Eliokarmos rossouwii (U.Müll.-Doblies & D.Müll.-Doblies) Mart.- Azorín, A.P. Dold, M.B.Crespo & M.Á.Alonso,

Martínez-Azorín, Mario, Dold, Anthony P., Crespo, Manuel B. & Alonso- Vargas, María Á., 2021, New combinations in Hyacinthaceae subfam. Ornithogaloideae, Phytotaxa 524 (1), pp. 59-64 : 60-61

Eliokarmos rossouwii (U.Müll.-Doblies & D.Müll.-Doblies) Mart.- Azorín, A.P. Dold, M.B.Crespo & M.Á.Alonso, comb. nov.

≡ Ornithogalum rossouwii Müller-Doblies & Müller-Doblies (1996: 394) , basionym.

Type:— SOUTH AFRICA. Sutherland (3220DD): 2 km N of Buffelsrivier and 32 km N of Laingsburg on Sutherland road , ca. 800 m of elevation, 04 August 1986, veg. A2, Müller-Doblies 86037b (holotype PRE ; isotypes B, BTU, K, NBG-STE; none of the cited collections were found) .

The original description of Ornithogalum rossouwii by Müller-Doblies & Müller-Doblies (1996) does not include data on capsule and seed morphology (unknown).We provide an illustration ( Fig. 1 ), and an amendment to the morphological description, including a range extension for tepal size based on the mentioned Aberdeen population: Tepals 9−10 × 5−6 mm (not only 13−15 × 5−7 mm); Capsule ovate, apiculate, ca. 5 × 3 mm, dehiscing by 3 valves to ca. mid length; Seeds subglobose, comma shaped, apiculate, 1.0−1.2 × 0.8−1.0 mm, black, glossy, minutely tuberculate in appearance; testa cells sinuose and puzzle-like, with sunken anticlinal walls, and rised central portions giving tuberculate aspect.

The taxonomic revisions of Ornithogalum Linnaeus (1753: 306) sensu lato in southern Africa by Obermeyer (1978) and Müller-Doblies & Müller-Doblies (1996) accept Ornithogalum multifolium Baker (1873: 271) and O. rupestre Linnaeus f. (1782: 199) as distinct species, based on their different size and proportions, and flower colour. However, Manning et al. (2007) opted to accept a broader species concept to merge O. multifolium in the synonymy of the priority name O. rupestre . Martínez-Azorín et al. (2011) followed the latter species treatment and presented the combination Eliokarmos rupestris (Linnaeus f. 1782: 199) Mart.-Azorín, M.B.Crespo & Juan in Martínez-Azorín et al. (2011: 30). Our field work in the previous decade confirmed that the typical and commonly spread yellow-flowered O. multifolium differs from diverse populations fitting O. rupestre sensu Obermeyer (1978) and Müller-Doblies & Müller-Doblies (1996), constantly showing white to pale carneous flowers, and smaller size. Therefore, a new combination of O. multifolium in Eliokarmos is needed.

Figures

FIGURE 1. Eliokarmos rossouwii (U.Müll.-Doblies & D.Müll.-Doblies) Mart.-Azorín et al. from Kariegasfontein Farm, A.P.Dold et al. TD16045 (GRA!). A. Leaves in habitat; B. Bulbs with leaf; C. Inflorescences in habitat; D. Inflorescence in cultivation; E. Flowers, frontal and dorsal views; F. Dissected flower; G. Capsule and dissected capsule with seeds; H. Seed; J. Detail of seed testa morphology. Scale bars: B: 1 cm; E–F: 5 mm; G: 3 mm; H: 200 µm; J: 100 µm.