fl. Flumin. 7, tab. 36 [BHL] (lecto: original parchment Plate of Florae Fluminensis in the Manuscript Section of the Biblioteca Nacional do Rio de Janeiro [catalogue number mss 1198656 _ 040], later published in J. V. de M. Vellozo, Fl. Flumin. 7: t. 36 (1831 )), designated by Coutinho et al., Brittonia 77 (1) (2025). Hibiscus bifurcatus f. glaber Gürke in C. F. P. von Martius et al., Fl. Bras. 12 (3): 561 (1892); Hibiscus bifurcatus var. glaber (Gürke) Hochr., Ann. Conserv. Jard. Bot. Genève 4: 109 (1900). Type: Brazil: Rio de Janeiro, Praia Grande, 27 Oct. 1867, A. Glaziou 1310 (lecto, designated by A. Krapovickas & P. A. Fryxell, Bonplandia 13: 61 (2004): R; isolecto: BR 0000013323912!, BR 0000013323929!, C (herb. Warming), P 06642099!). Residual syn: Suriname: Paramaribo, Mar. – Apr. 1844, A. Kappler 1590 (G 00353179!, P 06642110!). Brazil: between S. Ioao & S. Aña, 1868, W. Burchell 9101 (BR 0000013323936!, BR 0000013323943!). Brazil: W. Burchell 9969 (BR 0000013323882!, BR 0000013323899!, BR 0000013323905!). Suriname: 1851, H. R. Wullschlaegel 27 (BR 00000 13323868!). Suriname: 1853, H. R. Wullschlaegel 1361 (BR 00000133 23875!). Brazil: prov. Minarum: prope villa do Principe etc. C. F. P. Martius (M 0211565!, M 0211566!, M 0211568!). Hibiscus bifurcatus f. pilosus Gürke in C. F. P. von Martius, Fl. Bras. 12 (3): 561 (1892). Type: Brazil: Rio de Janeiro, 1834, C. Gaudichaud 924 (lecto, designated by A. Krapovickas & P. A. Fryxell, Bonplandia 13: 61 (2004): G; isolecto: P 06642098!). Residual syn: Brazil: 16 Aug. 1836, B. Luschnath s. n. [Fl. Bras. no. 1012] (M 0211569!, BR 0000005905065!, BR 0000005905393!, BR 0000005905720!). Descriptions and illustrations	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36BD570FF2FFBD39C24FE17.taxon	description	No specimens have been traced for Hibiscus fluminensis Vell. or Hibiscus quinquelobatus Vell., therefore the original illustrations (subsequently published 2 years after the protologue but available to Vellozo (1827, 1831) at the time of publication) have been designated as lectotypes by Coutinho et al. (2025). The original artwork for these figures can be viewed through the website of the Biblioteca Nacional (http: // bndigital. bn. br / acervodigital; see also Knapp et al. 2015). Notes Gürke (1892) recognised several formae within S. bifurcata but these are considered to be regional variants of a polymorphic species. The earlier name Hibiscus strigosus Lindl. has been suggested to be the same as H. bifurcatus but that name clearly applies to an Abelmoschus species. The illustration in the protologue may be an appropriate lectotype for H. strigosus Lindl. We follow Coutinho et al. (2025) in including Hibiscus quinquelobatus Vell. as a synonym of S. bifurcata.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C36BD570FF2FFBD39C24FE17.taxon	distribution	Distribution Widespread in South and Central America, in NE Argentina, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, French Guiana, Guyana, Honduras, Jamaica, Leeward Islands, SE Mexico, Nicaragua, Panamá, Paraguay, Perú, Puerto Rico, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, Venezuela and the Windward Islands.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C355D570FFC4FDE89FF4FB9B.taxon	description	Roe (1961, p. 9) specifically listed the material at GH as the ‘ holotype’ of Hibiscus brackenridgei and this is here accepted as an inadvertent lectotypification, even though species named by Gray (1854) are more commonly lectotypified by material held at US. This species is currently considered to be endangered (Keir 2018 a; The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, see https: // www. iucnredlist. org /).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C355D570FFC9FB7F9F00F9C2.taxon	description	(Fig. 10 e, f.) Descriptions and illustrations Bates (1965 a, pp. 79, 87); Roe (1961, pp. 10 – 11, fig. 4); Bates (1990, pp. 883 – 884, pl. 123); Wilson (1993, pp. 276 – 278); Staples and Herbst (2005, p. 388); Fayaz (2011, p. 508, fig.).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C355D570FFC9FB7F9F00F9C2.taxon	distribution	Distribution Maui, Hawai’i, USA.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C355D570FF35F9B49A53FDE4.taxon	description	(Fig. 11 a, b.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C355D570FF35F9B49A53FDE4.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Roe (1961, pp. 12 – 13, fig. 8); Menzel and Hancock (1984, fig. 1, 2); Bates (1989, p. 105); Bates (1990, p. 884); Wilson (1993, p. 278); Staples and Herbst (2005, p. 388).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C355D570FF35F9B49A53FDE4.taxon	distribution	Distribution Oahu, Hawai’i, USA.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C355D570FC82FD899A72F9C1.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Caum (1930, pp. 17 – 18, fig.); Roe (1961, pp. 11 – 12, fig. 6); Wilson (1993, pp. 278 – 279); Herbst and Wagner (1999, p. 23). Typification The collection as a whole at BISH was indicated as the type, therefore we here designate BISH 1010572 as lectotype as this sheet has been presumed to be a holotype by previous workers and has the best material and any of the sheets. Note This is the only member of Sabdariffa that is currently considered to be extinct (see Wood et al. 2019; Keir 2018 b; The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, see https: // www. iucnredlist. org /).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C355D570FC82FD899A72F9C1.taxon	distribution	Distribution Molokai, Hawai’i, USA.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C355D572FCC0F9B49CE2FE72.taxon	description	(Fig. 11 c, d.) Hibiscus byrnesii F. D. Wilson, Austral. J. Bot. 22: 177, fig. 4, 9 (1974). Type: Australia: Northern Territory: 57 miles [~ 91.7 km] E of Pine Creek, 20 Feb. 1969, N. B. Byrnes 1390 (holo: DNA A 0014914; iso: ASU 0019352, ASU 0019353, ASU 0019354, NT A 0014914, US 00098075). Descriptions and illustrations Wilson (1974, p. 177, fig. 4, 9); Cowie et al. (2013, p. 13, fig. 4); Wilson (2022).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C355D572FCC0F9B49CE2FE72.taxon	distribution	Distribution Northern parts of the Northern Territory, Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C357D575FFD2FE3E9B82FB02.taxon	description	(Fig. 3, 11 e, f.) Hibiscus cannabinus L., Syst. Nat. ed. 10, 2: 1149 (1759). Ketmia glandulosa Moench, Suppl. Meth. 202 (1802), nom. illeg.; Furcaria cannabina (L.) Ulbr. in H. G. A. Engler & O. Drude, Veg. Erde 9 (Pflanzenw. Afrikas); 3 (2): 400 (1921); Hibiscus sabdariffa subsp. cannabinus (L.) G. Panigrahi & S. K. Murti, Fl. Bilaspur Dist. 1: 127 (1989). Type: ‘ Alcea Bengalensis spinosissima’ in C. Commelijn, Hort. Med. Amstelod. Pl. Rar., 1: 35, t. 18 (1697) (neo: [BHL]), designated by D. O. Wijnands, The Botany of the Commelins 144 (1983) (as ‘ lectotype’ )). Hibiscus vitifolius Mill., Gard. Dict., 8 th edn, n. 8 (1768), nom. illeg., non L. (1753). Type citation: ‘ Ketmia Indica vitis folio, magno flore. Tourn. Inft. R. H. 100. ’? Hibiscus tripartitus Forssk., Fl. Aegypt. - Arab. 126 (1775), non Kuntze (1891); Hibiscus cannabinus var. tripartitus (Forssk.) Chiov., Boll. Soc. Bot. Ital. 1923: 115 (1923). Type: s. loc., s. dat., P. Forsskål s. n. (? holo: LD 1755565). Hibiscus congener Schumach. & Thonn. in C. F. Schumacher, Beskr. Guin. Pl. 319 (1827). Abelmoschus congener (Schumach. & Thonn.) Walp., Repert. Bot. Syst. 1 (2): 308 (1842). Type: Ghana: Volta Region, Keta Lagoon, s. dat., P. Thonning 130 (syn: C 10003981, C 10003982, C 10003983). Hibiscus obtusatus Schumach. & Thonn. in C. F. Schumacher, Beskr. Guin. Pl. 321 (1827). Type: Ghana: southern part of the country, s. dat., P. Thonning s. n. (syn: C 10003984, C 10003985). Hibiscus wightianus Wall., Numer. List: n. ° 2695 A (1831), nom. inval., nom. nud.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C357D575FFD2FE3E9B82FB02.taxon	description	Hibiscus cannabinus var. purpureus A. Howard & G. Howard, Mem. Dept. Agric. India, Bot. Ser. 4: 17, pl. 3 (right) (1911). Type: ‘ Hibiscus cannabinus var. purpureus’ in A. Howard & G. Howard, Mem. Dept. Agric. India, Bot. Ser. 4: 16, pl. 3 (1911) (right-hand illustration). Hibiscus cannabinus var. ruber A. Howard & G. Howard, Mem. Dept. Agric. India, Bot. Ser. 4: 17, pl. 3 (centre) (1911). Type: ‘ Hibiscus cannabinus var. ruber’ in A. Howard & G. Howard, Mem. Dept. Agric. India, Bot. Ser. 4: 16, pl. 3 (1911) (centre illustration). Hibiscus cannabinus var. viridis A. Howard & G. Howard, Mem. Dept. Agric. India, Bot. Ser. 4: 17, pl. 2 (right) (1911). Type: ‘ Hibiscus cannabinus var. viridis’ in A. Howard & G. Howard, Mem. Dept. Agric. India, Bot. Ser. 4: 16, pl. 2 (1911) (right-hand illustration). Hibiscus cannabinus var. vulgaris A. Howard & G. Howard, Mem. Dept. Agric. India, Bot. Ser. 4: 17, pl. 3 (left) (1911). Type: ‘ Hibiscus cannabinus var. vulgaris’ in A. Howard & G. Howard, Mem. Dept. Agric. India, Bot. Ser. 4: 16, pl. 3 (1911) (left-hand illustration).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C357D575FFD2FE3E9B82FB02.taxon	description	Linnaeus (1759) is not known to have examined a specimen of this widely cultivated species and rather appears to have relied entirely on early literature, hence Wijnands (1983, p. 144) designated an illustration in Commelin (1697) as the ‘ lectotype’ of this name (that is to be corrected to neotype as the illustration was not explicitly cited by Linneaus). Whereas the choice is entirely consistent with the protologue and in our opinion entirely appropriate, the neotypification has left lingering doubts about the application of the name, especially as the diagnostic woolly tomentum on the calyx is not evident in this figure. Wijnands (1983, p. 144) suggests that the woolly tomentum is represented by white patches on a coloured original of the figure, however we have now examined images of S. radiata from eastern India with white stripes on the calyx that better match this representation. We are now convinced that the plant illustrated represents our concept of Sabdariffa radiata, based on the appearance of the stem aculei, the distinct aculei on the leaf petioles, the upper leaves being deeply divided (not simple), the shape of the leaf margins and the white but not woolly calyx. The floral features are ambiguous as presented, especially the representation of the epicalyx, matching neither S radiata nor S. cannabina as we define these, and most likely represent artistic licence (or the forks on the epicalyx may have been entirely overlooked). Although there is extensive historical confusion between the two taxa, we consider the application of this name to the taxon here recognised as S. radiata to be too disruptive, therefore we are preparing a proposal to conserve the name Hibiscus cannabinus with a conserved type to maintain current usage of both names. There is confusion in the literature regarding the application of the name Hibiscus tripartitus, as different authors either ascribe this to Sabdariffa cannabina (e. g. Wilson 2006; POWO, see https: // powo. science. kew. org /) or Fioria vitifolia (L.) Mattei (e. g. El-Hadidi et al. 1999). Forsskål and Niebuhr (1775) cite no specimens and do not refer to any prior literature references, therefore the name is assumed to be based entirely on Forsskål’s own collections (see Hepper and Friis 1994, p. 197). We have only located a single specimen referable to this name, meaning that this is potentially the holotype though further duplicates may be extant. The specimen is in mature fruit, consistent with the protologue and fits the current concept of S. cannabina sens. lat., though this complex requires further review. Howard and Howard (1911) did not list any specimens for their new varieties in Hibiscus cannabinus and as such the only unambiguous original material we can identify at this stage constitutes the plates published with the protologues. Borssum Waalkes (1966, p. 64) notes that a number of the Howard and Howard (1911) varieties were cultivated at Bogor, with specimens held at BO and L, therefore these may serve as epitypes if the illustrations are insufficient for identification. Wilson (1999, p. 65) considered the varietal names of Howard and Howard (1911) to be cultivar names. However, Howard and Howard (1911, p. 16) state that there are ‘ five varieties comprising eight agricultural types’, demonstrating that the varieties were considered to be more than agricultural selections and the names are here considered to fall under the International code of nomenclature for algae, fungi and plants (Turland et al. 2018) rather than the International code of nomenclature for cultivated plants (see https: // www. ishs. org / scripta-horticulturae / internationalcode-nomenclature-cultivated-plants-ninth-edition). Notes Whether Hibiscus tripartitus, described by Forsskål and Niebuhr (1775), is actually a synonym of S. cannabina is questionalble and the affinity to S. verrucosa should also be considered. Schumacher and Thonner (in Schumacher 1827) described two additional species from Ghana, H. congener and H. obtusatus but these are considered to be potentially wild forms of this widely cultivated species. We were unable to locate a type specimen for Hibiscus cannabinus var. sudanicus therefore this name is only tentatively placed here. Wilson (1999, p. 49) examined material at G and P, and considered the type specimens to represent a hybrid between S. cannabina and S. acetosella. Hibiscus cannabinus var. simplex was recognised by Hauman (1963, pp. 109 – 110), including var. viridis as a synonym. We were unable to locate a type specimen for Hibiscus henriquesii (Pires de Lima 1921), therefore application of this name requires confirmation, though the description and type location are consistent with the placement here.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C357D575FFD2FE3E9B82FB02.taxon	distribution	Distribution Native to Africa and Arabia, in Angola, Bénin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Democratic Republic of The Congo, Eritrea, Ethiopia, The Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda, Yemen, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Introduced and commonly naturalised to Afghanistan, Bangladesh, SE Brazil, Cape Verde, China, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, India, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Kriti, Laos, Leeward Islands, Nepal, Niue, Pakistan, Perú, Puerto Rico, Russia, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Vietnam and the Windward Islands.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C350D575FCD9FAEE9A72F86C.taxon	description	(Fig. 12 a, b.) Hibiscus capitalensis Krapov. & Fryxell, Bonplandia 13 (1 – 4): 96 – 98, fig. 18 (2004). Type: Brazil: Distrito Federal, ~ 5 km E of Lagoa Paranoa, 25 Nov. 1966, H. S. Irwin, J. W. Grear, R. Souza & R. Reis dos Santos 13146 (holo: UB 199469!; iso: CTES 0001526!, F 0076510 F!, NY 00007090!, NY 00021179!, US 00517164!). Descriptions and illustrations Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 96 – 98, fig. 18); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C350D575FCD9FAEE9A72F86C.taxon	distribution	Distribution Distrito Federal, Brazil.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C351D577FF36F9039E8BFE73.taxon	description	Mattei (1908, p. 103); Thulin (1999 a, p. 337, fig. 1); Thulin (1999 b, p. 46, fig. 26).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C351D577FF36F9039E8BFE73.taxon	distribution	Distribution Somalia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C352D577FFD2FE1B9F61FC82.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, p. 58, fig. 6, 9).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C352D577FFD2FE1B9F61FC82.taxon	distribution	Distribution San Martín, Perú.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C352D577FF26FC489EB0FA41.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, p. 83, fig. 11); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C352D577FF26FC489EB0FA41.taxon	distribution	Distribution Goiás, Brazil.