Chamaecytisus hirsutus (L.) Link, 1968

Jarvis, Charlie, 2007, Chapter 7: Linnaean Plant Names and their Types (part C), Order out of Chaos. Linnaean Plant Types and their Types, London: Linnaean Society of London in association with the Natural History Museum, pp. 370-473 : 472-473

Cytisus hirsutus Linnaeus , Species Plantarum 2: 739. 1753.

"Habitat in Hispania, Sibiria, Austria, Italia." RCN: 5442.

Lectotype (Cristofolini & Jarvis in Taxon 40: 497. 1991): Herb. Burser XXII: 5 ( UPS) .

Current name: Chamaecytisus hirsutus (L.) Link ( Fabaceae : Faboideae ).

Note: Skalická (in Novit. Bot. Unit. Carol. 1: 55-61. 1982) discussed most of the original material for the name (though not the Burser collection). She concluded that Cytisus hirsutus should be interpreted in the sense of the cited Clusius description and illustration, identifiable as Cytisus villosus Pourr. As a result, she informally rejected C. hirsutus . Although Cristofolini & Jarvis (in Taxon 40: 497. 1991) believed Skalická to have made a formal typification (which they rejected in favour of Burser material), this does not seem to be the case. She stated (pp. 63-64) "I have made the typification...so that it could include only one species, which is conformable to the conceptions in Hortus cliffortianus", and "I appoint as the type-locality... ad montium radices circa Calpen et Baeticae maritimis. The type must be elected in convenience with the description of Cytisus III. Clus. Rar. Plant. Hist. 1: 94, 1601 and with the illustration of the species designated as Cytisus III". It seems that Skalická intended that another unspecified collection (a neotype?), agreeing with Clusius’ concept and stated locality, should be chosen to serve as the type. However, she did not designate such a collection herself. Consequently, the lectotype designated by Cristofolini & Jarvis, which maintains the usage of the Linnaean name as Chamaecytisus hirsutus , is the earliest formal choice.