Epilobium amurense Haussknecht (1879: 55)

Luo, Yike & Xie, Lei, 2023, A checklist of Onagraceae in the Pan-Himalaya region, Phytotaxa 597 (4), pp. 245-268 : 254

3.2. Epilobium amurense Haussknecht (1879: 55) .

Type:— Amur River (Heilongjiang River, border between the Far East region of the U.S. S. R. and Heilongjiang Province, China), “Um die Bai de Castries, an sonnigen Mergelabhängen”, 14 July 1854, Maximowicz s.n. ( LE, G, K000742623 !, GH00054042 digital image) ( Chen et al. 1992) .

= Epilobium laetum Wall. ex Haussknecht (1884: 218) . ≡ Epilobium amurense Hausskn. subsp. laetum (Wall. ex Hausskn.) Raven (1962a: 367) .

Lectotype (designated by Chen et al. 1992):— NEPAL. Towards Gosainthan, 1821–1822, N. Wallich 6329A (K001123575!, isolectotypes K000742620!, BM000957928!, CAS0033546 digital image).

= Epilobium nepalense Haussknecht (1879: 53) .

Lectotype (designated by Raven 1962a):— NEPAL. without definite locality, 1821–1822, N. Wallich s.n. (C10016103 digital image, isolectotype C10016102 digital image).

Distribution: —N Pakistan, Jammu & Kashmir, C Nepal, Sikkim & Darjeeling, U Yarlung. Zangbo, L Yarlung Zangbo; Yarlung Zangbo-Brahmaputra, S Hengduan, N Hengduan

Note: —Only Epilobium amurense subsp. amurense occurs in the Pan-Himalaya region, while the other subspecies E. amurense Hausskn. subsp. cephalostigma ( Haussknecht 1879: 57) Chen, Hoch & Raven (1992: 127) does not occur in this area.

Chen et al. (1992) considered that the “ holotype ” of E. amurense is deposited in LE. However, we are not sure how many duplicates are there. According to Art. 9.1, we cannot determine the type status of E. amurense by now.