Pinguicula lutea Walter (1788: 63)

Domínguez, Yoannis, Valdés, Cristina Mercedes Panfet & Miranda, Vitor Fernandes Oliveira, 2017, Typification of names in the genus Pinguicula L. (Lentibulariaceae), Phytotaxa 312 (2), pp. 179-198 : 186

Pinguicula lutea Walter (1788: 63)

Protologue locality:—Without information.

Type (neotype, designated here):— UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. South Carolina, Charleston County, Roadside of U.S. 17, 3.3 miles southwest of Ravenel, 15 April 1968, S. W. Leonard 1274 ( USCH No. 013257 barcode USCH0006423 [digital photo!], isoneotypes AUA No. 11977, NY barcode 00030631 [digital photo!], P barcode P04442779 !, S No. 14-18387 [digital photo!], U No. 229730 barcode U.1360314 [digital photo!]; image of the neotype is available at http://bisque.cyverse.org/image_service/image/00-KAgyz6 HaWb6paATR3 E7 jnc?resize=1250&format=jpeg) .

≡ Isoloba lutea (Walter) Rafinesque (1838: 59) .

= Pinguicula campanulata Lamarck (1792: 336 , pl. 18, f. 1). Type (lectotype, designated here):—[ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA]. La Caroline, s.d., s. coll. (under the name Pinguicula flava , P barcode P00358196 !; image of the lectotype is available at http://www. lamarck.cnrs.fr/i-corpuspic/tab/Herbier/liasse63/ P00358196 .jpg).

= Pinguicula edentula Hooker (1823 : pl. 16) ≡ Pinguicula lutea Walter var. edentula (Hook.) De Candolle (1844: 32) . Type (lectotype, designated by De Candolle 1844: 32):—Pl. 16 in Hooker 1823 (image of the lectotype is available at http://biodiversitylibrary.org/ page/47442731).

= Isoloba recurva Rafinesque (1838: 59) , nom. nud.

= Pinguicula lutea Walter var. minor De Candolle (1844: 32) . Type (holotype):—[ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA]. Carol.[ina] merid.[ional], s.d., Fraser s.n. (G barcode G00147915 [digital photo!], isotype FI No. 142098 barcode FI009816 [digital photo!], the fragments labeled “ Pinguicula lutea Am. Sept. Fraser ”).

= Pinguicula lutea Walter f. alba Folkerts & Freeman (1989: 40) . Type (holotype):— UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Florida, Liberty County, vicinity of Camel Lake, approximately 8 mi N Wilma, 12 March 1981, G.W. Folkerts s.n. (AUA No. 60712).

Note:—In the same way as for P. caerulea, Casper (1966) cited the specimen of P. lutea in Fraser’s folio as a paratype, stating that the holotype was destroyed according to Fernald & Schubert (1948).As discussed above, evidences indicate that at no point there was any herbarium specimen linked to this name that could be considered original material (see note on P. caerulea and Ward 2007a for further discussion). Moreover, the specimen in the folio is readily identified by its label, but it is not in Walter’s hand; therefore, we have decided to designate a neotype according to Art. 9.7 of the ICN ( McNeill et al. 2012).

We have traced several specimens that, at first sight, could be somehow suitable for the selection of a neotype since we decided to select as neotype a specimen from the type locality; nonetheless, some doubts arose through their examination. A particular specimen from the “Herbier de l’Amérique septentrionale d’André Michaux” (P00322537), housed at the National Museum of Natural History, Paris (MNHN-P) clearly represents P. lutea (as identified by Michaux’s hand) but it is mislabeled as “ Holotype de Pinguicula lutea Michx. ”. Michaux collected in the same area that Walter as appears in the entry for P. lutea in his Flora Boreali-Americana ( Michaux 1803): “Hab. in pinetis, sylvis sterilioribus Carolinae inferioris” but, P. lutea is not a Michaux’s name and the selection of this specimen as neotype could be confusing in the future due to the misidentification label. A pair of specimens collected by Fraser was traced at G-DC (G00147915) and FI (FI009816). Both specimens could have been also gathered in Walter’s area according to the information on the labels: “Carol.[ina] merid.[ional]” and “Am.[erica] Sept.[entrional]” respectively. Nevertheless, these specimens represent the holotype and isotype of De Candolle’s name Pinguicula lutea Walter var. minor DC. ( De Candolle 1844: 32) and it does not represent Walter’s species concept due to the smaller corolla (3/1).

A set of specimens collected more recently by S. W. Leonard in the South Carolina coastal plain, within Walter’s area , were traced at different herbaria ( AUA, NY, P, S, U, and USCH). Such materials are in good conditions and clearly represent P. lutea ; therefore, we have selected the Leonard’s specimen at A. C. Moore Herbarium, University of South Carolina ( USCH), as neotype according to Art. 9.7 and the remaining are cited as isoneotypes following Rec. 9 of the ICN ( McNeill et al. 2012) .