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C352D577FF15FA099DA9FF17.taxon	description	(Fig. 12 c, d.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C352D577FF15FA099DA9FF17.taxon	description	Fryxell and Krapovickas (2004, p. 61); Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 76 – 77).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C352D577FF15FA099DA9FF17.taxon	distribution	Distribution La Paz, Bolivia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C352D577FCD3FEF89A5AFCF2.taxon	description	Fryxell and Krapovickas (2004, p. 61, fig. 4); Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 103 – 104).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C352D577FCD3FEF89A5AFCF2.taxon	distribution	Distribution Santa Cruz, Bolivia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C352D576FCD5FCE59DF5FEE7.taxon	description	(Fig. 12 e, f.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C352D576FCD5FCE59DF5FEE7.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Turczaninow (1858, p. 193); Andrews (1952, p. 28); von Cufodontis (1959, p. 557); Wilson (1999, p. 68, p. p., as H. asper). Notes	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C352D576FCD5FCE59DF5FEE7.taxon	description	Some specimens from Sudan (e. g. H. Gillett 77; P 00925200) and Cameroon (e. g. E. de Garine EG 925; P 01080937) approach S. aspera in having deeply divided climax leaves but differ markedly in the calyx characters and our present concepts likely still represent an oversimplification of variation in this species complex across tropical Africa	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C352D576FCD5FCE59DF5FEE7.taxon	distribution	Distribution Known to occur in Ethiopia, Sudan and Chad. Probably more widespread in East Africa to northern Cameroon but a critical examination of specimens currently assigned to S. aspera and S. cannabina is required to determine the full distribution.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C353D579FCDDFE8C9E8BFDD3.taxon	description	(Fig. 13 a, b.) Hibiscus costatus A. Rich. in R. de la Sagra, Hist. Phys. Cuba, Pl. Vasc. 10 (2): 138 – 139, t. 15 (1845 [1841]). Type: Cuba: ‘ Crescit in Vuelta de Abajo ’, R. de la Sagra s. n. (lecto, designated by F. Areces Berazaín, Revista Jard. Bot. Nac. Univ. Habana 25 / 26: 27 – 28 (2006): P 02285891; isolecto: K 000199693, LIL 000829, P 02285892, P 02285893, US 00098082). Hibiscus australis J. D. Smith, Enum. Pl. Guatem. 6: 4 (1903), nom. inval., nom. nud.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C353D579FCDDFE8C9E8BFDD3.taxon	description	Richard (1845, pp. 138 – 139); Fries (1947, p. 30); León and Alain (1957, pp. 253 – 254, fig. 108); Menzel et al. (1983 a, p. 207, fig.); Fryxell (1988, p. 205); Edmonds (1991, fig. 1 (12); 2 (26 )); Fryxell (1992 b, pp. 103 – 104, fig. 11 [fig. on p. 85 due to a printing error]); Fryxell (2000, p. 12); Areces Berazaín (2006, pp. 27 – 28, fig. 1 a, 2 b, c, 3 b, 4 b, g).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C353D579FCDDFE8C9E8BFDD3.taxon	distribution	Distribution Belize, Cuba, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua and Panamá.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35CD579FF28FD489F29F867.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Exell (1936, p. 136); Exell and Mendonça (1937, p. 167); Wilson (1999, p. 71, fig. 3 a); Leistner (2008, p. 114). Typification Collections made by Welwitsch in Angola were grouped under species numbers and variously dispersed (see Albuquerque et al. 2009). In this case, two collections were clearly cited in the protologue of Hibiscus cuanzensis, both assigned the species number ‘ Welwitsch 5241 ’. However, Exell and Mendonça (in Exell 1936, p. 136) were explicit that the collection from ‘ near Cazella’ was the ‘ Typus in Herb. Mus. Bot. ’ and as there is only a single collection at BM matching these details, we accept this as a holotype despite the existence of uncited isotypes. This was also the conclusion of Exell and Mendonça (1937, p. 167) and Wilson (1999, p. 71). Two collections with a derived label ‘ Distr. Pungo Andongo’ are likely isotypes but given the aggregation of collections by Welwitsch, we cannot be certain of this. Four specimens simply labelled ‘ Iter Angolense’ cannot be reliably assigned to a location, therefore these are listed above as possible isotypes. The specimens from ‘ Calunda Mangue’, while constituting original material, are not type specimens.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35CD579FF28FD489F29F867.taxon	distribution	Distribution Cuanza Norte, Angola.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35CD579FC8BFF749D9DFBB1.taxon	description	Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 81 – 82); Krapovickas (2013, pp. 137 – 139, fig. 1); Rigueiral et al. (2019, pp. 6 – 7, fig. 1 d – f); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024). Typification We here select the sheet at P with the best material matching the protologue as lectotype of Hibiscus cucurbitaceus.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35CD579FC8BFF749D9DFBB1.taxon	distribution	Distribution Central Brazil.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35CD579FCE6FBA49A33F96B.taxon	description	(Fig. 13 c, d.) Hibiscus cummingii Wannan, Austrobaileya. 14: 28 – 32, fig. 1 – 6, 7 E, F (2024). Type: Australia: Queensland: North Kennedy District: Hervey Range, near Townsville, 27 Oct. 2010, B. S. Wannan 7198 (holo [mounted on 2 sheets]: BRI AQ 1046838). Descriptions and illustrations Wannan (2024, fig. 1 – 6, 7 E, F).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35CD579FCE6FBA49A33F96B.taxon	distribution	Distribution North Queensland, Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35CD57BFCC1F97E9B7AFC51.taxon	description	(Fig. 14 a, b.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35CD57BFCC1F97E9B7AFC51.taxon	materials_examined	Type citation: ‘ … was raised in spring 1829 at the Royal Botanic Garden, from seeds received from New Holland by Mr Goodsir … ’. Type: Australia: Queensland: Shoalwater Bay, R. Brown [Iter Austral. No. 5124] (neo, designated by F. D. Wilson, Austral. J. Bot. 22: 170 (1974): BM 013824568).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35CD57BFCC1F97E9B7AFC51.taxon	description	Graham (1830 a, pp. 367 – 368); Mueller (1861, pp. 118 – 119); Bentham (1863, p. 212); Mueller (1868, p. 170, 1874, p. 242); Bailey (1899, p. 126); Wilson (1974, pp. 170 – 171, fig. 15); Cooper and Cooper (2004, p. 277, fig.); Wilson (2022); Wannan (2024, 7 C, D). Typification The neotype of Hibiscus divaricatus selected by Wilson (1974, p. 170) is in serious conflict with the protologue that clearly refers to a different species, H. diversifolius, therefore we here reject this designation as inappropriate. We refrain from designating a new neotype pending further study and investigation as to whether original material may be extant. This species has also become popular in local horticulture in eastern Australia, therefore proposing a conserved type that maintains the current usage of the name may be advisable, despite the historical nomenclatural confusion dating back at least to Bentham (1863). For Hibiscus magnificus F. Muell., we refrain from designating a lectotype pending further study. Mueller described flowers but none are present on the two sheets remaining at MEL. A sheet at K from Burdekin is highly likely to be original material and the source of the floral descriptions but that location is not cited in the protologue. Additional syntypes may possibly be present at K that may be more appropriate choices as a lectotype. There is no material at MEL annotated with the name Hibiscus heterophyllus var. flaviflorus, however there are four sheets annotated by Mueller as varieties, one as ‘ var. hypoglauca’ (MEL 2222514) and three as ‘ var. lutea’. We conclude that Mueller (1868, p. 170) changed the epithet from ‘ lutea’ to ‘ flaviforae’, given that the meaning is essentially the same and recognise the three relevant sheets as syntypes of Hibiscus heterophyllus var. flaviflorus. We here choose the only specimen with flowers present as lectotype of this name. We also note that Hochreutiner (1900, p. 99) later validated Mueller’s original variety name Hibiscus divaricatus var. luteus but the two names are treated entirely independently, in part because the identification ‘ Hibiscus radiatus var. luteus ’ is only annotated on a specimen collected after the publication of Mueller’s epithet ‘ flaviflorae’. There is another collection of Hibiscus divaricatus var. luteus at MEL (Rockhampton, 2 Jan. 1876, P. A. O’Shanesy 1580, MEL 0046761!) that was considered as a possible syntype but the date on the label differs and the collections are not morphologically congruent, therefore we do not consider the MEL sheet to be original material and no duplicate material appears to have been retained at MEL. Notes A number of synonyms listed above were previously considered to be yellow-flowered forms of S. heterophylla but we prefer to place these under S. divaricata pending further study of this species complex.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35CD57BFCC1F97E9B7AFC51.taxon	distribution	Distribution Queensland and New South Wales, Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35ED57AFC85FC249C2FFCB2.taxon	description	Hibiscus scaber Lam., Encycl. 3: 350 ([19 Oct.] 1789). Type citation: ‘ croit a 1 ’ Isle de France, & est cultivée depuis long temps au Jardin du Roi’. Type: Îsle de France [Mauritius], s. dat., P. Commerson s. n. (lecto, here designated: P 00287576; isolecto: P 00287575). Hibiscus biflorus A. Spreng., Tent. Suppl. 19 (1828). Type citation: ‘ Uitenhagen C. B. S. Zeyher. (No. 241.) V. f. ’ Type: South Africa: Uitenhage [Kariega], 1822 – 1828, C. L. P. Zeyher 241 (lecto, here designated: HAL 0118176. Residual syn: sketch of type at BM (BM 013832976 )). Hibiscus macularis Harv. in W. H. Harvey & O. W. Sonder (eds), Fl. Cap. 1: 171 (1860), nom. inval., nom. nud.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35ED57AFC85FC249C2FFCB2.taxon	description	The sheet selected as lectotype of Hibiscus scaber includes the location details cited in the protologue (de Lamarck and Poiret 1789, p. 307) and the best material. The second sheet is presumed to be a duplicate and here accepted as an isolectotype. A sketch held at BM has sometimes been referred to as the type of Hibiscus biflorus, presumably because no specimen was located previously, but there is a sheet at HAL and this is here designated as lectotype. No herbarium was cited by Sprengel (1828) but a specimen is stated to have been seen. Notes POWO (see https: // powo. science. kew. org /) lists ‘ Hibiscus spicatus Cav., Diss. 3, Tertia Diss. Bot. 163, t. 59, fig. 1 (1787). Type citation: ‘ V. S. unicum exemplar apud D. de Jussieu. ’ (holo: P-JU; iso: MA 475812) ’ as a synonym of H. diversifolius. However, Fuertes and Fryxell (1993, p. 661) determine this specimen as probably being an Alcea species and therefore not a member of the Hibisceae.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35FD57AFFD8FC7E9B58F882.taxon	description	(Fig. 14 c, d.) Descriptions and illustrations Von Jacquin (1789, p. 207, 1795, t. 551); Sprengel (1828, p. 19); Edwards and Ridgeway (1819, t. 381); Ecklon and Zeyher (1835, p. 38); Harvey (1860, p. 171); Mueller (1861, pp. 117 – 118); Bentham (1863, p. 213); Masters (1868, p. 198); Bailey (1899, p. 127); Hochreutiner (1900, p. 119); Merrill (1908, p. 151); Baker (1911, p. 27); Eyles (1916, p. 415); Ulbrich (1921, p. 402, fig. 187 E – G); Exell and Mendonça (1937, p. 173); Garcia (1946, p. 40); Mendonça and Torre (1950, p. 14); Andrews (1952, p. 24, fig. 10); Brenan et al. (1953, p. 225); Hochreutiner (1955, p. 39, fig. 10 (6 – 8 )); Exell (1961, p. 443); Hauman (1961, p. 86); Hauman (1963, pp. 110 – 112); Wilson and Menzel (1964, p. 84, fig. 6, 7, 20, 21); Bates (1965 a, p. 79, fig.); Borssum Waalkes (1966, pp. 65 – 66); Scarth-Johnson (1968, p. 245, fig.); Bates (1971, p. 678); Wilson (1974, p. 164); Maquet (1983, p. 383, fig. 121, 4); Marais and Friedmann (1987, p. 36, fig. 11 (5, 6 )); Fryxell (1988, p. 208); Edmonds (1991, p. 17, fig. 1 (6, 7); 2 (20, 21 )); Wilson (1993, pp. 281 – 282); Vollesen (1995, p. 196); Wilson and Craven (1995, p. 445); Wilson (1999, p. 63); Fryxell (2000, p. 16); Mitchell and Norris (2000, p. 329); Cooper and Cooper (2004, p. 277, fig.); Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 65 – 66); Leistner (2008, p. 114); Mwachala (2009, pp. 45 – 46); Lejoly et al. (2010, p. 171); Coyne (2011, p. 160, pl.); Badry et al. (2015, pp. 39 – 45, fig. 3 – 6); Bredenkamp (2019, p. 1205); Amany et al. (2020, pp. 124 – 125); McLay (2022); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35FD57AFFD8FC7E9B58F882.taxon	distribution	Distribution The native range of this species deserves further attention. The origins and native range are commonly accepted as African, occurring in Angola, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Chad, Congo, Democratic Republic of The Congo, Egypt, Ethiopia, Gabon, Guinea, Kenya, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mozambique, Niger, Rwanda, Senegal, South Africa, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia. POWO (see https: // powo. science. kew. org /) considers this subspecies to be introduced in many other regions of the world but we accept this as also native to Asia, Australia, Brazil, the Cook Islands, Costa Rica, Fiji, Galápagos, Mauritius, Mexican Pacific Islands, Mexico, New Caledonia, New Guinea, New Zealand (North Island), Niue, the Philippines, Saint Helena, Tubuai Islands and Vanuatu. Several lines of evidence support the natural occurrence of S. diversifolia subsp. diversifolia, especially in the Pacific. A primary argument is that the Hawaiian S. brackenridgei is purported to be derived from S. diversifolia (Wilson 1993) and S. brackenridgei is placed as sister to S. diversifolia in our phylogeny (Fig. 6), albeit with very limited sampling. Sabdariffa brackenridgei is clearly in the ‘ African’ clade, indicating dispersal at some point. If S. diversifolia is the ancestral origin of S. brackenridgei that has clearly diverged significantly in morphology since arriving in Hawai’i, there was likely a source population of S. diversifolia (or a progenitor) somewhere around the Pacific early enough for dispersal and divergence to occur. The French Polynesian species Sabdariffa australensis is likely to also have been derived from S. diversifolia and the affinity of S. kitaibelifolia should also be investigated. Specific evidence for the natural occurrence of S. diversifolia in the Pacific comes from fossil pollen discovered in the Galápagos that significantly pre-dates human arrival in these islands (van Leeuwen et al. 2008). Fossil Hibiscus - type pollen is also known from pre-settlement deposits in New Zealand, though this may represent S. diversifolia or Hibiscus trionum (sens. lat.) (Newnham and Lowe 1991; de Lange et al. 2018). We conclude that this is a native species in most countries and islands listed as introduced locations by POWO (see https: // powo. science. kew. org /) but some of these, especially Mexico and Brazil, may require more detailed studies to assess the status as a native or adventive species. This species is suggested to be an introduction on Norfolk Island by Polynesian settlers (MacPhail et al. 2001) but even that remains uncertain and a global review is justified. This species is listed for Hawai’i (USA) but is considered to be only in cultivation there.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C358D57DFFCEFF749A3FFD48.taxon	description	(Fig. 14 e, f.) Hibiscus agioxillos Vell., Fl. Flumin. 283 (1825 [1829]). Type citation: ‘ (Tab. 35. a T. 7) … Habitat locis supra-citatis. ’ Type: ‘ Hibiscus agioxillos ’ in J. V. de M. Vellozo, Fl. Flumin. 