taxonID	type	description	language	source
A81987DCB85BFFA8FF6204B4CE88F87A.taxon	discussion	Classifying Gagea (excluding Lloydia) into two subgenera, as was originally suggested by Pascher (1907), is supported by some morphological synapomorphies. Apart from seed characteristics, which are frequently cited as being of taxonomic importance, tunic texture and geography are also valuable in establishing subgenera (Zarrei et al. 2009). Flattened seeds and a fibrous, reticulate to fibrous-papery tunic are synapomorphies for G. subgenus Hornungia (Bernh.) Pascher; these taxa mostly occur in dry habitats. Pyriform to terete seeds and a leathery tunic are shared characters among G. subgenus Gagea members, which mostly occur in more humid and boreal habitats. There are a few exceptions, such as G. alexeenkoana Mishchenko (1908: 76) in G. subgenus Hornungia, which extends into humid areas, and G. kunawurensis as well as G. dschungarica Regel (1879: 513) in G. subgenus Gagea, which grow in drier areas. However molecular (nrITS and plastid) studies do not support the existing subgeneric classification for Gagea (Peterson et al. 2008, Zarrei et al. 2009). Neither G. subgenus Gagea nor G. subgenus Hornungia is monophyletic. Analysis of sequence data from the low-copy nuclear gene ncpGS also does not support the monophyly of either subgenus (Zarrei et al., unpubl. data). Micromorphological characters do not display congruence with the previous subgeneric classification either. Apart from tepalar characters that are to some extent uniform in all species studied (Zarrei et al. 2010 d), characters associated with the different types of basal leaves and pedicels have been shown to be dispersed throughout both subgenera; widespread convergent evolution for these traits is indicated. Palynomorphological characters do not support the existence of two subgenera (Zarrei & Zarre 2005) because, although most species of G. subgenus Hornungia were classified under the reticulate and foveolate pollen type, microreticulate and perforate species are dispersed throughout the genus. The perforate pollen type included mostly G. subgenus Gagea species, but some species have reticulate and micro-reticulate palynomorphs. Evidently these palynomorphs have evolved repeatedly. In summary, although some macromorphological characters support the monophyly of subgenera in Gagea sensu stricto (as explained earlier in this section), neither micromorphological traits nor molecular analyses confirm this classification, which should therefore be revised.	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB85AFFAEFF6201ADC925FE14.taxon	discussion	Neither morphological nor molecular data (Peterson et al. 2008, Zarrei et al. 2009) support this as a distinct section. Two distinct pollen types, perforate and foveolate, were observed in G. graminifolia Vvedensky (1932: 269) and G. vegeta, respectively, both included in this section (Zarrei & Zarre 2005). Morphological and ontogenetic characters were mentioned as synapomorphies of G. sect. Graminifoliae by Peterson et al. (2008), but these are also shared with other sections, such as G. sect. Platyspermum sensu Levichev and G. sect. Incrustatae. Anatomical characters also do not support the monophyly of G. sect. Graminifoliae; G. vegeta (the only included species in Zarrei et al. (2010 d) grouped with G. sections Minimae (Pascher) Davlianidze and Gagea. In analyses of nrITS and plastid sequences (Zarrei et al. 2009), the only included species, G. vegeta, is embedded in clade C, the species of which form an enlarged G. sect. Platyspermum (see below). Peterson et al. (2008) included three species of G. sect. Graminifoliae in their analyses, and all fall into the clade containing other members of G. sect. Platyspermum as used here. All available data therefore indicate that this section should be merged with an expanded G. sect. Platyspermum.	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB85AFFA9FF620300C83AF912.taxon	discussion	This is a small section comprising about 26 species (Peterson et al. 2008). Species previously placed by Pascher (1904, 1907) and subsequently by Stroh (1937) and Uphof (1958 – 1960) in G. sect. Platyspermum sensu lato were placed by Levichev (2006) and Peterson et al. (2008) in six sections: Gagea sections Platyspermum Boiss., Stipitatae (Pascher) Davlianidze, Bulbiferae Levichev, Graminifoliae Levichev, Incrustatae Levichev and Dschungaricae Levichev (Zarrei et al. 2009, Peterson et al. 2008). Analyses of nrITS and plastid sequences support neither Pascher’s nor Levichev's concept of G. sect. Platyspermum sensu lato (Zarrei et al. 2009). In the analyses of both combined datasets and separate nrITS and plastid sequences, G. sections Platyspermum sensu