Chamaenerion conspersum ( Haussknecht 1879: 51 ) Kitamura (1966: 110)

Luo, Yike & Xie, Lei, 2023, A checklist of Onagraceae in the Pan-Himalaya region, Phytotaxa 597 (4), pp. 245-268 : 249

1.2. Chamaenerion conspersum ( Haussknecht 1879: 51) Kitamura (1966: 110) ( Fig. 2B ).

≡ Epilobium conspersum Hausskn. ≡ Chamerion conspersum (Hausskn.) Holub (1972: 86) . ≡ Epilobium reticulatum C.B. Clarke (1879: 583) , nom. superfl. ≡ Chamaenerion reticulatum (C.B.Clarke) Kitamura (1955: 185) .

Lectotype (first step designated by Raven 1962a: 351, second step designated here):— INDIA. Sikkim: India orient, in montibus Sikkim ad Lama Koryr , 3480–4267 m, 1849, Hooker s.n. ( K000913980 !, isolectotype K000913981 !) .

Distribution: —C Nepal, U Yarlung Zangbo, L Yarlung Zangbo, S Hengduan, Yarlung Zangbo-Brahmaputra.

Note: —There may have been hybridization events happened between this species and Chamaenerion angustifolium or C. speciosum ( Decaisne 1844: 57) Hoch & Gandhi (2020: 60) , since morphologically intermediate populations were found in overlap areas of those species ( Chen et al. 2007).

The protologue of E. conspersum only provided the habitat, altitude, and collector name of the type ( Haussknecht 1879). Raven (1962) considered that the “ holotype ” was deposited in K. However, the type material is a gathering with duplicate specimens in K (K000913980 and K000913981), which have the same collecting information. This situation can be considered as inadvertent lectotypification under Art. 7.11 and 9.10 of the ICN ( Turland et al. 2018). A second step is here lectotypified between the two speciemens in K (Art. 9.17 of ICN, Turland et al. 2018). The specimen K000913980 matches better with the protologue of E. conspersum and is designated as the lectotype here.

Figures

FIGURE 2. Field photographs of Chamaenerion and Circaea.A:Chamaenerion angustifolium.B: Chamaenerion conspersum. C: Circaea alpina subsp. imaicola. D: Circaea cordata. E: Circaea repens. Photographed by Y.K. Luo & L. Xie.