Buddleja elegans Chamisso & Schlechtendal (1827: 594) subsp. angustata (Benth.) Norman (1995: 192)

O’Leary, Nataly, 2015, Typification and nomenclatural notes on twenty-three names of Buddleja (Schrophulariaceae), Phytotaxa 234 (3), pp. 237-245 : 238

Buddleja elegans Chamisso & Schlechtendal (1827: 594) subsp. angustata (Benth.) Norman (1995: 192)

Basionym:— Buddleja angustata Bentham (1846: 443) ≡ Buddleja vetula Chamisso (1833: 18) var. major Schmidt (1862: 284) ≡ Buddleja vetula Cham. var. angustata (Benth.) Chodat (1902: 822) , nom. illeg. superfl.

Type (lectotype, first-step designated by Norman 2000: 77):— BRAZIL. Rio Grande do Sul: Rio Grande & Rio Jaquy Mtns., J. Tweedie 1097 ( K!, two sheets; second-step lectotype, here designated K barcode 573255! [digital image], isolectotype K barcode 573275! [digital image]) .

Notes:— Norman (2000) mentions the holotype of B. angustata to be housed at K, which is likely since Bentham worked there ( Stafleu & Cowan 1976), and the majority of J. Tweedie’s collections are housed there as well. However, there are two duplicate specimens at K ( K 573255 and K 573575) so that Norman’s mention can be considered as a first-step typification (Art. 9.17, Ex. 12 of the ICN, McNeill et al. 2012). This designation is here narrowed by selecting the most complete specimen as a second-step lectotype (Art. 9.17 of the ICN, McNeill et al. 2012, McNeill 2014).

Schmidt (1862) considered B. angustata Benth. (1846) as a variety of B. vetula Cham. , and he named it: Buddleja vetula var. major Schmidt. The author was not obliged to name it var. angustata , given that names have no priority outside their rank (Art. 11.2 of the ICN, McNeill et al. 2012). Later, Chodat (1902) followed Schmidt’s idea, but he named the variety: Buddleja vetula var. angustata (Benth.) Chodat , rendering this an illegitimate superfluous name (Art. 52 of the ICN, McNeill et al. 2012), because the epithet “ major” should have been used as it has priority at varietal rank. Norman (1995) considered this taxon as a subspecies of B. elegans and correctly used the epithet angustata , valid at this rank (Arts. 4.2, 4.3, 11.4, Ex. 16 of the ICN, McNeill et al. 2012).