Levichev, Graminifoliae and Incrustatae altogether comprise one highly supported clade (clade C; Figures 1 – 4 of Zarrei et al. 2009). Clade C corresponds to clade A in the analyses of psbA-trnH intergenic spacer, trnL-trnF intergenic spacer and nrITS sequences conducted by Peterson et al. (2008). Clade C has type I pedicel anatomy and type III basal leaf anatomy, with the exception of G. vegeta, which has type III pedicel anatomy and type II leaf anatomy. All four pollen types recognized by Zarrei & Zarre (2005) occur in clade C. The constituent species of clade C were not resolved in the trees obtained from the analyses of malate synthase (Zarrei et al. 2010 a) or ncpGS sequence data (Zarrei et al., unpubl. data).	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB85AFFA9FF6206B1CDAFFC78.taxon	discussion	Both Pascher (1904, 1907) and Levichev (2006) accepted Gagea sect. Plecostigma. However, the species they included in this section were different. For example, G. afghanica Terracciano (1904: 3) and G. olgae Regel (1875: 292) were placed under G. sect. Platyspermum by Pascher (1907) and subsequently by Uphof (1958 – 1960), whereas Levichev (2006) believed these three species should be classified under G. sect. Plecostigma. Molecular analysis of Zarrei et al. (2009) and Peterson et al. (2008) confirmed Levichev's treatment of the section. Moreover, based on molecular data (Zarrei et al. 2009) G. wendelboi Rechinger (1986: 291), G. exilis Vvedensky (1946: 236) and G. chlorantha (M. Bieb.) Schultes & Schultes (1829: 551) should be transferred to G. sect. Plecostigma. Palynomorphological data also support Levichev's treatment of the section because all members of the section have a foveolate or perforate pollen type and similar basal leaf transverse sections (Zarrei & Zarre 2005). The possession of a cymose inflorescence and fibrous-papery tunic are synapomorphies for this section.	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB85DFFAEFF6203FEC925F961.taxon	discussion	The distinctness of G. sect. Bulbiferae has been previously disputed (Zarrei et al. 2009). In analyses conducted by Peterson et al. (2008) using nrITS and plastid sequences, G. bulbifera (Pall.) Salisbury (1806: 557), the only species from this section included in their study, was in their clade A, corresponding to G. sect. Platyspermum (clade C) in Zarrei et al. (2009). In the last paper, G. bulbifera is sister to clade C with a bootstrap (BP) of 100 % in the analysis using nrITS sequence data (Figure 1, Zarrei et al. 2009); in the trees from plastid data (Figure 4, Zarrei et al. 2009) it is in a polytomy with all other clades. This species has the microreticulate pollen type along with G. dschungarica and G. caroli-kochii Grossheim (1935: 558; Zarrei & Zarre 2005). Gagea bulbifera was included in pedicel type II and basal leaf type VI by Zarrei et al. (2010 d). Pascher (1907) suggested that this species belongs to G. sect. Stipitatae, which has a type II pedicel and type IV basal leaf. Morphological characters indicate the placement of G. bulbifera in G. section Plecostigma. However, more data are needed to solve the problem of the placement of this section. At present, distinctness of G. sect. Bulbiferae is not supported by any of the available data. It fell as sister to G. sect. Platyspermum in molecular analyses (Zarrei et al. 2009) so we place these species in this section here.	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB85DFFAFFF620002CF1CFE69.taxon	discussion	This small section with c. 3 species was described in Peterson et al. (2008) to encompass those species having a branched inflorescence with alternate phyllotaxis (for a detailed morphological character data, see Peterson et al. 2008). The only member of this section included in analyses of nrITS and plastid sequences in Peterson et al. (2008), G. dschungarica, is sister to species of G. sect. Stipitatae in our studies. It was placed in G. sect. Monophyllos Pascher subsection Minimae Pascher by Stroh (1937), which is also sister to G. kunawurensis (= G. sect. Stipitatae) in analyses conducted by Zarrei et al. (2009). Pedicel anatomy (type II) is shared by G. dschungarica and G. kunawurensis. However, basal leaf anatomy (type II) in G. dschungarica is similar to that of G. lutea. and G. confusa. Gagea dschungarica has been grouped with G. caroli-kochii and G. bulbifera because of its microreticulate pollen type (Zarrei & Zarre 2005). However, G. dschungarica has morphological characters distinct from G. kunawurensis and related taxa. Thus, establishment of a new section is not appropriate, and it should be placed in a more broadly defined section that includes all members in clade D in Figure 4 of Zarrei et al. (2009).	