Lindenbergia philippensis ( Chamisso & Schlechtendal 1828: 5 ) Bentham (1846: 10)

Singh, S. K., Patil, Sameer, Bhattacharyya, Subhasmit & Ghosh, Poulami, 2024, Two new synonyms of Lindenbergia philippensis (Orobanchaceae), Phytotaxa 666 (1), pp. 88-92 : 91-92

Lindenbergia philippensis ( Chamisso & Schlechtendal 1828: 5) Bentham (1846: 10)

≡ Stemodia philippensis Chamisso & Schlechtendal (1828: 5)

Type:— PHILIPPINES: INS. Philippinae, Luzon , 1841, Cumming 708 ( K barcode K000951118 !) (Neotype designated here)

= Lindenbergia macrostachya ( Bentham 1832: 1470) Bentham (1835: 22) syn. nov.

≡ Stemodia macrostachya Bentham 1832: 1470

Type:— NEPAL. Serpur: 28.02.181 2, Wallich 3925C ( K barcode K000951122 !) (Lectotype designated by Hjertson, 1995).

= Lindenbergia titensis Sikdar & Maiti (1980: 121) syn. nov.

Type:— INDIA. West Bengal: Jalpaiguri Distt., Madarihat range, Titi , s.d., Sikdar 4519A (Holotype: CAL, barcode CAL0000018787 !)

Distribution: India, Nepal, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, China (South-Central, South-West), Myanmar, Laos, Thailand, Cambodia, Vietnam, Philippines.

Note: While describing Stemodia philippensis, Chamisso did not cite any herbarium material but mentioned “ Ad pagum Tierra Alta Luconiae legimus ipsi ” [We collected it ourselves from the village of the highlands of Luconi (now Luzon)], “We” referring to his acquaintance Eschscholtz during their voyage on the Russian ship Rurik to the Pacific ( Daum, 2019). Chamisso’s collections are housed at LE, but Eschscholtz’s collections remain unknown. Despite an exhaustive search at LE and B (a potential location for the unfound specimen as after his return from the voyage, Chamisso became the custodian of the Berlin Botanical Garden), and major European herbaria (BM, BR, E, K, L, P), the Chamisso specimen was not found. Hjertson (1995) also failed to locate it, mentioning Chamisso’s Luzon collection as a doubtful holotype. Since the specimen remains elusive, it is considered misplaced. Therefore, a neotype is designated for nomenclature stability. The selected specimen, collected from the same locality a few years later, aligns entirely with the protologue.

SEM: Under the Scanning Electron Microscope, the seed’s exine shows double sculpturing with large polygonal cells having smooth, distinct anticlinal walls with hook-like spiral thickenings dividing each cell (also noticed by Hjerston, 1995). These cells may be incomplete or reticuloid, containing smaller cells filled with granules and filaments. The prolate pollen grains measure 19.94–24.22 × 9.701–10.28 μm, with the exine showing small to large reticulations and a tricolporate aperture.