Mangifera altissima Blanco, Fl. Filip.

Mangifera altissima Blanco, Fl. Filip. View in CoL 181. 1837.

Neotype (first-step designated by Merrill, 1918; second-step designated by Kostermans & Bompard, 1993): PHILIPPINES, “Illustrative specimen from Angat, Rizal Province, Luzon, December, 1914 ( Merrill: Species Blancoanae No. 831)” (L [L0686906 digital image!]; isoneo A [A00049055 digital image!], CAL [CAL0000033690!], GH [GH00443918 digital image!], K [K001327111 digital image!], NY [NY00050782 digital image!], P [P02440608 digital image!], US [ US 00432690 digital image!]). Epitype (designated here): PHILIPPINES, Province of Rizal, Luzon, Jan.- March, 1905, Ahern’s collector 2442 (CAL [CAL0000033689!]). Fig. 1 View Fig Notes: Blanco (1837) described Mangifera altissima and no materials of his collections survived ( Merrill, 1918). Later, Merrill (1918) published “Species Blancoanae” and cited “Illustrative specimen from Angat, Rizal Province, Luzon, December, 1914 ( Merrill: Species Blancoanae No. 831)” for Mangifera altissima . Merrill (1918, p. 36) also noted in the introductory chapter “specimens that to a large degree would take the place of Blanco’s ‘types’ which were never preserved”. The indication of ‘types’ denotes that he treated an “Illustrative specimen” as the equivalent of a neotype. Therefore, Merrill inadvertently designated “ Species Blancoanae No. 831 ” as first-step neotype because specifying a herbarium was not necessary for type designation before 1990 under Art. 9.22 ( Turland et al., 2018). Hou (1978b) mentioned the type in two herbaria (BO, L) and although before 1990 there was no need to mention any herbarium or more than one herbaria before 1990 as per Art. 9.22 ( Turland et al., 2018). Hou’s designation still cannot be accepted as an effective second-step neotypification as per Art. 9.17 ( Turland et al., 2018) wherein citation of a single herbarium is compulsory. Later, Kostermans and Bompard (1993) cited “Mt Angat, Dec, fl, Merrill Spec. Blanco 831 (BO, K, L-holo, P)” and the citation of “L-holo” can be considered as effective second-step neotypification under Art. 9.17 ( Turland et al., 2018). We could trace specimens at A, CAL, GH, K, L, NY, P and US. There are no specimens extant at BO (pers. comm., Drs Retnowati & Arifiani). The second-step neotype specimen and all original materials are devoid of any flowers and fruits. As sterile specimens cannot help in the precise application of the name, therefore, we designate the flowering specimen CAL0000033689 as an epitype as per provisions of Art. 9.9 ( Turland et al., 2018), because this specimen is bearing inflorescences and is collected from the same province (‘Province of Rizal, Luzon’) from where the neotype specimen was collected by Merrill.