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB85DFFAEFF6206A8C9AEFBE5.taxon	discussion	Gagea circumplexa Vvedensky (1952: 28) and G. dayana Chodat & Beauverd (1932: 8) were the two species of this section included in analyses of molecular data (nrITS and plastid) by Zarrei et al. (2009). These two species grouped with other members of the G. reticulata complex in G. sect. Platyspermum (clade C, Figure 4 in Zarrei et al. 2009). They fell in different subclades in clade C. Gagea circumplexa was included by Peterson et al. (2008) and was placed within their clade A (G. sect. Platyspermum). No species from this section were included in anatomical studies, but G. circumplexa was included in palynological studies (Zarrei & Zarre 2005). Based on palynomorphological data, the separate placement of this species is not supported. This section should also be included G. sect. Platyspermum s. l. In summary, all taxa of clade C should be redefined as G. sect. Platyspermum, including G. sect. Platyspermum sensu Levichev (1990: 231), G. sect. Incrustatae, G. sect. Graminifoliae and probably G. sect. Bulbiferae. An umbellate inflorescence, flattened seeds, a fairly trilobed stigma, as well as a reticulate to fibrous-reticulate bulb tunic are all putative synapomorphies for this section. Although most species of this section possess a pentangular outline in transverse sections of basal leaves, collenchyma under epidermis, and sclerenchymatous tissues, these are not shared by all taxa. Gagea calcicola Zarrei & Wilkin (2010 b: 90) is an example of a species in this section with atypical anatomical characters (Zarrei et al. 2010 b, d).	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB85CFFAFFF620386CC53F9D9.taxon	discussion	This small section was not recognized as a distinct entity in any of the main twentieth-century classifications (Pascher 1904, 1907, Stroh 1937). All species of this section were placed in G. sect. Platyspermum by Stroh (1937). Pascher (1904, 1907) placed G. trinerva (Viv.) Greuter (1970: 159) and G. graeca in Lloydia. Peruzzi et al. (2008 b) and Peterson et al. (2008) accepted this section as distinct. The former authors mentioned only two species (G. trinerva and G. graeca) in this section, but in the latter there were three species. Gagea sect. Anthericoides is sister to the rest of the genus in the analyses performed by Zarrei et al. (2009) and includes members that are endemic to the Mediterranean region. The possession of white flowers with tepals longer than 12 mm is a shared morphological characteristic of this section, which we recognise in this study.	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB85CFFAFFF6301EEC94EF845.taxon	discussion	Peterson et al. (2008) mentioned c. 56 species in this section, which was well supported in the analyses conducted by Peterson et al. (2008) and is in clade B in analyses conducted by Zarrei et al. (2009; Figure 2). Although only one species of this section, G. lutea, was included in the pollen study of Zarrei & Zarre (2005) and anatomical analyses, it has distinctive characteristics. Members of the section are distributed in humid areas, particularly in Europe. The umbellate inflorescence and leathery bulb tunic are the main putative morphological synapomorphies of G. sect. Gagea, which we recognise here.	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB85CFFAFFF62057ECE04FBE1.taxon	discussion	All members of G. sect. Stipitatae were previously classified under G. sect. Platyspermum sensu lato (Pascher 1904, 1907, Stroh 1937, Uphof 1958 – 1960). Gagea sect. Stipitatae, which comprises c. 60 species, is one of the largest sections in Gagea (along with G. sect. Gagea; Peterson et al. 2008). Peterson et al. (2008) included eight species from this section in their analyses. Since members of G. sect. Stipitatae were placed in four subclades in a clade that corresponds to clade D in Zarrei et al. (2009), this section must be merged with all other members of the clade D sensu Zarrei et al. (2009). Gagea chomutovae Pascher (1907: 372), G. gageoides and G. kunawurensis were included in the anatomical studies as members of G. sect. Stipitatae. These species exhibited type II and III pedicels and type IV basal leaves (Zarrei et al. 2010 d). Gagea chomutovae, G. gageoides, G. kunawurensis and G. exilis of this section were included in a pollen morphological study by Zarrei & Zarre (2005); they exhibit four types of pollen that occur in other sections, so pollen characters do not support the monophyly of the section. Although there are several well-supported subclades composed of members of G. sect. Stipitatae, this section on its own is polyphyletic. For more information, see G. sect. Gagea and G. sect. Minimae below.	