7, tab. 35 [BHL] (lecto: original parchment Plate of Florae Fluminensis in the Manuscript Section of the Biblioteca Nacional do Rio de Janeiro [catalogue number mss 1198656 _ 039], later published in J. V. de M. Vellozo, Fl. Flumin. 7: t. 35 (1831 )), designated by Coutinho et al., Brittonia 77 (1) (2025). Hibiscus spinulosus Huber, Cat. Gén. 1871 & 1872: 4 (1871), non (W. V. Fitzg.) F. D. Wilson (1974). Type: not designated (see D. J. Mabberley, Taxon 34: 450 (1985).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C358D57DFFCEFF749A3FFD48.taxon	description	Huber (1871, p. 4); Exell (1961, p. 444); Edmonds (1991, p. 17); Wilson (1999, p. 64, fig. 2); Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 66 – 67); Mwachala (2009, p. 46); Badry et al. (2017, pp. 114 – 118, fig. 1 – 3); Rigueiral et al. (2019, pp. 8 – 9, fig. 1 g – h); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024, fig.); Hyde et al. (2024, fig.); Wannan (2024, 7 G, H). Typification Although the illustration of Hibiscus agioxillos was published 2 years after the description (Vellozo 1831), this was cited in the protologue (Vellozo 1827), therefore Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, p. 67) considered the illustration to be acceptable as original material and designated this as lectotype of the name. Coutinho et al. (2025) adopted a different view, accepting only the original parchment versions as original material and designated a replacement lectotype. The original artwork for this figure can be viewed through the website of the Biblioteca Nacional do Rio de Janeiro (http: // bndigital. bn. br / acervodigital; see also Knapp et al. 2015 and Coutinho et al. 2025). Although Mwachala (2009) cited the holotype of Hibiscus rivularis as being at BM, Bremekamp and Obermeyer (1935) explicitly stated that the type was held at PRE. As there are two sheets at PRE, Coutinho et al. (2025) designated PRE 0457138 - 0 as the lectotype based on the quality of the material on the sheet. Notes Exell (1961, p. 444) reduced Hibiscus rivularis Bremek. & Oberm. to a subspecies of H. diversifolius. However, the name Hibiscus agioxillos Vell. has priority but the application of Vellozo’s name was uncertain when H. rivularis was named by Bremekamp & Obermeyer (1935) and also when recombined by Exell (1961), therefore the priority was not recognised. We here agree with Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 66 – 67) that H. agioxillos can reliably be applied to the taxon most commonly known as Hibiscus diversifolius subsp. rivularis (Bremek. & Oberm.) Exell. As this is the earliest available epithet for this taxon, we adopt this here.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C358D57DFFCEFF749A3FFD48.taxon	distribution	Distribution Native to Angola, Botswana, Kenya, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia (Caprivi), Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia. Introduced and variously naturalised in SE Brazil and north Queensland, Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C358D57DFCE1FD329DE4F9C1.taxon	description	Hochreutiner (1900, p. 117); Wilson (1999, p. 72, fig. 3 g). Typification We here select the sheet at P with the best material matching the protologue as lectotype of Hibiscus elongatifolius. Notes There is a superficial resemblance between this species and Hibiscus squamosus Hochr. but S. elongatifolia can readily be separated by the divided stipules. Occasionally confused with S. aspera.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C358D57DFCE1FD329DE4F9C1.taxon	distribution	Distribution Cameroon.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C358D57FFC82F9B49EF1FE87.taxon	description	(Fig. 15 a, b.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C358D57FFC82F9B49EF1FE87.taxon	description	Cheek et al. (2020, p. 70).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C358D57FFC82F9B49EF1FE87.taxon	distribution	Distribution Guinea.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35AD57FFFC9FE789CE2FC13.taxon	description	(Fig. 15 c, d.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35AD57FFFC9FE789CE2FC13.taxon	description	Craven et al. (2003, p. 192, fig. 5); Craven (2022).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35AD57FFFC9FE789CE2FC13.taxon	distribution	Distribution Northern parts of the Northern Territory, Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35AD57FFFD2FBF79F0FF99A.taxon	description	Fryxell and Krapovickas (2004, pp. 65 – 66, fig. 5); Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 99 – 101, fig. 19); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35AD57FFFD2FBF79F0FF99A.taxon	distribution	Distribution Mato Grosso, Brazil.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35AD57FFF36F97C9DBBFE79.taxon	description	Skovsted (1944, p. 12, fig. 4); Wilson (1993, pp. 282 – 284, fig. 3).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35AD57FFF36F97C9DBBFE79.taxon	distribution	Distribution Vanua Levu, Fiji.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35AD57FFC8AFE1F9D9DFB8C.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, p. 77); Rigueiral et al. (2019, p. 9, fig. 1 i – j); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024). Typification We here select the sheet at P with the best material matching the protologue as lectotype of Hibiscus flagelliformis.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35AD57FFC8AFE1F9D9DFB8C.taxon	distribution	Distribution Central Brazil.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35AD57FFCEAFB409DC0F9BD.taxon	description	Baker (1939, p. 20); Wilson (1999, p. 57, fig. 1 f); Leistner (2008, p. 114).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35AD57FFCEAFB409DC0F9BD.taxon	distribution	Distribution Angola.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35AD57EFCC3F9539FE3FDE7.taxon	description	(Fig. 15 e, f.) Hibiscus forsteri F. D. Wilson in F. D. Wilson & Craven, Austrobaileya 4 (3): 439 – 442 (1995). Type: Queensland: Cook District: 6.8 km from Bromley on the track to Carron Valley, 16 July 1990, J. R. Clarkson 8866 & V. J. Neldner (holo (mounted on 2 sheets): CANB 576920.1, CANB 576920.2; iso: BRI AQ 0517379, DNA D 0064525, K, L, CNS MBA 758, NY, TEX 00208139). Descriptions and illustrations Wilson and Craven (1995, pp. 439 – 442); Cooper and Cooper (2004, p. 277, fig.); Wilson and Craven (2022).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35AD57EFCC3F9539FE3FDE7.taxon	distribution	Distribution North Queensland, Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35BD57EFFC2FD8B9C4DFAE2.taxon	description	(Fig. 16 a, b.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35BD57EFFC2FD8B9C4DFAE2.taxon	distribution	Distribution Kimberley region, Western Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35BD57EFF14FAE49A1BF9A3.taxon	description	(Fig. 16 c, d.) Hibiscus furcatus Willd., Enum. Pl. 736 (1809); Hibiscus surattensis var. furcatus (Willd.) Hochr., Annuaire Cons. Jard. Bot. Genève 4: 112 (1900). Type citation: ‘ Habitat in India orientali? ’ Type: cultivated in Berlin, origin probably India (holo: B - W 12880 - 01 0). Descriptions and illustrations Wilson (1999, pp. 56 – 57). Notes The morphological distinctiveness of the type specimen of H. furcatus Willd. from other Indian Sabdariffa taxa is readily apparent. This species has bifurcate epicalyx lobes, linear to subulate stipules, peduncles <5 cm long in fruit and stems that are relatively finely aculeate or aculeolate. Pradeep and Sivarajan (1991, p. 635) simply state that ‘ Willdenow’s name pertains to a very different species as observed by Paul and Nayar (1980, p. 195, 1988, p. 123). ’ Paul and Nayar (1980, p. 195) similarly simply state that H. furcatus and H. hispidissimus are distinct entities, without defining the application of H. furcatus Willd. This discussion is largely repeated by Paul and Nayar (1988, p. 123) under H. aculeatus but again, application of H. furcatus Willd. is not addressed. In the key to species in Paul and Nayar (1988) and Paul (1993), the specimen in question would key to S. hispidissima but is clearly a distinct species. Willdenow (1809, p. 736) places a question mark after the cited location ‘ India orientali? ’, indicating doubt over the origin of the material cultivated in Berlin. There is commonly confusion between ‘ East India’ and ‘ East Indies’ (Indonesia) but the specimen does not readily match any Malesian species either (see Borssum Waalkes 1966). Wilson (1999, p. 49) states that H. furcatus Willd. ‘ occurs in India and Thailand’. Indeed, this name was used in a review of Thai Hibiscus (Phuphathanaphong et al. 1989, pp. 49, 54, fig. 4), however the application was confused there, with H. furcatus Roxb. and H. aculeatus Roxb. included as synonyms and the plant illustrated is S. hispidissima. Wilson (1999, pp. 56 – 57) provides the only description that applies to the type concept, considering this a rare species in India and Thailand, citing a small number of collections. While confusion abounds in the literature and in names applied to specimens in herbaria, we here accept that Wilson’s (1999) concept as the type of H. furcatus Willd. does not match any other species. Photographs that can be matched to the type collection have recently been identified on iNaturalist (observation numbers: 28993434; 64936961; 92749419; 149528955) therefore we can now record the species for Maharashtra, Karnataka and Madhya Pradesh in India. Observations had previously been assigned to S. hispidissima, sometimes with doubt as this has a shrubby habit, quite distinct from the scrambling or climbing habit of S. hispidissima.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35BD57EFF14FAE49A1BF9A3.taxon	distribution	Distribution Maharashtra, Karnataka and Madhya Pradesh, India and possibly also in Thailand.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35BD560FCD8F9539A28FA0C.taxon	description	(Fig. 16 e, f.) Hibiscus furcellatus Desr. in Lamarck, Encycl. 3: 358 (1789); Furcaria furcellata (Desr.) Ulbr. in Engler, Pflanzenw. Afrikas 3 (2): 400 (1921). Type citation: ‘ croit dans la Guiane, & nous a été communiquée par M. Stoupy … ’. ‘ 35. H. furcellatus Desrousseaux Lam. diet. ’ Type: French Guyana, s. dat., D. Stoupy s. n. (holo: P-LA 00287577). Hibiscus diodon DC., Prodr. 1: 449 (1824); Hibiscus furcellatus var. diodon (DC.) Uittien in A. Pulle, Fl. Suriname 3: 21 (1932). Type citation: ‘ Cayenna’. Type: French Guyana: Cayenne, 1821, G. S. Perrottet 55 (syn: G-DC 00218939, G-DC 00218940). Hibiscus youngianus Gaud., Voy. Uranie 91 (1827) (as ‘ youngiana ’), nom. inval., nom. nud. Hibiscus trilobatus Vell., Fl. Flumin. 281, n ° 2 (1825 [1829]). Type citation: ‘ silvis maritimis Regii Proedii S. Crucis, ad loca humentia Floret Nov. ’. Type: (lecto: original parchment Plate of Florae Fluminensis in the Manuscript Section of the Biblioteca Nacional do Rio de Janeiro [catalogue number mss 1198656 _ 033], later published in J. V. de M. Vellozo, Fl. Flumin.: Icon. 7: t. 29 (1831) [BHL], designated by Coutinho et al., Brittonia 77 (1) (2025). Hibiscus youngianus Gaud. ex Hook. & Arn., Bot. Beechey Voy. 79 (1832); Hibiscus furcellatus var. youngianus (Gaud. ex Hook. & Arn.) Hochr., Annuaire Cons. Jard. Bot. Genève 4: 107 (1900). Type: United States of America: Hawaii: Oahu, s. dat., F. W. Beechey s. n. (syn: K 000659885); Hawaii: Oahu, May 1825, J. Macrae s. n. (syn: K 000659884); Hawaii: C. Gaudichaud 279 (syn: P 00646428 (2 sheets); P 00646427). Hibiscus corylifolius C. Presl, Reliq. Haenk. 2: 133 (1835). Type citation: ‘ Habitat in Guayaquil. ’ Type: Ecuador: Guayaquil, [locality possibly incorrect], s. dat., T. Haenke s. n. (syn: PR (2 sheets )). Hibiscus tomentosus A. Stahl, Estud. Fl. Puerto Rico 2: 92 (1884), nom. illeg., non Mill. (1768), nec Kuntze (1891), nom. illeg. Type: Stahl’s watercolour 371, deposited at Sala Manuel María Sama y Auger-Colección Puertorriqueña, General Library, University of Puerto Rico, Mayagüez Campus (lecto, designated by P. Acevedo-Rodríguez, Caribbean J. Sci. 43 (2): 194, fig. 3 (2007) [URL]. Residual syn: all Puerto Rico, s. dat., A. Stahl 46 (B, destroyed); ibid., A. Stahl 76 (B, destroyed); ibid., A. Stahl 150 (B, destroyed). Hibiscus fraternus Sessé & Mociño, Fl. Mex. ed. 2; 159 (1894), non L. (1775). Type: Mexico: In agris de Toa Alta, s. dat., M. Sessé & J. M. Mociño 3539 (? syn: MA 602616); ‘ Novae Hispaniiae’, s. dat., M. Sessé & J. M. Mociño 3545 bis (? syn: MA 602611 [photo at F]).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35BD560FCD8F9539A28FA0C.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Gaudichaud (1827, p. 91); Presl (1835, p. 133); Stahl (1884, p. 92); Sessé y Lacasta and Mociño (1894, p. 159); Hochreutiner (1900, p. 107); Chodat and Hassler (1905, p. 300); Hassler (1909, p. 379); Williams and Cheeseman (1929, p. 88); Uittien (1932, pp. 20 – 21); Macbride (1956, pp. 471 – 472); León and Alain (1957, p. 254); Roe (1961, pp. 6 – 8, fig. 1, 2); Wilson and Menzel (1964, p. 86, fig. 13, 27); Bates (1965 a, p. 79, fig.); Liogier (1981, p. 93); Fryxell (1988, p. 209); Bates (1990, p. 885, pl. 124); Edmonds (1991, fig. 1 (13); 2 (27 )); Fryxell (1992 b, pp. 104 – 106); Wilson (1993, pp. 279 – 280); Fryxell (2000, p. 15); Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 71 – 76); Areces Berazaín (2006, pp. 29 – 30, fig. 1 b, 2 d – f, 3 c, 4 c, h); Rigueiral et al. (2019, pp. 9 – 10, fig. 1 k – l); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024). Typification No specimens have been traced for Hibiscus trilobatus Vell. but the original illustration (published 2 years after the protologue but available to Vellozo at the time of publication) has been considered original material. The original artwork for this figure has been designated as lectotype of the name by Coutinho et al. (2025) and can be viewed through the website of the Biblioteca Nacional (http: // bndigital. bn. br / acervodigital; see also Knapp et al. 2015). Acevedo-Rodríguez (2005) discusses the work of Augustín Stahl in illustrating the flora of Pueto Rico. Acevedo-Rodríguez (2007) formally designated a lectotype for Hibiscus tomentosus A. Stahl based on an original watercolour by Stahl. We here designate G 00381130 [mounted on 2 sheets] as the lectotype of H. dominicus as this has an original determination as ‘ Hibiscus dominicus sp. nov. ’ by Hochreutiner and the material is from Chodat’s herbarium (see Chodat and Hassler 1905). Notes	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C35BD560FCD8F9539A28FA0C.taxon	distribution	Distribution Widespread in the Americas south from Florida (USA) and Mexico, in NE Argentina, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Florida (USA), French Guiana, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Hawai’i (USA), Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panamá, Paraguay, Perú, Puerto Rico, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, Venezuela and the Windward Islands.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C345D563FCFAF9F19F0AFE32.taxon	description	Hochreutiner (1917 b, pp. 157 – 160); Wilson (1999, p. 53, fig. 1 A). Notes Although POWO (see https: // powo. science. kew. org /) includes this species as under S. rostellata, we consider this to be quite distinct based on leaf shape, peduncle length, epicalyx features and calyx indumentum.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C345D563FCFAF9F19F0AFE32.taxon	distribution	Distribution Republic of Guinea.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C346D563FF10FDFE9C37FBC2.taxon	description	Hibiscus poggei Gürke ex Engl., Pflanzenw. Ost-Afrikas 3 (2): 400 (1921). Type: Angola: Lunda-Kasai Bezirk, [1880 s], P. Pogge s. n. (holo: B, n. v., possibly destroyed). Notes The status of the subspecies deserves further attention as these may warrant recognition at species-level but such an assessment is hampered by the few available collections. We retain these as subspecies for now (Fig. 17 a, b).