Diastatea ghiesbreghtii

Wimmer first recognized Diastatea ghiesbreghtii View in CoL in 1948 and later changed the name to D. lemairei . Subsequently, in his 1953 treatment ( Wimmer 1953) and then again in his supplement in 1968 ( Wimmer 1968), Wimmer expressed doubt about whether the plant belonged in Diastatea . He finally concluded that it was probably Lobelia stenosiphon (Adamson) E.Wimm.

The characters included in Lemaire’ s description and original illustration, as well as Wimmer’ s doubt, have us convinced that Diastatea lemairei E.Wimm. is not a Diastatea and it is relegated to the status of doubtful and excluded taxon.

Diastatea irasuensis (Planch. & Oerst.) E.Wimm., Ann. Naturhist. Mus. Wien View in CoL 56: 332. 1948 as irazuensis. Laurentia irasuensis (Planch. & Oerst.) E.Wimm. ex. Standl., Field Mus. Publ. Bot. 18: 1415. 1938 as irazuensis Lobelia irasuensis Planch. & Oerst. View in CoL

Notes —Wimmer mistakenly based the name of a new species he described (now known as Diastatea costaricensis McVaugh View in CoL ) on the type of Lobelia irasuensis Planch. & Oerst. View in CoL , a true Lobelia View in CoL , therefore, Diastatea irasuensis View in CoL Lobelia irasuensis View in CoL and thus is treated here as an excluded taxon. See Diastatea costaricensis View in CoL for further discussion.

Lobelia minutiflora Kunze, Linnaea View in CoL 16: 318. 1842. as ‘minutiflorum.’ Dortmanna minutiflora (Kunze) Kuntze, Revis. Gen. Pl. View in CoL 2: 972. 1891 as ‘ Dortmannia .’ TYPE: unknown (no original material found. If at LZ, presumed destroyed in WWII).

Notes — McVaugh (1940b) treated Lobelia minutiflora View in CoL as a heterotypic synonym of D. micrantha View in CoL when he recognized Diastatea View in CoL in his revision of Laurentia . However, Kunze describes the corolla as reddish and barely split in half “flores rubelli, vix ad dimidium fissi” thus it is doubtful this specimen represented D. micrantha View in CoL and is not recognized here as a heterotypic synonym of that taxon.