Rubus neomultisetosus M. Idrees, 2022

Idrees, Muhammad & Zhang, Zhiyong, 2022, Lectotypification of 16 names in Rubus subg. Idaeobatus, 12 names in R. subg. Malachobatus, and 1 name in R. subg. Chamaebatus (Rosaceae), Phytotaxa 559 (1), pp. 13-24 : 17

12. Rubus neomultisetosus M. Idrees , nom. nov.

Replaced name: Rubus multisetosus Yü & Lu (1985: 201) nom. illeg., non Progel (1882: 102); R. polytrichus Franchet (1890: 203) nom. illeg., non Progel (1882: 102)

Type (lectotype designated here):— CHINA. Yunnan: in silvis montis Tsang-chan supra Tali , alt. 2500-3000 m, fl. June 1885, Delavay 954 (barcode P00755446!, isolectotype: A00228272!). [Image available at http://coldb.mnhn. fr/catalognumber/mnhn/p/p00755446] .

Etymology: —The specific epithet derives from the prefix neo -, meaning new, and multisetosus , the epithet used by Yü & Lu (1985).

Note:— Rubus polytrichus Franchet (1890: 203) is a later homonym of R. polytrichus Progel (1882: 102) . Later, Yü & Lu (1985) proposed a new name R. multisetosus Yü & Lu (1985: 201) to replace R. polytrichus Franchet , but this is also illegitimate later homonym (Progel 1882: 102). A new replacement name, Rubus neomultisetosus M. Idrees , is therefore proposed here.

In the protologue, Franchet (1890) provided the following locality information: Yunnan: in silvis montis Tsangchan supra Tali, alt. 2500–3000 m, fl. June 1885 (Delavay 1884 & Delavay 954), but did not indicate the holotype. Tropicos (2022) lists “ G. Forrest 4400 ” kept in E as the type, with reference to the Flora of China ( Lu & Boufford 2003), but this is not part of the original material and must be disregarded. According to Stafleu and Cowan (1976), Franchet worked at P, and Delavay’s specimens were deposited in K, P and PC. We locate three duplicate specimens, one of them “ Delavay 1884 ” deposited in P (barcode 00755445), and two of them “ Delavay 954 ” in A (barcode 00228272), and P (barcode 00755446). However, all the specimens have Delavay’s annotation and are well preserved. All these collections should be regarded as syntype and it is necessary to select one of them as the lectotype (Art. 9.12 of ICN). We designate the sheet “ Delavay 954 ” in P (barcode 00755446) as the lectotype since it is morphological complete with the presence of stem, leaves, flower, and inflorescences that fully correspond with the protologue.