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C346D563FF6EFBAE9C36FA54.taxon	description	De Wildeman (1904, p. 166); Ulbrich (1921, p. 400); Hauman (1963, pp. 120 – 121); Wilson (1999, p. 69, fig. 3 c); Leistner (2008, p. 115).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C346D563FF6EFBAE9C36FA54.taxon	distribution	Distribution Angola and Democratic Republic of The Congo.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C346D563FF22F9D39DC0FE5F.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Exell and Mendonça (in Exell 1936, pp. 136 – 137); Wilson (1999, p. 71); Leistner (2008, p. 115). Typification Exell and Mendonça (in Exell 1936, p. 137) explicitly cited the material at BM as the type, so this is accepted as a holotype.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C346D563FF22F9D39DC0FE5F.taxon	distribution	Distribution Angola.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C346D563FCE2FE239DC0FC3F.taxon	description	Baker (1939, pp. 21 – 22); Wilson (1999, p. 71); Leistner (2008, p. 115).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C346D563FCE2FE239DC0FC3F.taxon	distribution	Distribution Angola.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C346D563FCE9FBC39A8DF9E4.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Hauman (1961, p. 88); Hauman (1963, p. 118); Wilson (1999, p. 56, fig. 1 c).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C346D563FCE9FBC39A8DF9E4.taxon	distribution	Distribution Democratic Republic of The Congo.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C346D564FCECF98E9A78FDE7.taxon	description	(Fig. 2, 17 c, d.) Hibiscus sabdariffa L., Sp. Pl. 2: 695 (1753), nom. cons; Sabdariffa rubra Kostel., Allg. Med. - Pharm. Fl. 5: 1857 (1836), nom. illeg.; Furcaria sabdariffa (L.) Ulbr. in H. G. A. Engler, Pflanzenw. Afrikas 3 (2): 402 (1921). Type citation: ‘ Habitat in India. ’ Type: Ketmia indica gossypii folio, acetosa, sapore. [apparently cultivated material from the garden of George Clifford III: Hartekamp Garden, Holland], Herb. Clifford (BM- Cliff 000646500), type cons. (see P. A. Fryxell, Taxon 50: 929 (2001 )). Hibiscus gossypiifolius Mill., Gard. Dict. 8 th edn, n. 10 (1768). Type: Cultivated. United States of America, Florida, Palm Beach, Everglades Experimental Station, accession A 60 - 234 [grown from seeds received from Santiago de las Vegas, Cuba], 21 Nov. 1962, M. Menzel & F. D. Wilson HV 132 (neo, here designated): FSU 000112994). Hibiscus fraternus L., Pl. Surin. 12 (1775). Type: Suriname: C. G. Dalberg 71 (lecto, designated by P. A. Fryxell, Syst. Bot. Monogr. 25: 225 (1988, as ‘ holotype’): LINN- 875.36; isolecto: S 09 - 24429 [? also S 11 - 9389]). Hibiscus digitatus Cav., Diss. 3: 151, t. 70, fig. 2 (1787); Sabdariffa digitata (Cav.) Kostel., Allg. Med. - Pharm. Fl. 5: 1857 (1836). Type: Brazil: habitat circa Rio Janeiro, June 1767, P. Commerson s. n. [Wills no. 48] (syn: MA 475802, P-JU 00673711; P 02285905). Hibiscus acetosus Noronha, Verh. Batav. Genootsch. Kunst. 5 (Art. 4): 17 (1790), nom. inval., nom. nud. Hibiscus digitatus var. kerrianus DC., Prodr. 1: 453 (1824). Type citation: ‘ ad Rio-Janerio. H. digitatus Ker. bot. reg. t. 608. ’ [Grown at Boyton and provided by Lambert, from seed collected in Brazil near Rio de Janeiro by Bonpland]. Type: ‘ Hibiscus digitatus’ in Bot. Reg. 8: t. 608 (1822) [BHL] (lecto, here designated). Hibiscus cuneatus Bertol. in A. Alessandrini, Nuovi Ann. Sci. Nat. 3: 138 (1840); Hibiscus cruentus Bertol., Nov. Comm. Acad. Sci. Inst. Bonon. 4: 428 – 429, t. 45 (1840), nom. illeg., nom. superfl., non H. cuneatus Kuntze (1891); Abelmoschus cruentus Walp., Repert. Bot. Syst. 1 (2): 310 (1842). Type citation: ‘ Esquintla. ’ ‘ Ex seminibus ab exemplari Guatimalensi eductis oblinui plantas duas, quae tola aestale laete sub dio vixerunt in horto botanico Bononiensi; sed hyeme sequenti perierunt in hipocausto, antequam florerent. ’ Type: Guatemala: Escuintla, s. dat. [1836], J. Velásquez s. n. (holo: BOLO 0508032).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C346D564FCECF98E9A78FDE7.taxon	description	Hibiscus sabdariffa var. albus A. Howard & G. Howard, Mem. Dept. Agric. India, Bot. Ser. 4: 32, 36, pl. 6 (left) (1911). Type: ‘ Hibiscus sabdariffa var. albus’ in A. Howard & G. Howard, Mem. Dept. Agric. India, Bot. Ser. 4: pl. 6 (left - hand illustration). Hibiscus sabdariffa var. intermedius A. Howard & G. Howard, Mem. Dept. Agric. India, Bot. Ser. 4: 32, 33, 36, pl. 7 (right) (1911). Type: ‘ Hibiscus sabdariffa var. intermedius’ in A. Howard & G. Howard, Mem. Dept. Agric. India, Bot. Ser. 4: pl. 7 (right-hand illustration). Hibiscus sabdariffa var. ruber A. Howard & G. Howard, Mem. Dept. Agric. India, Bot. Ser. 4: 32, 35, pl. 6 (right) (1911). Type: ‘ Hibiscus sabdariffa var. ruber’ in A. Howard & G. Howard, Mem. Dept. Agric. India, Bot. Ser. 4: pl. 6 (right-hand illustration). Hibiscus sabdariffa var. bhaghalpuriensis A. Howard & G. Howard, Mem. Dept. Agric. India, Bot. Ser. 4: 33, 36, pl. 7 (left) (1911). Type: ‘ Hibiscus sabdariffa var. bhaghalpuriensis’ in A. Howard & G. Howard, Mem. Dept. Agric. India, Bot. Ser. 4: pl. 7 (left-hand illustration). Hibiscus sabdariffa cultivar ‘ Altissima’ Wester, Philipp. Agric. Rev. 7: 268, fig. 4 (1914). Descriptions and illustrations Linnaeus (1737, 1753, p. 695, 1759, p. 1149, in Alm and Linnaeus 1775, p. 12); Edwards (1822, t. 608); Bertoloni (1840, pp. 428 – 428, fig. 45); Griffith (1854, p. 520); Masters (1874, p. 340); Baillon (1885, p. 509); Durand and de Wildeman (1899, p. 20); Hochreutiner (1900, p. 116); Cooke (1901, p. 110); Williams and Cheeseman (1929, p. 88); Uittien (1932, p. 20); Standley and Steyermark (1949, pp. 351 – 352); Andrews (1952, p. 28, fig. 12); Hochreutiner (1955, p. 39, fig. 11 (3 )); Kearney (1955, p. 275); Macbride (1956, pp. 474 – 475); Ochse and Bakhuizen van den Brink (1977, p. 476, fig. 296); Hauman (1963, pp. 114 – 115); Bates (1965 a, p. 79, fig. 23 e); Borssum Waalkes (1966, pp. 64 – 65); Adams (1972, p. 476); Abedin (1979, p. 10, fig. 2, B, C); Liogier (1981, pp. 94 – 95); Marais and Friedmann (1987, p. 36, pl. 10 (8, 9 )); Fryxell (1988, pp. 225 – 226); Paul and Nayar (1988, pp. 148 – 149); Edmonds (1991, p. 21, fig. 1 (9, 10); 2 (23, 24 )); Fryxell (1992 b, pp. 117 – 118); Wheeler (1992, p. 220, fig. 60 d); Kenneally et al. (1996, p. 123, pl.); Sivarajan and Pradeep (1996, pp. 114 – 119, fig. 41); Philcox (1997, pp. 296 – 297); Wilson (1999, pp. 65 – 66); Boulos (2000, p. 108); Fryxell (2000, p. 13); Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 52 – 53); van Wyk and Wink (2004, p. 170, fig.); Hussey et al. (2007, p. 184, pl.); Leistner (2008, p. 115); Mwachala (2009, p. 32); Fayaz (2011, p. 510, fig.); van der Burg (2013, pp. 66 – 67); Cowie et al. (2013, pp. 16 – 17, fig. 5, pl. 9); Baldini et al. (2019, pp. 212 – 213, fig. 13); Amany et al. (2020, p. 126); McLay (2022); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024, fig.). Typification No specimens are cited in the protologue for Hibiscus gossypiifolius Mill. Jacek Wajer (BM; pers. comm.) has confirmed that there is no known extant specimen that can be associated with Miller’s description, neither in the main collection of BM nor the Sloane collection, Linnean Society collection or Clifford Herbarium. No illustration can be directly linked to this name and, although Miller cites a polynomial from Tournefort, there is no illustration associated with that polynomial. Although Miller may have observed the species in cultivation in the Apothecaries’ Garden at Chelsea and not preserved a specimen, the source of his description was likely earlier works (e. g. Hughes’s The Natural History of Barbados; Sloane’s Voyage to Jamaica and Natural History of Jamaica and in Browne’s The Civil and Natural History of Jamaica), explaining his presumption that this was a New World species, distinct from ‘ true’ roselle from the Old World (Jacek Wajer, pers. comm.). Wester (1911, p. 96) points to Sloane (1707) as the first to record use of the fruit for food in Jamaica and this would seem to be a fairly direct link to Miller’s concept of his species (Miller 1768). Abedin (1979, p. 10) used the name Hibiscus gossypiifolius for the taxon traditionally called H. sabdariffa (which Abedin applied to H. cannabinus) and cited ‘ Holotype: (BM) ’ but as this cannot actually be linked to any specimen (as noted above), the statement does not qualify as an inadvertent neotypification. As no original material can be traced, a neotype must be selected for Miller’s name. We here select a modern collection with a known cytotype to fix the application of Miller’s name to the cultivated form of roselle with large, fleshy, red calyces consistent with the typification of Hibiscus sabdariffa L. by Fryxell (2001 b). We choose a cultivated specimen originating from Cuba over any material from Jamaica as the selected neotype has a known chromosome number of 2 n = 72. Given the long utilisation of this species and known variation in chromosome number, future workers may wish to formally recognise different cytotypes as distinct taxonomic entities and in such a case, an epitype will subsequently not be required to fix the application of this name. We here select the cited illustration as lectotype of the name Hibiscus digitatus var. kerrianus DC. as we have not been able to trace any other original material, though a Bonpland collection may possibly be extant somewhere. Howard and Howard (1911) did not list any specimens for the new varieties under Hibiscus sabdariffa and as such the only unambiguous original material we can identify is here considered to be the plates published with the protologues that are simply recognised as ‘ type’ here, in case actual specimens can be located that might more appropriately serve as lectotypes. Wilson (1999, p. 65) considered the varietal names of Howard and Howard (1911) to be cultivar names. Howard and Howard (1911, p. 32) state that ‘ Four different forms in all have been isolated by us and these have bred true. As the differences are very distinct and of a morphological nature rather than agricultural, we have formed the following four varieties: ’, demonstrating that the varieties were considered to be more than agricultural selections and the names are here considered to fall under the International code of nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (Turland et al. 2018), rather than the International code of nomenclature for cultivated plants (see https: // www. ishs. org / scripta-horticulturae / international-code-nomenclaturecultivated-plants-ninth-edition). Notes Bertoloni is commonly considered to have first published 60 new names in his Florula guatimalensis (Bertoloni 1840), a reprint from work published earlier in 1840 in Novi Commentarii Academiae Scientiarum Instituto Bononiensis, including the illegitimate Hibiscus cruentus Bertol. However, Baldini et al. (2019) present a comprehensive review of these names and the associated types, correcting the place of first publication to Bertoloni in Alessandrini (1840) and identifying authentic type material. Wilson (1999, p. 65) considered the varietal name ‘ Altissima’ of Wester (1914) to be a cultivar name and we agree with this conclusion. We list the name here as this is sometimes treated as a variety under the ICN (Turland et al. 2018) in the literature (e. g. Rakshit and Kundu 1970).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C346D564FCECF98E9A78FDE7.taxon	distribution	Distribution As this species has a long history of cultivation, the precise native range is difficult to define. Sabdariffa gossypiifolia is generally considered native to the Central African Republic, Chad, Democratic Republic of The Congo, Gabon, Ghana, Nigeria and Sudan. Introduced and commonly naturalised in the Andaman Islands, Angola, Australia, Bangladesh, Belize, Bénin, SE Brazil, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Caroline Islands, Cayman Islands, China, Colombia, Comoros, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Fiji, The Gambia, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Gulf of Guinea Islands, Haiti, India, Iraq, Jamaica, Laos, Leeward Islands, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Marianas, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Niger, Pakistan, Perú, Puerto Rico, Réunion, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Vietnam, Windward Islands, Zambia and Zimbabwe.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C341D564FC82FDF49A33FBDB.taxon	description	(Fig. 17 e, f.) Hibiscus graniticus Wannan, Austrobaileya 12: 20 − 21, fig. 1 – 8 (2022). Type: Australia. Queensland: Cook District: Bonny Glen, Cape York Peninsula, 27 Oct. 2010, B. S. Wannan 5990 & M. Trenerry (holo: BRI AQ 880107; iso: CNS, NSW 824525). Descriptions and illustrations Wannan (2022, pp. 20 – 21, fig. 1 – 8).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C341D564FC82FDF49A33FBDB.taxon	distribution	Distribution North Queensland, Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C341D564FCECFBBF9ABAF94C.taxon	description	(Fig. 18 a, b.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C341D564FCECFBBF9ABAF94C.taxon	description	Baker (1937, p. 99); Goetz (1980); Edmonds (1991, p. 18); Wilson (1999, pp. 62 – 63, fig. 2 f); Mwachala (2009, pp. 42 – 44, fig. 6).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C341D564FCECFBBF9ABAF94C.taxon	distribution	Distribution Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C341D567FC84F9069EB0FA33.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 94 – 96, fig. 17); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C341D567FC84F9069EB0FA33.taxon	distribution	Distribution Goiás, Brazil.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C342D567FF31F9FB9A3FF93B.taxon	description	Hochreutiner (1902, pp. 51 – 52); Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 78 – 79); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024). Typification There are five sheets at G representing three duplicates, two each mounted on two sheets. We here designate the collection represented by G 00381129 [mounted on 2 sheets] as lectotype as this has an original determination by Hochreutiner and a copy of the protologue attached.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C342D567FF31F9FB9A3FF93B.taxon	distribution	Distribution Central Brazil and Paraguay.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C342D566FCF9F92C9EE3FC5F.taxon	description	1256 (lecto, first-step designated by A. Krapovickas & P. A. Fryxell, Bonplandia 13: 60 (2004): W; second-step designated here: W 0066239!; isolecto: BR, F 0062908 F!, M 0211552!, W 0066240!). Descriptions and illustrations Gürke (1892, p. 559, tab. 110, fig. l); Gottsberger (1972, pp. 468 – 475, fig. 22 – 24); Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, p. 60, fig. 5); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024). Typification When Gürke described H. henningsianus he indicated the type as J. B. E. Pohl 1256 but did not indicate a single herbarium, therefore all original material represents syntypes. Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004) published a first-step lectotypification, selecting the specimen at W. However, the material at W comprises two sheets with distinct barcodes. Therefore, we designate the specimen with W barcode 0066239 as a second-step lectotype (ICN Art. 9, Turland et al. 2018) as this is the best material.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C342D566FCF9F92C9EE3FC5F.taxon	distribution	Distribution Brazil.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C343D569FF10FC049C2AFDAC.taxon	description	(Fig. 18 c, d.) Hibiscus heterophyllus Vent., Jard. Malm. 2: 103, t. 103 (1804), non Griff. (1854); Type: Cultivated. France, Malmaison, from material collected in Australia [most likely originating from New South Wales: Sydney region, 1802 – 1803, Leschenault or Guichenot s. n.], E. P. Ventinat s. n. (holo [mounted on 3 sheets]: G 00341495). Hibiscus flabellatus Desf., Tabl. École Bot. 147 (1804). Type citation: ‘ … N. Holl. … ’. Type: ‘ N. Holl. ’ [Australia: New South Wales: Sydney region, Baudin Expedition, 1802 – 1803, J. Leschenault de la Tour or A. Guichenot s. n.] (holo: P 00270074). Hibiscus procerus Wall., Num. List no. 2692 [p. 91] (1831), nom. inval., nom. nud.