Medicago monantha ( C.A.Mey.) Trautv., Index Seminum

Medicago monantha ( C.A.Mey.) Trautv., Index Seminum View in CoL [Kiev] 1840: 6, 4. 1841. Trigonella monantha C.A.Mey., Verz. Pfl. Casp. Meer. 137. 1831. Lectotype (designated here): AZERBAIJAN, in Campis et Collibus ficcis lapidofis pr. Pag : Swant, 20.06.1830, C.A. Meyer 148 (LE [ LE01015986 digital image!]); isolecto (LE [ LE01015985 digital image!]). Fig. 1 View Fig

Notes: Trigonella monantha C.A.Mey. was published by the Russian botanist and explorer, Carl Anton von Meyer (1831) which was subsequently transferred to Medicago by Trautvetter (1841). In the protologue, Meyer ( l.c.) did not cite any specimens but provided a reference to the locality “Prope Lenkoran et prope pagum Swant (alt. 670 hexap.)”. According to Lectotype (designated here): SPAIN, Madrid, Hort. Reg. Matr., s.d., s.coll. s.n. (MA [Acc. no.: 237731] digital image!). Fig. 2 View Fig

Notes: Lagasca (1816a) described Physalis parviflora Lag. based on the plants cultivated in the Botanical Garden of Madrid in the year 1815 from the seeds procured most likely from Mexico (Nova Hispania). The name was illegitimate being a later homonym of P. parviflora R.Br. Subsequently , the replacement name Physalis lagascae Roem. & Schult. was published by Roemer and Schultes (1819). Here the type of Physalis lagascae would be that of Physalis parviflora (see Art. 7.4, Ex. 4, Turland et al., 2018). In the absence of any specimen cited in the protologue of Physalis parviflora , it is necessary to designate a nomenclatural type to stabilize the precise application of the name from the specimens seen and annotated by Lagasca while describing P. parviflora . After the publication of Physalis parviflora , during his flight from Madrid to Gibraltar, Lagasca’s original herbarium was destroyed in the year 1822 ( Stafleu & Cowan, 1979). However, the original Stafleu and Cowan (1981), the herbarium and types of Meyer are housed at LE, and two relevant sheets (LE01015985, LE01015986) were traced, bearing collection number 148. These two specimens, though were not cited in the protologue, most likely were used/studied by C.A. Meyer while describing T. monantha . Both specimens can be considered as uncited original material under Art. 9.4 of the Shenzhen Code ( Turland et al., 2018). Among them, the specimen (LE01015985) bears an annotation (dated 17.04.1986) by E. Small as T. monantha C.A.Mey. with a note “presumably the holotype unless there is another specimen so designated at LE, in which case this is an isotype ” which is inconsistent with the provisions of article 9.1 of the Shenzhen Code (Turland et al., l.c.). In the absence of the holotype, the specimen (LE01015986) is designated here as the lectotype.