Iresine ajuscana Suess. & Beyerle

Thomas Borsch, Hilda Flores-Olvera, Silvia Zumaya & Kai Müller, 2018, Pollen characters and DNA sequence data converge on a monophyletic genus Iresine (Amaranthaceae, Caryophyllales) and help to elucidate its species diversity, Taxon 67 (5), pp. 944-976 : 963-964

Iresine ajuscana Suess. & Beyerle

in Repert. Spec. Nov. Regni Veg. 39: 10. 1935 ≡ Iresine ajuscana f. longiflora Suess. in Repert. Spec. Nov. Regni Veg. 39: 10. 1935 – Holotype for I. ajuscana and Lectotype for I. ajuscana f. longiflora ( designated here): MEXICO. Staat Mexico: Thal von Ajusco , 1870, L. Hahn 35 (B barcode B 10 0177104! [image!] ; isotype/isolectotype: fragment M barcode M-0098602 [image!]).

= Iresine ajuscana f. minutiflora Suess. in Repert. Spec. Nov. Regni Veg. 39: 11. 1935 – Lectotype (designated here): MEXICO. Sallo de aqua , Dec 1905, C.A. Purpus 1807 ( B barcode B 10 0715445 ! [image!]) .

= Iresine grandis var. glabrata Suess. in Mitt. Bot. Staatssamml. München 4: 108. 1952 – Holotype: MEXICO. Oaxaca: Ayutla, Cañon Rio Tlahuitoltepec, 19–27 Feb 1937, W.H. Camp 2720 (NY barcodes 01259979! [image!]; isotype: NY barcode 01259978! [image!]).

= Iresine rubella Suess. in Mitt. Bot. Staatssamml. München 4: 109. 1952 – Holotype: MEXICO. Mexico-Valle, Monte de la Parada, 1856–1858, s.coll. s.n. (BM!).

Note. – The original description of the species has no f. ajuscana but Suessenguth created f. longiflora for the type specimen of the species. With the lectotypification we want to make sure that f. longiflora refers to the same specimen as the autonym. Forma longiflora then falls into the synonymy of the autonym and the specimen Hahn 35 at B is taken as the holotype for the species name. Regarding to f. minutiflora four specimens are mentioned as original material. Only the two plants collected by Purpus (nos. 1803 and 1807) were annotated by Suessenguth in 1934 with “ Iresine ajuscana f. minutiflora Suess. & Bey.” and are staminate plants. Because of the strong link, one of them is designated as lectotype. The two specimens from Amecameca, Sacro Monte 2300 m, 3-3-1932, H. Fröderström & E. Hultén 1207 und 1208, both collected on the same day and representing staminate and pistillate plants, lack any sign of the name of the form and were identified one year later, in 1935, by Suessenguth already citing the publication in the Repertorium The specimen described by Suessenguth (1952) as I. rubella has relatively well developed pistillodes but these lack functional filiform stigmas and contrary to the view of this author is interpreted as a staminate individual.

Taxonomic status: Not a monophylum as currently defined, requires further study (C).