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C343D569FF10FC049C2AFDAC.taxon	materials_examined	Type: Australia: Queensland: Fitzroy River, Rockhampton, s. dat., A. Thozet 306 (holo: MEL 18723!).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C343D569FF10FC049C2AFDAC.taxon	description	Ventenat et al. (1804, p. 103, t. 103); Desfontaines (1804, p. 147); de Lamarck and Poiret (1804, p. 220); Bailey (1899, p. 127); Hochreutiner (1900, p. 121); Domin (1928, pp. 404, 405); Bates (1965 a, pp. 89, 79, fig. 23 h); Borssum Waalkes (1966, p. 66); Wilson (1974, p. 168, fig. 13, 170, fig. 14); Wilson and Craven (1995, p. 445); Spencer (1997, p. 379); Cooper and Cooper (2004, pp. 277 – 278, fig.); McLay (2022). Typification Hibiscus persicifolius has often been considered a synonym of S. diversifolius. Wilson (1999, p. 77) suggests that the type of Hibiscus persicifolius may have been cultivated or adventive and that the name may actually apply to S. heterophylla. We agree with this conclusion. The type of Hibiscus heterophyllus var. hispidifolius had not previously been recognised as the protologue information is rather vague but there is only a single collection at MEL annotated with this variety name and we therefore accept this as the holotype. The Coppinger collection representing Hibiscus heterophyllus var. discolor from Port Molle (Long Island, Whitsundays) has not been traced, therefore a sheet at BM with a favourable amount of material, collected by Robert Brown, is here designated as lectotype of the name Hibiscus heterophyllus var. discolor Domin. Notes We could not find evidence of a valid description of Hibiscus procerus in Wallich (1831), therefore we consider this to be a nomen nudum. Several specimens appear to be associated with the proposed name but these have no type status: India: 1816, W. Roxburgh s. n. (G 00218926); India: Wallich Cat. 2692 (K 001116821, K 001116822); cultivated from seed from New South Wales [Australia] (BR 0000013466190; BR 0000013466206). Wilson (1999, p. 77) states that Roxburgh’s illustration [Icones Roxburghianae 1506 (K)] is of the white-flowered form of S. heterophylla from Australia. Roxburgh (1832) does not mention the name but does list Hibiscus heterophyllus as a species from New South Wales, cultivated in the botanic garden (represented by BM 013732147), consistent with Wilson’s interpretation. We here exclude all the yellow-flowered forms from the concept of S. heterophylla, placing these under S. divaricata instead, but further research on this complex is required.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C343D569FF10FC049C2AFDAC.taxon	distribution	Distribution Queensland and New South Wales, Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34CD569FFD2FDB49F04F9FA.taxon	description	Hibiscus cabralensis Krapov., Bonplandia 15 (1 – 2): 47, fig. 1 (2006). Type: Brazil: Minas Gerais: Mun. Várzea da Palma, Serra do Cabral, estrada Várzea da Palma a Joaquim Felício, 100 m, 5 Dec. 2004, G. Hatschbach & E. Barbosa 78849 (holo: MBM 301210!; iso: CTES 0001532!). Descriptions and illustrations Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 82 – 83); Krapovickas (2006, p. 47); Rigueiral et al. (2019, pp. 10, 12, fig. 4 a, b); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024). Typification Two sheets of Hibiscus cucurbitaceus var. cuneifolius are held at P and of these we here designate P 02285900 as lectotype as this has the original label and includes leaves, calyces and a corolla.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34CD569FFD2FDB49F04F9FA.taxon	distribution	Distribution Minas Gerais, Brazil.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34CD569FF3DF9E39BF7F95A.taxon	description	(Fig. 19 a, b.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34CD569FF3DF9E39BF7F95A.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34CD569FF3DF9E39BF7F95A.taxon	description	Historical applications of the names Hibiscus furcatus Roxb. ex DC. and H. aculeatus Roxb. are greatly confused (e. g. by Bahadur et al. 1970) but were clarified by Pradeep and Sivarajan (1991). A problem has been identified here in that Furcaria roxburghii Kostel. is a validly published replacement name for the greatly confused Hibiscus furcatus Roxb. ex DC. This appears to be the earliest name available at species rank for this taxon. The name was presumably overlooked as a valid name as the generic combination Furcaria proposed by Kosteletzky (1836) was an illegitimate homonym, but this does not invalidate the species combination as there was a valid genus Furcaria (Desvaux 1827). However, we refrain from adopting this epithet due to the great confusion surrounding Roxburgh’s concept of ‘ Hibiscus furcatus ’, and we propose conservation of the name Hibiscus hispidissimus Griff. as a more stable nomenclatural solution.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34CD569FF3DF9E39BF7F95A.taxon	distribution	Distribution Native to Bangladesh, Cambodia, China, India, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Vietnam. Introduced in Sudan and possibly introduced in Nepal.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34CD56BFCEDF92C9FE9FE04.taxon	description	Mar. 1976, G. Hatschbach & R. Kummrow 38269 (holo: MBM 42520!, iso: C, CTES 0001555!, NY 00007089!). Descriptions and illustrations Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 88 – 90, fig. 14); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34CD56BFCEDF92C9FE9FE04.taxon	distribution	Distribution Northern and central Brazil.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34ED56BFF28FDFE9FC3FC29.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Mwachala (2009, p. 40).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34ED56BFF28FDFE9FC3FC29.taxon	distribution	Distribution SE Kenya and E Tanzania.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34ED56BFFD5FC2C9F40F9FB.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Paul and Nayar (1985, pp. 188 – 189, fig. 1 – 6); Paul and Nayar (1988, pp. 131 – 132); Paul (1993, p. 325); Dhami (2023, p. 132).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34ED56BFFD5FC2C9F40F9FB.taxon	distribution	Distribution Punjab, India, where the species is considered Threatened (Dhami 2023).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34ED56BFFDFF98E9B32FE80.taxon	description	(Fig. 19 c, d.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34ED56BFFDFF98E9B32FE80.taxon	description	Craven et al. (2003, pp. 197 – 200, fig. 8); Craven (2022).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34ED56BFFDFF98E9B32FE80.taxon	distribution	Distribution Northern parts of the Northern Territory, Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34ED56BFCD6FE4D9DB2FC63.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 104 – 107, fig. 21); Rigueiral et al. (2019, pp. 12 – 13, fig. 4 c – e); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34ED56BFCD6FE4D9DB2FC63.taxon	distribution	Distribution Säo Paulo, Brazil.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34ED56BFC82FC6E9A9DF9C3.taxon	description	(Fig. 19 e, f.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34ED56BFC82FC6E9A9DF9C3.taxon	description	Wheeler (1992, p. 223, fig. 61 e, as Hibiscus sp. B); Craven et al. (2003, p. 200, fig. 9); Craven (2022).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34ED56BFC82FC6E9A9DF9C3.taxon	distribution	Distribution Kimberley region, Western Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34ED56AFC8BF98E9C4DF86D.taxon	description	(Fig. 20 a, b.) Hibiscus kirstyae Craven in L. A. Craven et al., Muelleria 35: 4, fig. 2 (2016). Type: Western Australia: Morgan River, near Theda Station homestead, 17 Feb. 2005, M. D. Barrett 1589 (holo [mounted on 2 sheets]: PERTH 7213425, PERTH 7213433; iso: CANB 527708.1, CANB 527708.2, K). Descriptions and illustrations Craven et al. (2016, p. 4, fig. 2); Craven (2022).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34ED56AFC8BF98E9C4DF86D.taxon	distribution	Distribution Kimberley region, Western Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34FD56DFCF0F9619FBEFB0F.taxon	description	(Fig. 20 c, d.) Hibiscus kitaibelifolius A. St-Hil., Fl. Bras, Merid. 4 th edn, 1 (7): 248, pl. 48 (1828). Type citation: ‘ Ad ripas rivulorum haud longe ab urbe vulgo S. João del Rey in provincia Minas Geraes. Florebat Martio. ’ Type: Brazil: Province de Minas Geraes, Lás João del Rey, 1816 – 1821, A. St. - Hilaire Catal. D n ° 375 (lecto, here designated: P 02285919!; isolecto: P 02285920!, P 02285921!).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34FD56DFCF0F9619FBEFB0F.taxon	description	De Saint-Hilaire (1828, p. 248, pl. 48); Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, p. 69); Rigueiral et al. (2019, pp. 13 – 14, fig. 4 f – h); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024, fig.). Typification Most type citations for Hibiscus kitaibelifolius have only listed the type as being at P. Given that there are three sheets, a lectotype is here selected that recognises the sheet P 02285919 as the best material due to the full information in the label. We here designate G 00353182 as lectotype of Hibiscus furcellatus var. glandulosus as this has an original field label and original annotation by Hochreutiner. Notes We consider the protologue and illustration of Hibiscus quinquelobatus to be a very good match for Sabdariffa kitaibelifolia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34FD56DFCF0F9619FBEFB0F.taxon	distribution	Distribution Minas Gerais and São Paulo, Brazil.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C348D56DFF3AFAF29A19FE53.taxon	description	De Saint-Hilaire (1828, p. 245); Menzel et al. (1983 a, pp. 218 – 220, fig. 18); Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 83 – 86, fig. 12); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024). Typification There are three specimens of Saint-Hilaire 679 at P and we selected P 02285922 as lectotype as this has full information in the label and possesses flowers and fruits.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C348D56DFF3AFAF29A19FE53.taxon	distribution	Distribution Bolivia and Goiás, Brazil.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C348D56DFCDDFDDA9D21FC79.taxon	description	Hibiscus diversifolius var. granatensis Triana & Planch., Fl. Nov. Gran. 1: 165 (1862). Type citation: ‘ Province d’Antioquia, ait. 1300 m; dans les endroits où les forêts ont été coupées (Tr.); Cartago, dans les lagunes (Goudol). ’ Type: Colombia: prov. Antioquia, alt. 1500, May 1852, J. J. Triana s. n. [herb. Triana No. 5277] (syn: BM 013824619, COL).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C348D56DFC30FC339B48FAB9.taxon	description	De Lamarck and Poiret (1789, pp. 349 – 350); Triana Silva and Planchon (1862, p. 165); Liogier (1981, p. 94); Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 68 – 69); Areces Berazaín (2006, pp. 30 – 32, fig. 1 c, 2 g, 3 d, 4 d, i).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C348D56DFC30FC339B48FAB9.taxon	distribution	Distribution Cuba, Hispaniola and western Colombia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C348D56CFCFEFA419F1CFE41.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Carabia (1943, pp. 15 – 16); León and Alain (1957, pp. 256 – 257); Areces Berazaín (2006, pp. 32 – 33, fig. 1 d, 2 h, 3 e, 4 e, j). Notes The history of specimens from the ‘ Atkins’ botanical garden in Cuba, relevant to this species, is discussed by Rodríguez Vázquez and Flores (2020).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C348D56CFCFEFA419F1CFE41.taxon	distribution	Distribution Sierra de Ñipe, Cuba.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C349D56CFFDBFE049F6EFC7E.taxon	description	Krapovickas (2008, pp. 37 – 40, fig. 3).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C349D56CFFDBFE049F6EFC7E.taxon	distribution	Distribution Northern Bolivia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C349D56CFFCCFC1A9C4DFA14.taxon	description	(Fig. 20 e, f.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C349D56CFFCCFC1A9C4DFA14.taxon	description	Craven et al. (2003, p. 203, fig. 11); Craven (2022).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C349D56CFFCCFC1A9C4DFA14.taxon	distribution	Distribution Kimberley region, Western Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C349D56CFF2AF9F19A54FF17.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Krapovickas (2006, p. 49); Rigueiral et al. (2019, p. 14, fig. 4 i, j); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C349D56CFF2AF9F19A54FF17.taxon	distribution	Distribution Minas Gerais, Brazil.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C349D56EFCECFE9E9F58FF07.taxon	description	(Fig. 21 a, b.) Hibiscus mastersianus Hiern, Cat Afric. Pl. Welw. 1: 71 (1896); Hibiscus surattensis var. mastersianus (Hiern) Hochr., Annuaire Conserv. Jard. Bot. Genève 4: 112 (1900). Type citation: ‘ H. furcatus Masters, l. c., p. 201, non Roxb. Pungo Adongo. … in secondary thickets near Caghuy; fl. and fr. May 1857 … No. 5242. Huilla. – In thickets near Ferraõ de Sola in the Lopollo country; … fl. Jan. 1860. No. 4927 … in stoney places at the borders of forests consisting of ‘ Panda’ … near Eme; fl. May 1860. No. 4928. ’ Type: Mozambique: Lupata, 20 Apr. 1860, J. Kirk s. n. (lecto: K 000240669), designated by E. W. B. H. Milne-Redhead, Bull. Misc. Inform. Kew 1935: 273 (1935). Residual syn: The Gambia, s. dat., Ingram s. n. (n. v.). Angola: Huila Province: near Ferraõ de Sola, Lopolo, Jan. 1860, F. M. J. Welwitsch 4927 (K 000240663); Angola: Huila Province: ‘ Eme, ’ May 1860, F. M. J. Welwitsch 4928 (K); Angola: Malanje Province: Pungo Adonga, near Gaghuy, May 1857, F. M. J. Welwitsch 5242 (K). Hibiscus pachmarhicus Haines, Bull. Misc. Inform. 1914: 24 – 26, fig. 1 – 7 (1914). Type: India: Central Provinces; Madhya Pradesh, Pachmarhi in the Satpura Range, 900 m, Oct. 1911, H. H. Haines 197 P (syn: K 000659776, K 000659777, K 000659778). Hibiscus beddomei Rakshit & Kundu, Sci. & Cult. 27: 192, fig. 1 (1961). Type: India: South India, without precise locality, Nov. 1856, R. H. Beddome 91 & 92 (holo: CAL 0000006235). Descriptions and illustrations Hiern (1896, p. 71); Haines (1914, pp. 24 – 26, fig. 1 – 7); Milne-Redhead (1935, p. 272); Exell (1961, p. 439); Rakshit and Kundu (1961, p. 192, fig. 1); Merxmüller (1969, p. 82: 13, 19 – 20); Paul and Nayar (1988, p. 126); Edmonds (1991, p. 19); Paul (1993, p. 324); Wilson (1999, p. 71 – 72, fig. 3 b); Heath and Heath (2009, p. 284, fig.); Mwachala (2009, pp. 38 – 39). Typification Milne-Redhead (1935, p. 273) designated a specimen collected by Kirk in Mozambique as lectotype of Hibiscus mastersianus (K 000240669). This is a valid selection based on the citation of Masters’ (1868) concept of H. furcatus, where this is one of the specimens cited. The Welwitsch specimens directly cited by Hiern (1896) are residual syntypes. Notes Paul and Nayar (1988, p. 126) and Paul (1993, p. 324) recognised H. beddomei as a distinct species but did not discuss the relationship to S. mastersiana, rather this was distinguished from S. radiata. If Indian populations prove to be distinct from African populations in future, the name Hibiscus pachmarhicus Haines (1914) would have priority for the Indian populations. This species was also possibly an early introduction to India that currently appears native.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C349D56EFCECFE9E9F58FF07.taxon	distribution	Distribution Considered to have a naturally disjunct distribution in central and southern Africa and India, occurring in Angola, Botswana, Democratic Republic of The Congo, India, Kenya, Mozambique, Namibia, Rwanda, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34BD56EFF31FEE79F0FFBE8.taxon	description	Hibiscus furcellatus var. scaber R. E. Fr., Kongl. Svenska Vetenskapsakad. Handl. 