Rubus ulmifolius Schott (1818a: 42)

Ferrer-Gallego, P. Pablo & Beek, Abraham Van De, 2021, On Rubus ulmifolius (Rosaceae) and related taxa, Phytotaxa 523 (2), pp. 155-166 : 156

publication ID 10.11646/phytotaxa.523.2.3


persistent identifier

treatment provided by


scientific name

Rubus ulmifolius Schott (1818a: 42)


Rubus ulmifolius Schott (1818a: 42) View in CoL

Lectotype (designated by Weber 1986: 216): In sepibus maritimis Hispaniae, sine dat., Schott s.n. ( W). Ind. Loc: Mountains of Gibraltar.

The name Rubus ulmifolius was published twice by Heinrich Wilhelm Schott, first in the Väterländische Blätter für die österreichische Kaiserstaat ( Schott 1818a: 42) and subsequently in Isis ( Schott 1818b: 821) . It was typified by Weber (1986) from a specimen preserved at W. There is no doubt about its identity, it is the discolour blackberry, i.e. a blackberry with abaxially white tomentose leaves, with strongly pruinose stems and small leaves, which is the most common species in South-West Europe.

As a diploid taxon it has a large variability in contrast to the apogamous taxa which form the bulk of Rubus species in Europe. Because earlier botanists were not aware of this difference they dealt with the variations of R. ulmifolius in the same way as with the apogamous taxa. This resulted in a large number of related taxa, sometimes ordered as infraspecific taxa. Sudre (1908 –1913) recognized 8 subspecies, 20 microgenera (an unfortunate word for an infraspecific rank!) and 94 varieties. Next to these many synonyms are listed. Most of these do not have real taxonomic value. Monasterio-Huelin & Weber (1996) reduced the number of infraspecific taxa to 4 varieties. Rubus ulmifolius has also many hybrids, often with unknown other parents.

Before Focke (1877) recuperated the name R. ulmifolius most authors used other, later names for the species, e.g. R. discolor Weihe & Nees (1824: 46) or R. rusticanus Mercier (1861: 279) , but since Focke’s publication is has been in common use.

There is no doubt about the identity of the type. It consists of both an inflorescence and a piece of a primocane. On the label is written ‘In sepibus maritimis Hispaniae’ which corresponds well with the locality in the protologue: ‘in montosis Gibraltariae’, or at least does not contradict it.


Naturhistorisches Museum Wien














Rubus ulmifolius Schott (1818a: 42)

Ferrer-Gallego, P. Pablo & Beek, Abraham Van De 2021

Rubus ulmifolius

Schott, H. W. 1818: )
Weber 1986: 216
GBIF Dataset (for parent article) Darwin Core Archive (for parent article) View in SIBiLS Plain XML RDF