Polycnemum verrucosum Láng (1824: 179)

Iamonico, Duilio & Somlyay, Lajos, 2014, Typification of Láng’s names in Polycnemum (Amaranthaceae s. l.), Phytotaxa 188 (2), pp. 118-120 : 118-119

Polycnemum verrucosum Láng (1824: 179) .

Lectotype (designated here):― HUNGARY. “Habitat in plagis arenosis, aridis, comitatus Pestiensis, Cumaniae, Faszygiae”, s.d., A. F. Láng s.n. ( BP 707552!) (Fig. 2). ≡ Polycnemum arvense var. verrucosum (Láng) Oborny (1884: 334) .

Láng (1824: 179) described Polycnemum verrucosum from Hungary “… in plagis arenosis, aridis, comitatus Pestiensis, Cumaniae, Faszygiae ”. This provenance covers a fairly large part of the Great Hungarian Plain, namely the territory of historical Pest County, the regions of Kunság (“ Cumania ” in Latin; the present-day Kis- and Nagykunság) and Jászság (“ Iazygia ”, “ Jazygia ”, or “ Jaszygia ” in Latin; the version “ Faszygia ” appearing in the protologue is an orthographic error).

Three relevant specimens were traced, two found at W (both indicated as “ syntypus ” by R. Masson and J. Walter in 2013), and one at BP. The specimen W-1889-0266487 (image at http://jacq.nhm-wien.ac.at/djatoka/jacq-viewer/ viewer.html?rft_id=w_18890266487&identifiers=w) bears a label reading “ Polycnemum verrucosum (mihi) Láng [Láng’s script] Auf Steppen in Pester C. [probably Reichenbach’s script]”. Indeed, this specimen comes from the herbarium of the younger Reichenbach who likely received it from his father (see Burns-Balogh 1988). Apparently, it was the elder Reichenbach who got the specimen from Láng (see Reichenbach 1832: 583), but the date of collection is unknown. The specimen W-0026899 (image at http://jacq.nhm-wien.ac.at/djatoka/jacq-viewer/viewer.html?rft_id=w_ 0026899&identifiers=w_0026899) bears two individuals (plus three branches), accompanied by two original labels by Láng, thus representing two gatherings (from the herbaria of I. I. Schiffer and E. Fenzl, respectively). Although the texts on the labels match the protologue, since the collection dates are lacking, it cannot be ascertained whether these specimens are pre-1824 or not. Therefore, we prefer to consider all the specimens in W as not being original material.

Fortunately, the specimen BP-707552 (from Sadler’s herbarium) is unequivocally part of the original material, representing a single gathering and bearing two labels with the original annotations by Láng. The text of the right-hand label (“ Polycnemum verrucosum (mihi)… In plagis arenosis C. [Cottus] Pestiensis Cumaniae Jaszygiae ”) includes a detailed description, and a reference to an article (“ Descrip. vide Bot. [Botanische] Zeit. [Zeitung] 823 [1823]”) in which Láng apparently intended to introduce his new species. The fact that this article was eventually published without a description ( Láng 1823: 27) proves that the label was written by Láng before 1824. The left-hand label bears a reference to the protologue (“ Vid. Syl. pl. nov. ”), and probably was added subsequently to the sheet. All things considered, since the specimen BP-707552 seems to be the only certain original material, fully corresponding to both the protologue and the current concept of the species (e.g., Ball 1993, Iamonico 2013), it is designated here as the lectotype of the name P. verrucosum .