42 (1 ° 2): 41 (1908). Type: Brazil: Mato Grosso: Serra do Itapirapuan [Tapirapuan], 20 Apr. 1894, C. A. M. Lindman A. 3303 (lecto, designated by A. Krapovickas & P. A. Fryxell, Bonplandia 13: 86 (2004): S). Residual syn: Brazil: Mato Grosso: inter Coxipó Mirim et Cuyabá [Cuiabá], 17 June 1903, G. O. A. Malme s. n. (UPS V- 715111!). Descriptions and illustrations Fries (1908, p. 41); Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 86 – 88, fig. 13); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34BD56EFF31FEE79F0FFBE8.taxon	distribution	Distribution Mato Grosso, Brazil.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34BD56EFF25FB8F9B6DFD9A.taxon	description	(Fig. 21 c, d.) Hibiscus mechowii Garcke in O. Hoffm., Linnaea 43: 121 (1881). Type citation: ‘ Pungo Andongo. Jan. – Apr. ’ Type: Angola: Cuanza Norte, s. dat., F. W. A. von Mechow 105 (holo: B, presumed destroyed; drawing at BM 013832979). Neotype (here designated): Angola: Melange Province, Pungo Andongo, Apr. 1857, F. M. J. Welwitsch 5262 (BM 013723928; isoneo: K). Hibiscus lancibracteatus De Wild. & T. Durand in T. Durand & E. A. J. De Wildeman, Bull. Soc. Roy. Bot. Belgique 38 (1): 25 (1899). Type citation: ‘ Reg. III: env. de Coquilhatville, 1895 (Alfr. Dewevre). ’ Type: Democratic Republic of The Congo: Halte dans une ile située a michamin entre Loukolela et N’Gombi, Mbandaka [Coquilhatville], 17 Nov. 1896, A. Dewèvre 752 (syn: BR 0000008952103; BR 0000008952424, drawing at BM 013832978). Descriptions and illustrations Garcke (1881, p. 121); Durand and de Wildeman (1899, pp. 25 – 27); de Wildeman and Durand (1901, p. 1, t. 84); Exell (1961, p. 443); Hauman (1963, pp. 113 – 114); Merxmüller (1969, p. 82: 15, 20); Edmonds (1991, p. 19); Wilson (1999, p. 61, fig. 2 g); Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 48 – 50, fig. 7); Leistner (2008, p. 115); Mwachala (2009, pp. 44 – 45). Typification We here designate a neotype for Hibiscus mechowii as we have been unable to locate any type material and presume this to be destroyed. We have selected a specimen from the same location as the original type to ensure consistency of the species concept. There may be additional duplicates that we have not yet located (see Figueiredo 2008).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34BD56EFF25FB8F9B6DFD9A.taxon	distribution	Distribution Native to Angola, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of The Congo, Guinea, Mali, Namibia, Senegal, Tanzania and Zambia. Introduced and naturalised in Venezuela.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34BD56EFCE2FD439B32FB2A.taxon	description	(Fig. 21 e, f.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34BD56EFCE2FD439B32FB2A.taxon	description	Wilson and Byrnes (1970, p. 194); Wilson (1974, p. 176); McLay (2022).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34BD56EFCE2FD439B32FB2A.taxon	distribution	Distribution Northern parts of the Northern Territory, Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34BD511FCD9FB339B4DF880.taxon	description	(Fig. 22 a, b.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34BD511FCD9FB339B4DF880.taxon	description	Hochreutiner (1908, pp. 11 – 12); Fitzgerald (1918, p. 174); Hochreutiner (1924, p. 163); Borssum Waalkes (1966, pp. 61 – 62, fig. 9); Wilson (1974, p. 171); Mitchell (1981, p. 210); Wheeler (1992, p. 217, fig. 59 f); Kenneally et al. (1996, p. 122, pl.); Cooper and Cooper (2004, p. 278, fig.); Cowie et al. (2013, p. 14, fig. 4, pl. 8); McLay (2022).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C34BD511FCD9FB339B4DF880.taxon	distribution	Distribution Lesser Sunda Islands in the southern Indonesian archipelago, New Guinea and northern Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C335D510FF3BFF749F6AFD83.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Van der Burg (2013, pp. 59, 62, fig. 17).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C335D510FF3BFF749F6AFD83.taxon	distribution	Distribution Minkébé, Gabon.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C335D510FFD7FD489C4DFB80.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Wilson (1974, p. 178, fig. 6, 11); Wheeler (1992, p. 218, fig. 59 g); Craven et al. (2003, p. 204); McLay (2022).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C335D510FFD7FD489C4DFB80.taxon	distribution	Distribution Kimberley region, Western Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C335D510FFC8FB4F9A9DFF17.taxon	description	(Fig. 22 c, d.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C335D510FFC8FB4F9A9DFF17.taxon	description	Craven et al. (2003, p. 194, fig. 7); Craven (2022). Notes The indumentum of this taxon is considered sufficiently distinct from S. fryxellii that the former variety is here raised to species rank. The aculei on the stem are considered particularly diagnostic. This species is also found in a dryer rainfall zone, on younger sandstone.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C335D510FFC8FB4F9A9DFF17.taxon	distribution	Distribution Kimberley region, Western Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C335D510FCFFFE9B9DA2FBFF.taxon	description	Baker (1939, p. 21); Wilson (1999, p. 71, fig. 3 e); Leistner (2008, p. 115). Typification Baker (1939) cited material at BM and COI as the type, therefore a lectotype needs to be selected. We here designate BM 000554369 as the label states that this is the type and a copy of the protologue is attached to this sheet, both of which are absent from the other sheet at BM.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C335D510FCFFFE9B9DA2FBFF.taxon	distribution	Distribution Moxico, Angola.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C335D513FCF6FB839F04FE69.taxon	description	(Fig. 22 e, f.) Hibiscus multiformis A. St-Hil., Fl. Bras. Merid. 4 th edn, 1 (7): 246 (1828), non Steud. (1840); Hibiscus furcellatus var. multiformis (A. St. - Hil.) Gürke in C. F. P. von Martius et al., Fl. Bras. 12 (3): 563 (1892). Type citation: ‘ Crescit im paludosis inter vicum vulgo Nossa Sñra da Conçeçao et tabernam vulgo Toporoca. Florebat Martio. ’ Type: Brazil: Minas Gerais, Nossa Sñra da Conçeçao, [Mar.] 1816, A. St. - Hilaire Catal. C 1 n ° 425 (lecto, here designated: P 02285929!; isolecto: MPU 016520!, P 02285927!, P 02285928!). Residual syn: Brazil: Toporoca, 1816, A. St. - Hilaire Catal. C 1 n ° 890 (syn: MPU 017482!). Descriptions and illustrations De Saint-Hilaire (1828, p. 246); Gürke (1892, p. 563); Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, p. 70); Rigueiral et al. (2019, pp. 14 – 15, fig. 4 k, l); Camargo et al. (2022, pp. 35 – 36, fig. 1 e); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024, fig.). Typification Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004) designated material at P as the holotype of H. multiformis. However, there are three sheets of the Saint-Hilaire gathering at P (P barcodes 022855927, 022855928 and 022855929). The sheet P 02285929 is here designated as the lectotype as this is the only sheet with a flower at P.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C335D513FCF6FB839F04FE69.taxon	distribution	Distribution Minas Gerais, Brazil.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C336D513FFD2FE719F04FC5D.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 92 – 94, fig. 16); Rigueiral et al. (2019, p. 15, fig. 6 a – c); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C336D513FFD2FE719F04FC5D.taxon	distribution	Distribution Minas Gerais, Brazil.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C336D513FF22FC059EFAF9AE.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Van der Burg (2013, pp. 62 – 63, fig. 18). Note This species is currently considered to be endangered (Ikabanga et al. 2020; The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, see https: // www. iucnredlist. org /).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C336D513FF22FC059EFAF9AE.taxon	distribution	Distribution Gabon.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C336D513FF3CF9B49B9AFBB7.taxon	description	(Fig. 23 a, b.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C336D513FF3CF9B49B9AFBB7.taxon	description	Although Baker (1939, p. 20) cited ‘ Type in Herb. Mus. Brit. ’, there are two sheets of Hibiscus nigricaulis at BM, therefore we here designate BM 000554469 as lectotype as this has the most material on the sheet. Descriptions and illustrations Baker (1939, pp. 19 – 20); Exell (1959, p. 165); Hauman (1963, p. 110); Merxmüller (1969, p. 82: 14, 20); Edmonds (1991, fig. 1 (11); 2 (31 )); Wilson (1999, pp. 60 – 61, fig. 1 e); Leistner (2008, p. 115); Heath and Heath (2009, p. 285, fig.); Bredenkamp (2019, pp. 1205 – 1206); Hyde et al. (2024, fig.).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C336D513FF3CF9B49B9AFBB7.taxon	distribution	Distribution Angola, Botswana, Democratic Republic of The Congo, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia (Caprivi), South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Notes Although there is some variation in leaf shape and density of aculei on the calyx across the range of S. nigricaulis, we consider the type of H. meeusei to fall within this variation.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C336D512FCDBFB5F9B82F863.taxon	description	(Fig. 23 c, d.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C336D512FCDBFB5F9B82F863.taxon	description	De Wildeman (1911, p. 279); Baker (1939, pp. 20 – 21); Hauman (1963, pp. 119 – 120); Maquet (1983, p. 383, fig. 121, 6 a, b); Wilson (1999, pp. 59 – 60, fig. 1 h); Leistner (2008, p. 115); Mwachala (2009, p. 39); van der Burg (2013, p. 63). Typification There are two type sheets of Hibiscus eetveldeanus var. asperatus at BR and the sheet with a full flower and original collection slip is here designated as the lectotype. Notes Mullenders (1954, p. 79) is sometimes attributed as having coined a homonym Hibiscus furcatus Mullend. but this is merely a misapplication of the name, without a description, that actually applies to the concept of S. noldeae.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C336D512FCDBFB5F9B82F863.taxon	distribution	Distribution Widespread in tropical Africa, in Angola, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Democratic Republic of The Congo, Ethiopia, Gabon, Guinea, Ivory Coast, Liberia, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C330D515FF11FF749F7BFCDB.taxon	description	(Fig. 23 e, f.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C330D515FF11FF749F7BFCDB.taxon	description	Fryxell and Krapovickas (2004, p. 67); Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 98 – 99); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C330D515FF11FF749F7BFCDB.taxon	distribution	Distribution Bolivia and Brazil.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C330D515FFD7FCAE9F79F9C1.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Mattei (1916, p. 32); Thulin (1999 a, p. 339); Wilson (1999, p. 77). Notes Wilson (1999, p. 77) only saw a sketch of S. paolii, therefore considered this to be a poorly known taxon related to S. rostellata. Thulin (1999 a, p. 339) examined the type at FT (the only known collection) and maintained the species as distinct as this differs significantly in indumentum features.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C330D515FFD7FCAE9F79F9C1.taxon	distribution	Distribution Southern Somalia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C330D515FF11F9B49DF7FE78.taxon	description	(Fig. 24 a, b.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C330D515FF11F9B49DF7FE78.taxon	description	Hochreutiner (1900, p. 120, 1955, p. 37, fig. X, 9, 10); Wilson (1999, p. 63).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C330D515FF11F9B49DF7FE78.taxon	distribution	Distribution Madagascar.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C330D515FCD1FE669DE4FBC3.taxon	description	(Fig. 24 c.) Hibiscus peruvianus R. E. Fr., Kongl. Svenska Vetenskapsakad. Handl. 24 (2): 31, Taf. 2, fig. 11 – 13 (1947). Type: Perú: Stromgebiet des Ucayali von 10 ° S bis zur Mündung, 1923, G. Tessmann 3072 (syn: B, probably destroyed; S 12 - 17673). Descriptions and illustrations Fries (1947, p. 31, Taf. 2, fig. 11 – 13); Macbride (1956, pp. 473 – 474); Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, p. 55, fig. 2); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C330D515FCD1FE669DE4FBC3.taxon	distribution	Distribution Bolivia, northern Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Perú and Venezuela.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C330D515FCEBFB8B9B32F959.taxon	description	(Fig. 24 d, e.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C330D515FCEBFB8B9B32F959.taxon	description	Craven et al. (2003, pp. 204 – 206, fig. 13); Cowie et al. (2013, p. 16, fig. 5); Craven (2022).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C330D515FCEBFB8B9B32F959.taxon	distribution	Distribution Northern parts of the Northern Territory, Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C330D517FC82F9069F0FFF17.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Gürke (1892, p. 564); Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 77 – 78); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C330D517FC82F9069F0FFF17.taxon	distribution	Distribution Mato Grosso, Brazil.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C332D517FFD3FEF19A83FC09.taxon	description	(Fig. 5, 25 a, b.) Hibiscus radiatus Cav., Diss. 3: 150, t. 54, fig. 2 (1787); Furcaria cavanillesii Kostel., Allg. Med. - Pharm. Flora 5: 1836 (1857), nom. illeg.; Hibiscus cannabinus var. radiatus (Cav.) Chiov., Atti Ist Bot. Univ. Pavia ser. 4, 7: 125 – 126 (1936). Type: Cultivated, France: Paris, from seeds provided by Banks, 1786, A. J. Cavanilles s. n. (lecto, designated by J. van Borssum Waalkes, Blumea 14 (1): 60 (1966, as ‘ holotype’): P-JU 12373; isolecto: LECB 0002047, MA 475810). Hibiscus unidens Lindl., Edward’s Bot. Reg. 11: t. 878 (1825). Hibiscus cannabinus var. unidens (Lindl.) Hochr., Annuaire Conserv. Jard. Bot. Genève 4: 115 (1900). Type citation: ‘ Raised at Mr Colvill’s nursery, from Brazilian seed. ’ [mid 1824]. Type: ‘ Hibiscus unidens’ in Bot. Reg. 11: tab. 878 [BHL].	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C332D517FFD3FEF19A83FC09.taxon	description	Canhamo braziliensis Perini, Prosp. Expl. Notice Cult. Canh. Braz. 1, plate after title page; fig. 7 – 12 after page 4; fig. 406 after page 6; fig. after page 8; fig. 4 after page 10; plate after page 12, plate after page 13 (1905); Pavonia perinii Perini, Prosp. Expl. Notice Cult. Canh. Braz. 5 (1905), nom alt. Type:? K, n. v. Descriptions and illustrations	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C332D517FFD3FEF19A83FC09.taxon	description	Canhamo braziliensis Perini has been placed under either Hibiscus cannabinus (e. g. Krapovickas and Fryxell 2004) or	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C332D517FFD3FEF19A83FC09.taxon	distribution	Distribution Considered native to India and Myanmar. Commonly cultivated and often naturalised in NE Argentina, Bangladesh, SE Brazil, Central African Republic, Colombia, Cuba, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Galápagos (Ecuador), Honduras, Laos, Leeward Islands, Mexico, Paraguay, Puerto Rico, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, southern USA, Venezuela and the Windward Islands.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C332D517FCF5FBC49DD7F92B.taxon	description	(Fig. 25 c, d.) Hibiscus reekmansii F. D. Wilson, Bull. Nat. Hist. Mus. London, Bot. 29 (1): 64 – 65, fig. 2 d (1999). Type: Burundi: Muramwya Province, Mptosa road, 17 May 1979, M. Reekmans 7993 (holo: BR 0000005571444; iso: BJA 426026043). Hibiscus diversifolius var. angustilobus Hauman, Bull. Jard. Bot. Etat. 31: 86 (1961). Type: Democratic Republic of The Congo: Upper Katanga: Sakala Marungu, 2200 m, Apr. 1944, L. Dubois 1157 (holo [mounted on 2 sheets]: BR 0000008952738, BR 0000008952745). Descriptions and illustrations Wilson (1999, pp. 64 – 65, fig. 2 d); Mwachala (2009, p. 42).