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB85FFFACFF620200C9ABF936.taxon	discussion	Gagea sect. Foliatae Levichev (1990) was not accepted as a distinct section by Peterson et al. (2008). It was initially published including G. foliosa (J. Presl & C. Presl) Schultes & Schultes (1830: 1073), G. tenera and G. szovitsii (Lang) Bess. ex Schultes & Schultes (1829: 550). All these species were later transferred to G. sect. Didymobulbos by Peterson et al. (2008). Species of this section and G. sect. Fistulosae are collectively monophyletic based on analyses of molecular data conducted by Peterson et al. (2008), Peruzzi et al. (2008 a) and Zarrei et al. (2009). Gagea sect. Didymobulbos sensu Levichev is not monophyletic. Anatomical features of the pedicel and the basal leaf are characteristic of all members of both G. sections Stipitatae and Didymobulbos. It is clear that Pascher's treatment of G. sect. Didymobulbos should be accepted.	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB85FFFACFF62057CC96AFB64.taxon	discussion	Gagea fragifera (Vill.) Bayer & López (1989: 663), G. glacialis Koch (1849: 228), G. luteoides Stapf (1885: 80) and G. microfistulosa Levichev (2009: 39) are the only species of this section that were included in molecular analyses using plastid and nrITS sequences (Peterson et al. 2008, Zarrei et al. 2009). They are classified as G. sect. Monophyllos by Pascher (1907). Although they collectively form a clade in the analyses of plastid sequences, they were intermixed with G. sect. Didymobulbos in analyses using nrITS sequences (Peterson et al. 2008). In analyses of combined datasets of plastid and nrITS sequences, these species formed a subclade with low bootstrap support (BP 73, Figure 3 in Zarrei et al. 2009) within clade D. Peterson et al. (2008) indicated that, as well as some ontogenetic characters, the umbellate inflorescence plus terete seeds are common characters in the section. However, these characters are shared with several other sections such as G. sect. Didymobulbos. Pollen characters do not support the distinctness of the section. The only species included in analyses conducted by Zarrei & Zarre (2005) had the reticulate pollen type shared with most members of G. sect. Platyspermum. Pedicel anatomy supports the placement of G. fragifera in a clade with G. villosa. The basal leaf anatomy of this species was similar to that of G. chomutovae within clade D (Figure 3 in Zarrei et al. 2009). In conclusion, G. sect. Fistulosae should be reduced to lower taxonomic rank within G. sect. Didymobulbos (including all members of clade D, Figure 3, Zarrei et al. 2009).	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB85FFFACFF6207D4CED5FE68.taxon	discussion	Although monophyly of this section was highly supported in analyses conducted by Zarrei et al. (2009) and Peterson et al. (2008), its relationship with other sections in clade D (Figure 4 in Zarrei et al. 2009) is unclear because they form a polytomy. Since the morphological differences between species belonging to G. sect. Minimae are not great, its current rank is probably not appropriate, and it should be merged with other sections in clade D and be reduced to a taxon of lower rank. A " shortly branched inflorescence with alternate phyllotaxis ", as described by Peterson et al. (2008), and a flattened basal leaf (Zarrei et al. 2009) are putative synapomorphies of sect. Minimae, which is not recognised here.	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB85FFFACFF620051C946F862.taxon	discussion	Published by Levichev in Peterson et al. (2008), this section has only one species, G. spathacea (Hayne) Salisbury (1806: 556). Independent analyses by Peterson et al. (2008) and Zarrei et al. (2009) do not support the section as distinct from other members of G. sect. Didymobulbos. No anatomical or palynomorphological features were studied in G. spathacea, but this section is not recognised here.	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB85EFFADFF6207D4CFBFFEFC.taxon	discussion	Analyses of nrITS sequences resulted in a highly supported clade (BP 95, Figure 1) comprising L. serotina (L.) Reichenbach (1830: 102). and L. delicatula (Zarrei et al. 2009). Analyses of plastid sequences alone told another story. All former Lloydia species occurred as a polytomy with clade A, which comprises G. sect. Plecostigma, which is where they are placed here.	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB851FFA2FF6204C8C84EFA2E.taxon	discussion	Species included: — Gagea aipetriensis Levichev, G. capusii A. Terracc., G. chanae Grossh., G. helenae Grossh., G. hiensis Pascher, G. lutea, G. megapolitana Henker, G. nakaiana Kitag., G. podolica Schult. & Schult. f., G. pomeranica R. Ruthe, G. pratensis, G. pusilla (F. W. Schmidt) Sweet and G. transversalis (Pall.) Steven. Note: — Gagea sect. Gagea is based on the type of the genus as designated by Uphof (1958). According to the ICBN (McNeill et al. 2006) the typification of Levichev (1990) using G. lutea is thus rejected.	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB851FFA2FF620618CC56FCB3.taxon	description	Putative synapomorphies: — basal leaf single, pentangular in transverse section; tunic reticulate, fibrous, fibrous-papery; inflorescence umbellate; filament glabrous; tepals yellow adaxially, acuminate to long acuminate at the apex, hardened and enlarged after anthesis.	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB851FFA2FF620618CC56FCB3.taxon	discussion	Species included: — Gagea alexeenkoana sensu lato (incl. G. caroli-kochii), G. anonyma, G. bergii, G. bulbifera, G. calcicola, G. circumplexa, G. commutata K. Koch, G. dayana, G. eleonorae, G. reticulata sensu lato (incl. G. tehranica Gand., G. tenuifolia), G. robusta Zarrei & Wilkin, G. setifolia (incl. G. perpusilla) and G. vegeta.	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB851FFA3FF6202B1CE56FEA8.taxon	discussion	Species included: G. algeriensis, G. bohemica, G. capillifolia, G. chomutovae, G. confusa, G. dschungarica, G. filiformis, G. foliosa, G. fragifera, G. gageoides, G. glacialis, G. granulosa, G. helderichii, G. infrakamensis, G. lactea, G. libanotica, G. lojaconoi, G. luteoides, G. minima, G. peduncularis, G. soleirolii, G. spathacea, G. kunawurensis, G. tenera, and G. villosa.	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB850FFA3FF6204F9CE97FA80.taxon	discussion	Species included: — Gagea graeca and G. trinervia (Viv.) Greuter	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB850FFA3FF620203CE50F903.taxon	description	Basionym: Lloydia Salisb. ex Rchb. sect. Lloydia, Fl. Germ. Excurs.: 102 (1830). Type: Lloydia serotina (L.) Rchb., Fl. Germ. Excurs.: 102 (1830). Syn.: Lloydia subgenus Lloydia Baker, Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 14: 300 (1874). Type: Lloydia serotina = G. serotina (L.) Ker Gawl. Lloydia sect. Lloydia, Nat. Pflanzenfam. Nachtr. 2: 11 (1900). Lloydia sect. Lloydia ser. Nectarobothrium Engl., Nat. Pflanzenfam. Nachtr. 2: 11 (1900). Type: Lloydia serotina = G. serotina.	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB850FFA3FF620203CE50F903.taxon	discussion	Putative synapomorphies: — basal leaves 1 – 2; tunic fibrous; inflorescence solitary flowered or cymose to raceme-like; filament glabrous; tepals white adaxially, withered after anthesis, acute to subacute at the apex.	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB850FFA3FF620203CE50F903.taxon	discussion	Species included: — Gagea noltiei and G. serotina	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB850FFA3FF62063CCCD6FCEE.taxon	discussion	Species included: — Gagea afghanica, G. altaica Schischk. & Sumnev., G. chlorantha, G. exilis, G. iranica Zarre & Zarre, G. olgae, G. pauciflora (Turcz. ex Trautv.) Turcz. ex Ledeb., G. uliginosa Siehe & Pascher and G. wendelboi Rech. f.	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB850FFA0FF6201A4CF73FD80.taxon	description	Putative synapomorphies: — basal leaves 3 – 8; tunic fibrous; inflorescence solitary-flowered or cymose to raceme-like; filaments hairy; tepals white or yellow adaxially, tepals withered after anthesis.	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB850FFA0FF6201A4CF73FD80.taxon	discussion	Species included: — Gagea flavonutans. Lectotype (designated by Dasgupta & Deb 1986): SIKKIM. Migothang, 3900 m, 31 May 1960, Hara et al. 6564 (TI). Gagea oxycarpa (Franch.) Zarrei & Wilkin, comb. nov. Basionym: Lloydia oxycarpa Franch., J. Bot. (Morot) 12: 192 (1898). Lectotype (designated here): CHINA. Yunnan: Hee chan men 1554 (P).	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
A81987DCB850FFA0FF6201A4CF73FD80.taxon	discussion	Note: — Gagea sect. Tricholloydia comprises members of Lloydia sect. Tricholloydia that are included in Gagea as a section for the first time here. Hemierium graecum (L.) Rafinesque (1837: 27) was designated as a lectotype by Dasgupta & Deb (1986). It is synonymous with G. graeca, lectotype of Gagea sect. Anthericoides. Therefore, the typification of Dasgupta & Deb (1986) is rejected here, and a new typification has been made. Other species of Lloydia need to be studied both morphologically and in terms of typification before transferring them to Gagea.	en	Zarrei, Mehdi, Wilkin, Paul, Ingrouille, Martin J., Chase, And Mark W. (2011): A revised infrageneric classification for Gagea Salisb. (Tulipeae; Liliaceae): insights from DNA sequence and morphological data. Phytotaxa 15: 44-56, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.6
