Festuca circummediterranea Patzke

in Oesterr. Bot. Z. 122: 261. 1974.

÷ F.laevis (Hack.) Nyman, Consp. Fl. Eur.: 828. 1882 [nom. illeg.].

÷ F.laevis (Hack.) K. Richter, Pl. Eur.: 96. 1890 [nom. illeg.].

÷ F.ovina subsp. laevis Hack., Monogr. Festuc. Eur.: 107. 1882.

÷ F.ovina var. laevis Hack., Monogr. Festuc. Eur.: 84. 1882.

Festuca ovina subsp. laevis was raised to the rank of species in NYMAN (1882: 828). The reference of NYMAN (1882: 828) to HACKEL (1882) with the mention of “Hack. monogr. 107” is sufficient to validate the new combination. The name F.laevis (Hack.) Nyman is illegitimate, as this name has been validly published by Sprengel for a different taxon ( F.laevis (Thunb.) Spreng., Syst. Veg. 1: 355. 1824). As a consequence, this name must be regarded as a later but illegitimate homonym. However, the name was validly published and retains the same type as F.ovina subsp. laevis Hack. The same combination was later published again by RICHTER (1890: 96), without any reference to Nyman, but with a clear reference to “Hack. mon. p. 107. (p. 108) (1882.)”, and is thus an isonym with no nomenclatural status (MCNEILL & al., 2006, art. 6 note 2).

The name ‘ Festuca circummediterranea’ as an avowed substitute for the name of the taxon at the specific rank was published for the first time by EHRENDORFER (1967: 90) and later again by EHRENDORFER (1973: 112). Actually, as both these names lack a full and direct reference to the place of valid publication of the replaced synonym including page reference and date, they must be regarded as not validly published (MCNEILL & al., 2006, art. 33.4).

Valid publication occurred with PATZKE (1974), thanks to the full and direct reference both to N YMAN (1882) and RICHTER (1890), which are both validly published names, even if illegitimate. PATZKE (1974) reports also a reference to HACKEL (1882), but not quite correctly, as he quotes “ F.ovina L. subsp. laevis var. genuina Hackel, Monogr. Fest. Eur. 108 (1882)”. As stated above, this page is neither the place of valid publication of F.ovina subsp. laevis nor that of F.ovina var. laevis (H ACKEL, 1882: 84) respectively.

The new name published by PATZKE (1974) obviously retains the same type of the name F.ovina subsp. laevis Hack., designed above in this paper. This name is currently adopted for this taxon in recent Floras of southern Europe and northern Africa (e.g. MARKGRAF- DANNNEBERG, 1980; FOGGI & MÜLLER, 2009a-e).