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C332D517FCF5FBC49DD7F92B.taxon	distribution	Distribution Burundi, Democratic Republic of The Congo, Rwanda and Tanzania.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C332D519FCF1F92C9C4DFF17.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Wheeler (1992, p. 222, fig. 61 d, as Hibiscus sp. A); Craven et al. (2003, pp. 206 – 209, fig. 14); Craven (2022).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C332D519FCF1F92C9C4DFF17.taxon	distribution	Distribution Kimberley region, Western Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33CD519FFC7FE9C9B32FF17.taxon	description	(Fig. 25 e, f.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33CD519FFC7FE9C9B32FF17.taxon	description	Craven et al. (2003, p. 209, fig. 15); Craven (2022).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33CD519FFC7FE9C9B32FF17.taxon	distribution	Distribution Northern parts of the Northern Territory, Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33CD518FC8EFEE49F08FB85.taxon	description	(Fig. 26 a, b.) Hibiscus rostellatus Guill. & Perr. in Guill., Perr., & A. Rich., Fl. Seneg. Tent. 1: 55 – 56 (1831); Hibiscus surattensis var. rostellatus (Guill. & Perr.) Hochr., Annuaire Conserv. Jard. Bot. Genève 4: 113 (1900). Type citation: ‘ Crescit in paludosis circà Kounoun in peninsulâ Promontorii-Viridis. Floret à Septembre ad Martium. ’ Type: Senegal: G. S. Perrottet (lecto, designated by F. D. Wilson, Bull. Nat. Hist. Mus. London (Botany) 29 (1): 53 – 55 (1999): P 00151940; isolecto: P 00151941). Residual syn: Senegal: Cape Vert, Kounoun, 13 Mar. 1829, G. S. Perrottet 53 & 88 (BM 013726744); Senegal: Cape Vert, Kounoun, 1831, G. S. Perrottet (G); Senegal: 1824, G. S. Perrottet 324 (P 00151942). Descriptions and illustrations Guillemin et al. (1831, pp. 55 – 56); Andrews (1952, p. 26); Hauman (1963, pp. 117 – 118); Edmonds (1991, p. 20, fig. 1 (8), 2 (30 )); Wilson (1999, pp. 53 – 55, fig. 1 b); Leistner (2008, p. 115); Mwachala (2009, pp. 39 – 40); Lejoly et al. (2010, p. 171); van der Burg (2013, pp. 64, 66). Typification Wilson (1999, p. 53) designated a lectotype for Hibiscus rostellatus at P, stating, “ The label on the sheet from P reads as follows: ‘ Herbarium Richard [red ink] Hibiscus rostellatus Nob. afigurer [black ink] Senegal, Perottet [red ink] ’. Additional sheets at BM and G were considered isolectotypes. Further examination of digital images of these, and additional sheets at the same institutions, shows that more than one collection is involved. The lectotype is accepted here but not the ‘ isolectotypes’. An additional sheet at P is accepted as an isolectotype. Leistner (2008, p. 115) lists Welwitsch 5243 (BM, K) as the type but there is no direct evidence that this is original material.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33CD518FC8EFEE49F08FB85.taxon	distribution	Distribution Widespread in tropical Africa, in Angola, Bénin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Democratic Republic of The Congo, Ethiopia, Gabon, The Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Liberia, Mali, Mozambique, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda and Zambia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33DD518FFD4FB6E9A5FFE48.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, p. 104, fig. 20); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024). Typification When Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004) described H. saddii, the holotype was simply stated to be preserved at R, however, we located three sheets at R. The three sheets all have the same label with Krapovickas’ handwriting ‘ holotype’, the first sheet has an original specimen label and the subsequent two sheets have copies of this label. The barcode numbers associated with these sheets also indicate that these are part of a single ‘ specimen’ as the subsequent sheets are designated ‘ a’ and ‘ b’ respectively. We therefore accept the holotype as being mounted on three sheets, representing three preparations of a single specimen (Art. 8.3; Turland et al. 2018).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33DD518FFD4FB6E9A5FFE48.taxon	distribution	Distribution Mato Grosso, Brazil.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33DD518FCFDFE3D9A33FBE6.taxon	description	(Fig. 26 c, d.) Hibiscus sankowskyorum Craven in Craven et al., Muelleria 35: 6, fig. 1 d – f, 3 (2016). Type: Australia: Queensland. Cook District: Brown Creek crossing on the road to Iron Range, on levee of the stream, 9 Aug. l 987, J. R. Clarkson 7341 (holo [mounted on 2 sheets]: CANB 572995.1, CANB 572995.2; iso: BRI, L, QRS). Descriptions and illustrations Craven et al. (2016, p. 6, fig. 1 d – f, 3); Craven et al. (2022).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33DD518FCFDFE3D9A33FBE6.taxon	distribution	Distribution North Queensland, Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33DD518FC82FB8B9A33F959.taxon	description	(Fig. 27 a.) Hibiscus saponarius Craven in F. D. Wilson & Craven, Austrobaileya 4 (3): 442, fig. 2 (1995). Type: Australia: Queensland: Cook District: 4.2 km E of King River on the Edward River to Musgrave road, 3 June. 1989, J. R. Clarkson 8107 & V. J. Neldner (holo [mounted on 2 sheets]: CANB 518986.1, CANB 518986.2; iso: ASU 0019319, BRI AQ 0591242, CNS MBA 779, K 000659896, K 000659897). Descriptions and illustrations Wilson and Craven (1995, p. 442, fig. 2); Craven (2022); Wannan (2024, 7 A, B).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33DD518FC82FB8B9A33F959.taxon	distribution	Distribution North Queensland, Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33DD51BFCE0F92C9A06F862.taxon	description	Dame-Marie, Etang-Dérémond, 1 Aug. 1928, E. L. Ekman 10467 (lecto, here designated: S 12 - 11539; isolecto: K 000535447; S - R- 11260). Descriptions and illustrations Helwig (in Urban 1929, p. 28). Typification We here designate S 12 - 11539 as the lectotype of Hibiscus furcellatus var. scabricaulis as there is slightly more fertile material on the sheet. Notes	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33DD51BFCE0F92C9A06F862.taxon	distribution	Distribution Massif de la Hotte, Haiti.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33FD51AFF2DFF749CBCFB1D.taxon	description	Baker (1894, pp. 74 – 75); Wilson (1999, p. 73, fig. 3 f). Typification Baker (1894, pp. 65 – 66) specifies that the first set of specimens collected by Scott-Elliott was retained at K, with duplicates (when available) dispersed to BM, B, HA, CAL and P, in that order of priority. However, this does not constitute designation of holotypes at K, therefore we here select K 000240762 as lectotype as this is an ample sheet with original annotations. Notes Often confused with S. cannabinna due to a similar habit and highly divided leaves but likely closer to S. aspera and S. verrucosa that share overlapping distributions with S. scotellii. This species differs from all of these taxa in having a short, soft indumentum that suggests a closer relationship with S. sineaculeata.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33FD51AFF2DFF749CBCFB1D.taxon	distribution	Distribution Tropical West Africa, in Bénin, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Guinea, Ivory Coast, Liberia, Mali, Nigeria, Sierra Leone and Togo.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33FD51AFF32FAE19A47FF17.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Fuertes (1992, p. 65, fig. 1, 2, 3 a – f). Typification Although Fuertes (1992) only cited COL as the location of the holotype, a single sheet at COL is clearly labelled as the holotype by Fuertes and this is considered specific designation, not requiring designation of a lectotype.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33FD51AFF32FAE19A47FF17.taxon	distribution	Distribution Caquetá, Colombia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33FD51AFC89FEFE9DB6FC8F.taxon	description	(Fig. 27 b, c.) Hibiscus sineaculeatus F. D. Wilson, Bull. Nat. Hist. Mus. London, Bot. 29 (1): 72, fig. 3 d (1999). Type: Nigeria: Zaria Province, Kan Gimi Veg. mapping area, Dutsen Gwagwa, 20 Oct. 1947, R. W. J. Keay FHI 20117 (holo: K 000580890). [Hibiscus scotellii Keay, Fl. W. Trop. Afr. (edn 2); 1 (2): 347 (1958), non Baker f. (1894), p. p. as to type]. Descriptions and illustrations Wilson (1999, p. 72, fig. 3 d).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33FD51AFC89FEFE9DB6FC8F.taxon	distribution	Distribution Béninand Nigeria.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33FD51AFC8EFC569B9AF9FA.taxon	description	(Fig. 28 a, b.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33FD51AFC8EFC569B9AF9FA.taxon	description	Baker (1938, p. 22); Lebrun (1976, p. 379); Edmonds (1991, p. 19); Cheek (1992, fig. 2058); Vollesen (1995, p. 196); Wilson (1999, p. 62, fig. 2 h); Thulin (1999 b, p. 46, fig. 25 g); Mwachala (2009, p. 44).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33FD51AFC8EFC569B9AF9FA.taxon	distribution	Distribution Central East Africa, in Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia and Tanzania.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33FD51CFC87F9E39C2AFD18.taxon	description	(Fig. 28 c, d.) Hibiscus splendens C. Fraser ex Graham, Edinburgh N. Phil. J. 175 (1830); Abelmoschus splendens (C. Fraser ex Graham) Walp., Rep. Bot. Syst. 1: 309 (1842); Malvaviscus splendens (C. Fraser ex Graham) Regel, Gartenflora 6: 77 (1857). Type citation: ‘ … from New Holland seeds sent by Mr Fraser in November 1828 … ’ Type: Cultivated, Edinburgh (holo: K 000659876 (photo E 00279411 )). Descriptions and illustrations Graham (1830 a, p. 175); Graham (1830 b, t. 3025); Loddiges (1832, t. 1835); Bentham (1863, p. 213); Bailey (1899, pp. 127 – 128); Hochreutiner (1900, p. 120); Wilson (1974, p. 165, fig. 1, 16); Wilson and Craven (1995, p. 445); Spencer (1997, p. 383, fig.); Mitchell and Norris (2000, p. 329); Cooper and Cooper (2004, p. 278, fig.); Wilson and Lally (2022). Typification Although no specific specimen was cited, only a single collection is available matching the protologue and this specimen is clearly the material used for the illustration in Graham, Curtis’s Botanical Magazine 57: t. 3025 (1830) [BHL], noted to be the first recorded flowering in England. As only a single specimen can be identified, this is accepted as a holotype. This matching specimen was overlooked by Wilson (1974) who designated an earlier collection by Fraser as a neotype: [New South Wales:] Hastings River, N. Holl., 1825, C. Fraser s. n. (neotype: E), that was a superfluous designation given that original material is extant, as noted by Lauener and Paul (1985) and Wilson and Craven (1995).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33FD51CFC87F9E39C2AFD18.taxon	distribution	Distribution Queensland and New South Wales, Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C339D51CFF32FCED9C4DFA88.taxon	description	(Fig. 28 e, f.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C339D51CFF32FCED9C4DFA88.taxon	description	Craven et al. (2003, p. 212, fig. 17); Barrett (2015, fig. 12 b); Craven (2022).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C339D51CFF32FCED9C4DFA88.taxon	distribution	Distribution Kimberley region, Western Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C339D51CFFD4FA7D9A9DFF17.taxon	description	(Fig. 29 a, b.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C339D51CFFD4FA7D9A9DFF17.taxon	description	Craven et al. (2003, pp. 212 – 213, fig. 18); Craven (2022).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C339D51CFFD4FA7D9A9DFF17.taxon	distribution	Distribution Kimberley region, Western Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C339D51CFC8DFE9E9DF7FBA2.taxon	description	Hochreutiner (1917 a, pp. 83 – 85); Hochreutiner (1955, pp. 40 – 41, fig. 11, 1 – 2); Wilson (1999, p. 61). Typification We here designate G 00014297 as lectotype as this is the best material with original labels and annotations by Hochreutiner.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C339D51CFC8DFE9E9DF7FBA2.taxon	distribution	Distribution Madagascar.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C339D51EFCEEFB4B9E84FB8C.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Hochreutiner (1906, pp. 18 – 20); Andrews (1952, p. 26); Hauman (1961, pp. 86 – 87; 1963, p. 119); Wilson (1999, p. 57, fig. 2 e); van der Burg (2013, p. 69). Typification We here designate P 00151944 as lectotype of Hibiscus sudanensis as this is the best material with original labels and annotations by Hochreutiner. Hochreutiner (1906, p. 19) did not list specimens directly under the variety Hibiscus sudanensis var. glabrescens, rather only under the forms of the variety. However, there is a note specifying that Chevalier 10757 is the type of the species name and var. genuinus, and that Chevalier ‘ XZ’ [= 63 xz] is the type of var. glabrescens (Hochreutiner 1906, p. 20). As Chevalier 63 xz is the type of forma grandiflorus, that name is illegitimate. We here designate P 00151943 as lectotype of Hibiscus sudanensis f. minoriflorus as thisis the best material with original labels and annotations by Hochreutiner. Notes Hibiscus rostellatus var. congolanus is sometimes included under S. rostellata (e. g. POWO, see https: // powo. science. kew. org /) but the leaf shape, indumentum and calyx features are a better match for S. sudanensis. Lejoly et al. (2010, p. 171) accept the variety as named but we do not currently see justification for recognition without a broader review of variation. Although the species epithet recognises Sudan, this reflects previous political boundaries and the type was collected in what is currently the Central African Republic. The species dubiously occurs in Sudan as currently recognised.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C339D51EFCEEFB4B9E84FB8C.taxon	distribution	Distribution Democratic Republic of The Congo and Central African Republic.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33BD51EFF24FB6B9C4DF86C.taxon	description	(Fig. 29 c, d.) Hibiscus superbus C. A. Gardner, West. Austral. Forests Dept. Bull. 32: 64, fig. (1923), non Bergmans (1924). Type: Western Australia: West Kimberley, 1901, F. M. House s. n. (lecto, here designated: PERTH 01600311; isolecto: PERTH 01600303). Descriptions and illustrations Gardner (1923, p. 64, fig.); Wheeler (1992, p. 222, fig. 61 b); Wilson (1974, p. 179); McLay (2022). Typification We here designate PERTH 01600311 as lectotype as this sheet contains the best material.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33BD51EFF24FB6B9C4DF86C.taxon	distribution	Distribution Kimberley region, Western Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33BD501FC82FF749F70FBF9.taxon	description	(Fig. 29 e, f.) Hibiscus surattensis L., Sp. Pl. 2: 696 (1753); Furcaria surattensis (L.) Kostel., Allg. Med. Pharm. Fl. 5: 1856 (1836); Hibiscus involucratus Salisb., Prodr. Stirp. Chap. Allerton 384 (1796), nom. illeg., non (Hochr.) M. M. Hanes, G. E. Schatz & Callm. (2020), nom. illeg.; Hibiscus convolvulaceus Hassk., Abh. Naturf. Ges. Halle 9: 216 (1866), nom. illeg. Type: G. E. Rumphius, Herb. Amboin. 4: 40, t. 16 (1743) [BHL]. Hibiscus trinitarius Noronha, Verh. Batav. Genootsch. Kunst. 5 (Art. 4): 17 (1790), nom. inval., nom. nud. Hibiscus bifurcatus Blanco, Fl. Filip. 545 (1837), nom. illeg., non Cav. (1787). Type: Philippines: Luzon, Bulacan Province, Angat, Dec. 1914, E. Merrill Sp. Blancoana 670 (neo, designated by J. van Borssum Waalkes, Blumea 16 (1): 58 (1966): GH; isoneo: BM 013824035, BO, L, P, US). Hibiscus hypoglossus Harv. & Sond., Fl. Cap. 1: 177 (1860), nom. inval., pro syn.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33BD501FC82FF749F70FBF9.