Leobordea

Silva, Lucas De Almeida, Freitas, Joelcio, Dutra, Valquíria Ferreira & Araújo, Anderson Alves-, 2014, Validation of Lathyrus egirdiricus and three new combinations in Leobordea and Senegalia (Leguminosae), Phytotaxa 184 (5), pp. 295-297 : 295-296

Leobordea

Boatwright et al. (2011), using morphologic and phylogenetic analysis, expanded the concept of Leobordea with the inclusion of Lotononis sect. Digitatae B-E. Van Wyk (1991: 107), Leptis (E. Meyer ex Ecklon & Zeyher) Bentham (1843: 597) , Lipozygis (E. Meyer) Bentham (1843: 597) and Synclistus B-E. Van Wyk (1991: 157). Amongst the new combinations proposed for the genus, Leobordea furcata (Merxmüller & Schreiber) B.-E. van Wyk & Boatwright (in Boatwright et al., 2011: 173) is invalid and Leobordea diffusa (Thunberg) B.-E. van Wyk & Boatwright (2011: 176) is illegitimate.

The basionym of Leobordea furcata was cited as being Lotononis furcata (Merxmüller & Schreiber) Schreiber (1960: 613) , however, the earliest name is, in fact, Amphinomia furcata Merxmüller & Schreiber (1957: 272) .According to the Article 41.8 (see also Ex. 20) of the Code ( McNeill et al. 2012), this combination is invalid. A new combination of Amphinomia furcata Merxmüller & Schreiber in Leobordea is proposed here: