Raphanus aucheri (Boiss.) Boiss., Diagn. Pl.

AL-Shehbaz, Ihsan A. & Barriera, Gabrielle, 2019, Typification of Edmond Boissier’s Cruciferae (Brassicaceae) names enumerated in Flora Orientalis, Boissiera 72, pp. 1-193 : 170

Raphanus aucheri (Boiss.) Boiss., Diagn. Pl. Orient. 8: 45. 1849.

 Brassica aucheri Boiss. in Ann. Sci. Nat., Bot. ser. 2, 17: 88. 1842.

Type: “[Aucher-Eloy] N. 203. Mossul”.

Lectotypus (designated here): IRAQ: “Mosul”, s.d., AucherEloy 203 ( G-BOIS [ G00332666 ]; isolecto-: P [ P00741698 ]) .

Notes. – Boissier annotated P00741698, and that means he based the species description on the two duplicates above and the lectotypification is then justified.

In treating B. aucheri as Raphanus, BOISSIER (1849: 45, 1867a: 401 ) confused two unrelated species that superficially resemble each other in flower color and reflexed fruit.

SCHULZ (1919) recognized that problem and treated (p. 209) the eastern Mediterranean species (N Israel, Lebanon and W Syria) as R. aucheri , and assigned (p. 135) the plants from Iran and Iraq to Sinapis aucheri (Boiss.) O.E. Schulz. However , the name Raphanus aucheri was a combination based on the same type of Brassica aucheri and, therefore, Schulz added to the confusion.

Both AL-SHEHBAZ (1985) and BAILLARGEON (1985) discussed the history and distribution of both species, and the name Raphanus boissieri Al-Shehbaz , which was proposed for the eastern Mediterranean species, was illegitimate to the earlier published Quidproquo confusum Greuter & Burdet ( GREUTER & RAUS, 1983) . Although the status of the last name was accept-ed by some (e.g., BAILLARGEON, 1985; GREUTER et al., 1986: 149) and rejected by others (e.g., AL-SHEHBAZ, 2012), recent molecular studies by ZIFFER-BERGER et al. (2014) have firmly established Quidproquo Greuter & Burdet as a distinct genus.