Rubus ulmifolius, Schott, 1818
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/phytotaxa.677.3.8 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03CD87F2-FFAB-A169-E88F-FAB47119F781 |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Rubus ulmifolius |
status |
|
3. Rubus ulmifolius View in CoL f. sancti-francisci A. Beek & P.P. Ferrer, nom. & stat. nov., pro R. inermis Pourret (1788: 326) .
Lectotype (designated by Van de Beek 1979: 206):—[ SPAIN]. Near Barcelona, s.d., Pourret 3168 ( MAF-POURR).
Other original specimens: BC code Salvador 3833, P barcode P 02521232.
Pourret (1788: 326) provided the famous St. Francis Blackberry with a scientific name. This bramble had been cultivated in gardens of Franciscan monasteries already long before the time of Pourret. Tournefort (1700: 614) already mentions this Ronce de Saint François. The locality that Pourret refers to, is Barcelona. Most probably it was collected in a monastery garden ( Ferrer-Gallego & Van de Beek 2021).
The results of sawing experiments brought to light that the descendants of Pourret’s taxon, the St. Francis blackberry, have prickles, and look like a normal R. ulmifolius . So it must be concluded that it belongs to the natural variability of that species. Because it is a well known form with a long tradition it seemed us desirable to provide it with a scientific name as a form of R. ulmifolius .
The epithet ‘ inermis ’ is not available on infraspecic level, because of the publication of R. ulmifolius var. inermis Focke (1914: 154) , based on R. inermis Willdenow (1809: 548) , which is a different taxon (see below). Monasterio-Huelin & Weber (1996) identify R. inermis Pourret with R. ulmifolius var. anoplothyrsus Sudre (1909: 70) . However, that variety is not identical with the St. Francis Blackberry. The only collection of Sudre, that he used for his description, is in his Batotheca Europaea, nr. 311. It has prickles on the primocane (as Sudre mentions) and only a part of the inflorescences lack prickles.
Because no other epithet is available, a new one had to be found. We chose ‘ sancti-francisci ’, after the popular name that has been used for the plant for centuries. The name is published here.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |