Lotus capensis Houtt.,
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.15553/c2017v721a11 |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6301898 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/038F111B-FF90-F21F-FCDE-FCBC25D1BF06 |
|
treatment provided by |
Carolina |
|
scientific name |
Lotus capensis Houtt., |
| status |
|
58. Lotus capensis Houtt., View in CoL
Nat. Hist. II(10): 311, tab. 65, fig. 3. 1779.
Lectotypus (designated here by Callmander): SOUTH AFRICA: Cape, Auge s.n. [?] ( G-PREL [ G00818107 ]!).
= Lotononis umbellata (L.) Benth View in CoL . in London J. Bot. 2: 602. 1843.
Notes. – Lotus capensis was considered to be a synonym of Lotononis umbellata by MERRILL (1938: 347). The former was not cited by VAN WYK (1991) in his revision of Lotononis (DC.) Eckl. & Zeyh. A note by R. Dahlgren (Lund, 15.I.1959) on the Cape herbarium collection confirms that Houttuyn’s species belongs to Lotononis . Lotus suffruticosus Burm. f. (BURMAN f., 1768: 22) undoubtedly represents the same taxon. Houttuyn cited Burman’s binomial in Nat. Hist. II(10): Aanwyz. Plaat. [2]. 1779. No type specimen of the latter has been located in G-PREL but a fragment is present in G-DC [G00477415].
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
|
Kingdom |
|
|
Phylum |
|
|
Class |
|
|
Order |
|
|
Family |
|
|
Genus |
Lotus capensis Houtt.,
| Wijnands, Dirk Onno, Heniger, Johannes, Veldkamp, Jan Frederik, Fumeaux, Nicolas & Callmander, Martin W. 2017 |
Lotononis umbellata (L.) Benth
| Benth. 1843: 602 |