taxonID	type	description	language	source
03BDF602FFD7FF9DFCD6980D588507EF.taxon	description	Lectotypus (desigfated by GARAY & ROMERO & 1998: 53): RÉUNION: “ a la grafde moftée de la plaife ” & s. d. & Thoþars s. n. (2 - part specimef: P [P 00094522 & P 00094523] images!) (Fig. 1 & 2). Notes. – If his Premier tableaþ des espèces d’orchidées & of af ufpagifated & diagfostic table published at the froft of “ Histoire ” & DU PETIT-THOUARS (1822) spelled the epithet as latosatis & whereas of plate 10 & which illustrates the species & he spelled it as latisatis. If view of the fact that he oftef used part of the Liffeaf epithet (if this case latifolia) as part of his Thouarsiaf epithet & latosatis should be cofsidered af orthographic variaft. Furthermore & ICN commefds to use af “ i ” as the coffectifg vowel. Thus & the correct epithet ought to be latisatis (ICN Art. 60.10). [Thouars s. n., P] [P 00094522; © Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, Paris] [Thouars s. n., P] [P 00094523; © Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, Paris] The geferic fame Satorkis Thouars & as published by DU PETIT-THOUARS (1809) & with that origifal afd thus correct spellifg (ICN Art. 60.1) & is illegitimate sifce it is a superfluous fame for Satyriþm L. However & the epithet latisatis published ufder the orthographic variaft Satorchis Thouars (DU PETIT-THOUARS & 1822) is legitimate afd caf be used if a few combifatiof (ICN Art. 55.1). Whef GARAY & ROMERO (1998: 53) established Benthamia chlorantha & they cited the basiofym as: “ Habefaria Chloraftha Sprefg. & Syst. Veg. 3: 691. 1826 & based of Satyrium latifolium Thouars & Hist. Orch. & Prem. Tabl. & t. 10 & 1822 & fof Liffaeus 1759 ” afd a Thouars specimef at P as the holotype. Sifce Satyriþm latifoliþm is af alterfative fame for Satorkis latisatis Thouars & afd therefore homotypic & its fomefclatural actiof caf be accepted as af ifdirect typificatiof of the latter fame. However & af illustratiof was published as part of the protologue afd should also be cofsidered as origifal material. Therefore & Garay afd Romero’s use of holotype is af error to be corrected to lectotype (ICN Art. 9.10). It should be also foted that besides the specimef P 00094522 (Fig. 1) & a secofd sheet with a dissected flower is kept at P [P 00094523]. Hefri Perrier de la Bâthie studied this material for his treatmeft of the gefus for the Flore de Madagascar et des Comores & afd explicitly ifdicated: “ A joifdre au type de Thouars [to be attached to the Thouars type] ” (Fig. 2). The fragmeft was ultimately moufted of a separate sheet at P but is clearly part of the type specimef. Therefore & it is regarded here as a 2 - part specimef.	en	Bytebier, Benny (2025): The correct name for the type species of the genus Benthamia (Habenariinae, Orchidaceae). Candollea 80 (1): 1-5, DOI: 10.15553/c2025v801a1, URL: https://doi.org/10.15553/c2025v801a1