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Linnaeus (1753, p. 696); Salisbury (1796, p. 384); Blanco (1837, p. 545); Wight (1839, pl. 197); Blanco (1845, p. 380); Hasskarl (1866, p. 74); Blanco (1879, p. 334, t. 347); Trimen (1893, p. 152); Backer (1907, p. 129); Keay (1958, p. 346); Andrews (1952, p. 26); Exell (1961, p. 438, t. 89 / 4); Rakshit and Kundu (1961, p. 194); Hauman (1963, pp. 121 – 122); Borssum Waalkes (1966, pp. 58 – 59); Exell and Gonçalves (1979, p. 25, fig. 8, 4); Gibson (1975, p. 64, fig. 6); Hochreutiner (1955, p. 37, fig. X, 1 – 3); Marais and Friedmann (1987, p. 37, fig. 11 (2 – 4 )); Paul and Nayar (1988, pp. 153 – 155, fig. 32); Edmonds (1991, p. 15, fig. 1 (3); 2 (18 )); Pradeep and Sivarajan (1991, p. 636, fig. 7, 8); Chang (1993, p. 742); Paul (1993, pp. 327 – 329, fig. 91); Vollesen (1995, p. 198); Sivarajan and Pradeep (1996, pp. 119 – 123, fig. 42); Philcox (1997, pp. 293 – 294); Wilson (1999, pp. 51 – 53); Leistner (2008, p. 115); Mwachala (2009, p. 38); Lejoly et al. (2010, p. 171); Fayaz (2011, p. 511, fig.); van der Burg (2013, pp. 69 – 70, fig. 21); Hyde et al. (2024, fig.). Typification Jarvis (2007) determined that the sheet commonly cited as the type of Hibiscus surattensis [India: Gujarat, Surat, LINN 875.29] is not original material as ‘ the sheet lacks the relevant Species Plantarum number (i. e. ‘ 12 ’), and was a post- 1753 addition to the collection. ’ Jarvis (2007) states that the only original material identified for the name is the plate in Rumphius’ Herb. Amboin. 4: 40, t. 16 (1743). We designate G 00301841 as lectotype of Hibiscus surattensis var. villosus as this has the most material and original annotations by Hochreutiner.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C33BD501FC82FF749F70FBF9.taxon	distribution	Distribution Widespread in sub-Saharan Africa, also in the Indian subcontinent and south-east Asia, native to Angola, Bangladesh, Bénin, Borneo, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Central African Republic, southern China, Democratic Republic of The Congo, Ethiopia, Gabon, The Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Gulf of Guinea Islands, India, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Laos, Liberia, Malawi, Malaysia, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nigeria, Philippines, Republic of Cabo Verde, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa (Northern Provinces) Sri Lanka, Sudan, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Uganda, Vietnam, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Considered introduced in the Comoros, Madagascar, Mauritius, Réunion and the Seychelles but further study may be warranted.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C324D501FFD3FB8F9CE2F995.taxon	description	(Fig. 30 a, b.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C324D501FFD3FB8F9CE2F995.taxon	description	Wilson and Byrnes (1970, p. 195); Wilson (1974, p. 176); Wilson and Lally (2022).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C324D501FFD3FB8F9CE2F995.taxon	distribution	Distribution Northern parts of the Northern Territory, Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C324D501FFD5F91B9B32FE9F.taxon	description	Craven et al. (2003, pp. 213 – 217); Craven (2022).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C324D501FFD5F91B9B32FE9F.taxon	distribution	Distribution Northern parts of the Northern Territory, Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C324D501FC82FE799BF5FBBE.taxon	description	Baker (1937, p. 101); Wilson (1999, p. 59, fig. 1 g). Typification Baker (1937, p. 101) specifies ‘ Type in Herb. Conim., specimen in Herb. Mus. Brit. ’ but the location of duplicates precludes the acceptance of a holotype. We here designate COI 00005068 as lectotype as this is an ample specimen with an original label and descriptive working notes attached.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C324D501FC82FE799BF5FBBE.taxon	distribution	Distribution Northern Mozambique, possibly extending into Tanzania.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C324D501FCEDFB5F9A33F92C.taxon	description	(Fig. 30 c, d.) Hibiscus townsvillensis Craven in L. A. Craven et al., Muelleria 35: 9, fig. 1 g – i, 4 (2016). Type: Cultivated. Australian Capital Territory: CSIRO glasshouse, Black Mountain, Dec. 2003, L. A. Craven 10469 (holotype (mounted on 6 sheets): CANB 875440.1, CANB 875440.2, CANB 875440.3, CANB 875440.4, CANB 875440.5, CANB 875440.6; isotypes: A, ASU, B, BISH, BRI, CNS, G, K, L, MEL 2417498, NY, P 04023447, US). Descriptions and illustrations Craven et al. (2016, p. 9, fig. 1 g – i, 4); Craven et al. (2022).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C324D501FCEDFB5F9A33F92C.taxon	distribution	Distribution North Queensland, Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C324D503FCDEF92C9F4CFF17.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations De Saint-Hilaire and Naudin (1842, p. 39); Gürke (1892, p. 563); Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 58 – 60, fig. 2); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C324D503FCDEF92C9F4CFF17.taxon	distribution	Distribution Central Brazil.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C326D503FF21FE8E9B6BFF17.taxon	description	(Fig. 30 e, f.) Hibiscus uncinellus Moç. & Sessé ex DC., Prodr. 1: 449 (1824). Type: Icones Florae Mexicanae s. n. (lecto, designated by P. A. Fryxell & F. D. Wilson, Brittonia 38: 110 (1986): Torner Collection, no. 6331.1422, Hunt Institute [URL], stem, leaves, and buds only, excluding the corolla). Descriptions and illustrations De Candolle (1824, p. 449); Fryxell and Wilson (1986, p. 110, fig. 1; no full description); Fryxell (1988, pp. 229 – 232, fig. 55); Fryxell (1992 b, pp. 119 – 122); Fryxell (2000, p. 13).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C326D503FF21FE8E9B6BFF17.taxon	distribution	Distribution Central America, in Guatemala and Mexico.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C326D502FC8EFEFC9BF2FDC8.taxon	description	(Fig. 31 a, b.) Hibiscus verrucosus Guill. & Perr. in D. A. Guillemin et al., Fl. Seneg. Tent. 1: 57 (1831); Abelmoschus verrucosus (Guill. & Perr.) Walp., Repert. Bot. Syst. 1: 308 (1842); Hibiscus cannabinus var. verrucosus (Guill. & Perr.) Garcke, Linnaea 43: 56 (1880). Type citation: ‘ Crescit in sabulosis humidis insule fluminis Senegal dictae Sorr, prope Saint-Louis. Floret mensibus Septembre, Octobre et Novembre. ’ Type: Senegambie [Senegal]: Ile de Sorr, Oct. 1825, F. M. R. Leprieur s. n. (lecto, here designated: P 06721189). Descriptions and illustrations Guillemin et al. (1831, p. 57); Wilson (1999, p. 68, fig. 2 c, in part, as H. asper). Typification No authentic material of Hibiscus verrucosus has previously been identified. Mwachala (2009, p. 41) cited a collection by A. Petit at P as a possible holotype but this may not be original material. There may be original material of H. verrucosus in the Gay Herbarium, collected in Senegal prior to the description of H. verrucosus and used in preparation of the Flora Senegambiae Tentamen (see Gillett 1962) but collection details on specimens examined to date in the Gay Herbarium do not match the protologue. A sheet at BM may be original material: Senegal, Feb. 1825, Perrottet 55 (BM 013730377) but this requires confirmation. Searching of digitised collections at P, however, has identified material matching the protologue location and month of collection, and bearing the name Hibiscus verrucosus. Leprieur is also mentioned as a collector in the preface to Guillemin et al. (1831). This specimen (P 06721189) is here designated as lectotype of H. verrucosus as we consider the possibility for any other potential original material to be unequivocally linked to the protologue unlikely, and we consider the fixation of the application of this name with a lectotype to be highly desirable. Notes Hochreutiner (1900) and many other authors have treated S. verrucosa as a synonym of S. cannabina but usually without knowledge of the type material of S. verrucosa. Wilson (1999) suggested that this may well be an earlier name for S. aspera. Location of original material allows these competing ideas to be critically assessed. Collections from Richard Toll, Senegal (J. G. Adams 11112; P 02143634) and Auwie, Senegal (J. Trochain 1067; P 06721038) appear to be a good match for the lectotype of S. verrucosa, bearing entire leaves. Another collection from Richard Toll, of significance for understanding variation in this species, has very deeply divided leaves, therefore the entire leaves on the lectotype may reflect young or rapid growth. Specimens from Guinea and Mali with a combination of entire and 3 - lobed leaves also fit with our concept of S. verrucosa (e. g. J. G. Adams 11699; P 02143597). Wilson’s (1999, p. 68) concept of S. aspera includes our concepts of both S. cordofana and S. verrucosa, and our concept of S. aspera. Although the delimitation of taxa in this complex will require further study by local workers, we here distinguish two groups of species based on whether the epicalyx lobes are ± flat (when dried, somewhat fleshy-thickened when fresh) with stiff hispid hairs only (S. aspera) or have distinct marginal ribs and prominent aculei (S. cordofana and S. verrucosa). We recognise S. cordofana from East Africa as a related but disjunct taxon relative to our West African concept of S. verrucosa, both of which have previously been confused with S. aspera. Sabdariffa verrucosa is closely allied to S. cordofana in having epicalyx lobes with distinct marginal ribs but S. verrucosa has leaves variously entire, shallowly lobed or deeply lobed as the plants mature (v. climax leaves consistently 3 – 5 - lobed for at least half the length), large (v. small) scattered aculei on the stems, and the epicalyx and calyx with a few stiff hairs and long, very prominent aculeli on margins and ribs (v. epicalyx and calyx glabrous except for large, prominent aculei on the margins).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C326D502FC8EFEFC9BF2FDC8.taxon	distribution	Distribution Senegal, Guinea and Mali, and probably extending south to Ghana and east to Niger but a comprehensive review of specimens will be required to determine the distribution.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C327D502FCDDFDBC9D9DFBB4.taxon	description	Fryxell (1973, p. 80); Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 53 – 54, fig. 1 a – c); Rigueiral et al. (2019, p. 18, fig. 6 j – l); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C327D502FCDDFDBC9D9DFBB4.taxon	distribution	Distribution Central Brazil.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C327D502FCC6FB529A5FF98B.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations Krapovickas and Fryxell (2004, pp. 54 – 55, fig. 8); Coutinho and Fernandes-Júnior (2024).	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C327D502FCC6FB529A5FF98B.taxon	distribution	Distribution Mato Grosso, Brazil.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C327D505FC8EF97E9E87FB3A.taxon	description	(Fig. 31 c, d.)	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C327D505FC8EF97E9E87FB3A.taxon	description	Descriptions and illustrations	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C327D505FC8EF97E9E87FB3A.taxon	description	Mueller’s collection locality details on specimens relative to published protologues are notoriously vague. We here select a single specimen at K (ex MEL) as the lectotype as this can be unambiguously associated with a locality cited in the protologue (Mueller 1859, p. 221). We assign only the left-hand piece to K 000659823, assuming that the remaining three pieces belong to K 000659825.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C327D505FC8EF97E9E87FB3A.taxon	distribution	Distribution Northern parts of the Northern Territory and Queensland, Australia.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C320D505FF21FABA9C98F887.taxon	materials_examined	Type citation: ‘ Koulikoro [? Sarankoro], moyen Niger, terrain rocheux; 6 – 14 Oct. 1899. Sindou, terres cultivés, parmi les plantations de cotonniers; 10 mai 1899 ’. Type: n. v. Notes We have not traced the original material of Hibiscus cannabinus var. chevalieri. Wilson (1999) provided notes on the specimens cited and attributed these to A. J. B. Chevalier but did not see the material either. As we separate H. verrucosus from Wilson’s concept of H. asper, establishment of the taxon of which this variety is most likely to be a synonym is uncertain. The description of the calyx in the protologue suggests that this may be a synonym of H. cannabinus.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C320D505FC82FF759DDEFD30.taxon	materials_examined	Type citation: ‘ Ad sinum Edgecombe-Bay; Fitzalan’ Type: Queensland: Edgecombe-Bay, E. F. A. Fitzalan (holo: MEL 18677). Descriptions and illustrations Bailey (1913, p. 58). Notes A name of uncertain application that some workers have suggested may belong in section Furcaria but close examination of the type specimen suggests that this is more likely to be closer to section Lilibiscus Hochr. (B. Wannan, pers. comm.). Wilson (1974, p. 180) also considered this species to fall outside the circumscription of Hibiscus section Furcaria.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C320D505FCD2FCE69A15F882.taxon	materials_examined	Type: Tanzania: (Ostafrika), Usumbura, Luwironsa-Ufer bei Mugera, 4 Aug. 1905, A. Keil 183 (holo: B, probably destroyed; basic illustration of the type at BM 013832977). Descriptions and illustrations Ulbrich (1924, pp. 681 – 683). Notes Wilson (1999, p. 75) includes this in an appendix of poorly known species. The distinction from S. diversifolia remains unclear as no authentic material has been located. In addition to the type, Ulbrich (1924, p. 682) also cites a sterile specimen from Kenya (Fries 2049) and POWO (see https: // powo. science. kew. org /) records this for the Democratic Republic of The Congo, though the basis for the record is unclear. This is an accepted name in POWO (see https: // powo. science. kew. org /) and in the African Plant Database (see https: // africanplantdatabase. ch / en / nomen / specie / 81556 / hibiscus-keilii-ulbr) but we are not confident that H. keilii is distinct from S. diversifolia (and the ‘ carmine’ flowers would place this in subsp. agioxillos), therefore we refrain from making a new combination here. We key out H. keilii based on the distinctions noted by Ulbrich (1924, p. 682) but further collections are clearly needed to ascertain the status of this entity. If this taxon does belong under S. diversifolia, then the epicalyx features must have been misinterpreted. A possible relationship with S. rostellata should also be considered.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C321D504FFC6FF759F3CFEC3.taxon	materials_examined	Type: Hibiscus saxicola Ulbr.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C321D504FFC4FE809E94FC1B.taxon	materials_examined	Type: Cameroon: Bezirk Ebolowa, swischen Posten Sangmelima und Ebolowa, 11 km W of Sangmelima, 700 m, 2 June 1911, J. Mildbraed 5515 (syn: B, possibly destroyed, HBG 509073). Descriptions and illustrations Ulbrich (1919, pp. 179 – 180). Notes In the prologue, Ulbrich (1919) placed this species in section Azanza but later (Ulbrich 1921) provided an alternative classification, erecting series Saxicolae under section Furcaria. We are not currently convinced that this species belongs in Sabdariffa and refrain from providing a new combination pending further study.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
03AC0268C321D504FFC4FE809E94FC1B.taxon	distribution	Distribution Cameroon.	en	Barrett, Russell L., Yoshikawa, Vania Nobuko, McLay, Todd G. B., Duarte, Marília Cristina, Mwachala, Geoffrey, Hanes, Margaret M. (2025): Reinstatement of Sabdariffa and new combinations to support a monophyletic concept of Hibiscus (Malvaceae: Hibisceae). Australian Systematic Botany 38 (3): 1-97, DOI: 10.1071/SB24013, URL: https://doi.org/10.1071/sb24013
