Bromus alopecuros Poir., Voy. Barbarie. 2: 100-101 (1789)

Llamas, Felix & Acedo, Carmen, 2019, Typification of eight current and seven related names and a new section in the genus Bromus (Bromeae, Pooideae, Poaceae), PhytoKeys 121, pp. 53-72 : 54-55

Bromus alopecuros Poir., Voy. Barbarie. 2: 100-101 (1789)

Bromus alopecuros Poir., Voy. Barbarie. 2: 100-101 (1789). Type Protologue: "Cette espèce croît dans les prairies aux environs de la Calle ". Type: [Algeria] Numidia (lectotype, designated here: P [P02622864 image!]). (Figure 1)

Bromus contortus Desf., Fl. Atlant. 1: 95, tab. 25 (1798). Type Protologue: "Habitat prope La Calle". Type: [Algeria] La Calle (lectotype, designated here: P [P00320328 image!]). (Figure 2)

Bromus alopecuroides Poir. in Lamarck, Encycl., Suppl. 1: 703 (1810), nom. illeg. superfl. for Bromus contortus Desf. Type Protologue: [Algeria] "Barbarie, dans les prés, aux environs de Lacalle".

Remarks.

Currently, the species Bromus alopecuros Poir. has at least two synonyms: B. alopecuroides Poir. and B. contortus Desf.

In describing Bromus alopecuros , Poiret (1789: 100) stated in the protologue diagnosis "Panicula conferta erecta, spiculis oblongis subsessilibus, aristis inferne spiraliter contortis." followed by a description in French and the locotypic indication indicating this species grows around La Calle [now El Kala, El Tarf province, Algeria].

During our search for original material in the herbaria conserving the plants of Poiret (FI, H, P and UPS), we found only one specimen collected by him. There is a sheet in P (P02622864) from Numidia (Algeria “Numidia” included in the full title of his publication), registered as original material, bearing a single plant annotated as B. alopecuros with five labels transcribed below; one of them handwritten by Poiret:

Label 1: [printed]. Herb. Poiret in Herb. Moquin-Tandom.

Label 2: [handwritten by Poiret] "brom. contortus Desf. Bromus alopecuros (n) Panicula conferta erecta spiculis oblongis subsessilibus, aristis inferne spiraliter contortis. (nobis) h. Poiret ex Numidia.

Label 3: [printed]: barcode Herbier museum Paris P 02622864

Label 4: [handwritten] Bromus alopecuros Poiret, Det. P. Smith 3/72

Label 5: [printed]. Herb. Mus. Paris

As this specimen bears a label handwritten by Poiret with his description of B. alopecuros and the word “nobis” [our], indicating the author is describing a new species, it seems sure that it is original material and it is suitable to be described as a lectotype. In addition, there is no other specimen matching with Bromus alopecuros Poir. in FI (Chiara Nepi pers. comm. 2018); nor in H (Raino Lampinen pers. comm. 1994; Henry Väre pers. comm. 2018) nor in UPS (Dr. Mats Hjertson pers. comm. 2018).

When Desfontaines (1798: 95), describes Bromus contortus , his description closely matches that of Poiret (1789). In his diagnosis, Desfontaines adds that the spikelets are "quindecimfloribus, …pubescentibus”. At the end, he has doubts about his plant and transcribes a reference to the description of Poiret "An Bromus alopecuros? Poiret. Itin. 2. P. 100)". Subsequently, he includes a more detailed description and asserts "Habitat prope La Calle". The only known original material for B. contortus is the illustration quoted in Desfontaines (1798: plate 25) and a single sheet in P (MNHN-P P00320328) bearing two specimens mounted on it with a printed label: Herbier de la FLORE ATANTIQUE donné au Museum par M. DESFONTAINES and annotated " Bromus contortus " handwritten (unknown by whom). There is another label, handwritten by Desfontaines, containing the exact diagnosis and description as it appears in Flora Atlantica ( Desfontaines 1798: 95). Maybe Desfontaines is surprised one specimen is very similar to B. alopecuros , but not the other one, justifying his doubt in the description where he states "perhaps B. alopecuros?" This sheet bears two plants. The one on the left seems to be Bromus lanceolatus Roth and the one on the right is a fragment (contracted and erect panicle with subsessile spikelets) of a specimen matching B. contortus Desf., that also exemplifies the typical resemblance to B. alopecuros Poir. Therefore, the sheet in question does not represent a specimen as defined in the Code ( Turland et al. 2018); but each of the two plants on the sheet is a specimen in its own right. Only one specimen is original material for B. contortus Desf. It is possible that the illustration in Desfontaines (1798: plate 25) was drawn from the plant designated here as lectotype.

Choosing the specimen on the right of the sheet MNHN-P P00320328 (Figure 2) as lectotype, which taxonomically matches B. alopecuros Poir., the name becomes a taxonomic or heterotypic synonym ( Turland et al. 2018) of it, as Persoon (1805, 1: 95) asserted. Moreover, it is also possible that the heterogeneous material in this sheet is the origin of some misidentifications of B. lanceolatus Roth as B. contortus Desf.

Later, Poiret (1810: 703) describes Bromus alopecuroides " Bromus panicula conferta, erecta; spiculis oblongis, pubescentibus, quindecimfloris, subsessilibus; aristis infernè spiraliter contortis". This description is almost identical to the former of B. alopecuros . Its only difference is to include "pubescentibus, quindecimfloris", the same features Desfontaines (1798: 95) uses to describe B. contortus . Poiret continues adding the references to B. alopecuros Poir. and the synonym B. contortus Desf. Therefore, this name does not need a Lectoype as it is a superfluous and illegitimate renaming (Art. 52. 1) of Bromus contortus Poir. and has the same type we select here for that name.