Plantago griffithii Decaisne (1852: 700)

Hassemer, Gustavo, 2018, Notes on the montane Indo-Iranian species in Plantago subgenus Plantago (Plantaginaceae), Phytotaxa 336 (1), pp. 59-68 : 60-63

Plantago griffithii Decaisne (1852: 700) (original spelling: “ Griffithsii ”)

≡ P. gentianoides var. griffithii (Decne.) Pilger (1925: 101)

≡ P. gentianoides subsp. griffithii (Decne.) Rechinger in Patzak & Rechinger (1965: 9–11)

Type: — AFGHANISTAN. S.d., W. Griffith 415-3 (holotype K-000779585! [ Figure 1 ]; isotypes C-10016657!, P-03531976!, S-17- 48757 !) .

= P. aitchisonii Pilger (1927: 1099–1100) , syn. nov.

Type: — AFGHANISTAN. Kurrum Valley , 1879, J. E. T. Aitchison 516/646 (holotype DD! [ Figure 2 ]; isotype K-000779586!) .

Distribution: — Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan, at elevations of 2000 m or higher.

Notes: —The original spelling of this name is “ Plantago Griffithsii ”; however, it is evident from the protologue that Decaisne intended to honour the collector of the type, the British botanist William Griffith (1810–1845). Therefore, the extra “s” can be considered a typographical error that should be corrected (Art. 60.1). The protologue of P. griffithii ( Decaisne 1852: 700) gave the following information on the type: “In Affghanistan (cl. W. Griffith, n. 1611, in herb. Hooker.)”. I was able to locate the holotype at K (barcode 000779585; Figure 1 ). Since the protologue of P. griffithii indicated both the collection where the type was deposited (i.e. “in herb. [herbarium] Hooker. [Hookerianum]”) and a unique identifying number for the sheet (i.e. “n. 1611”), I consider that a holotype was designated for this name, in accordance with the Melbourne Code ( McNeill et al. 2012) and also the recommendations in McNeill (2014). The number 1611 mentioned by Decaisne is not Griffith’s collector number, as this number is actually 415-3, which is also present in duplicates kept at C, P and S (therefore, isotypes). Decaisne without a doubt saw this number when he studied this specimen, hence his mention of it in the protologue. It is important to highlight that the number 1611 is not present in any other W. Griffith 415- 3 specimen.

Plantago griffithii was synonymised with P. gentianoides Sibthorp & Smith (1806: 101) by Bornmüller (1897: 67). Bornmüller considered that the only difference between these two species was the hairiness of the scapes, and, upon discovering specimens of P. griffithii with glabrous scapes in south-eastern Iran, he concluded that no characters remained to separate the two species. My study of herbarium specimens of P. griffithii and P. gentianoides has evidenced that neither species has glabrous scapes; in the case of P. griffithii , the scape (not including the spike) is glabrous in the lower two-thirds, and has appressed antrorse trichomes in the upper third, similar to other Plantago taxa such as P. australis Lamarck (1791: 339) subsp. australis and P. pachyneura Steudel (1849: 406) (see Rahn 1974, Hassemer et al. 2015). Plantago gentianoides very often has pilose scapes, as Bornmüller (1897: 66) himself noted. The scapes of both species, as is the case with many other Plantago species, gradually lose the trichomes and become increasingly glabrous as the fruits maturate. Therefore, the hairiness of scapes is not adequate for the classification of P. griffithii and P. gentianoides .

The main character that distinguishes P. griffithii (and also P. tatarica Decaisne 1852: 696 ; see below) from P. gentianoides , with which it has been confused for more than a century, is the fruit shape: P. griffithii and P. tatarica have globose pyxidia that resemble those of P. major , whereas P. gentianoides has elongated, pyriform pyxidia that resemble more those of P. depressa and of species of Plantago section Virginica Decne. & Steinh. ex Barnéoud (1844: 17) (see Rahn 1974). Plantago gentianoides was described from Bithynia (north-western Anatolia), and is most common in mountains in south-eastern Europe ( Bornmüller 1897: 68, Pilger 1925, 1937 [as P. gentianoides var. eugentianoides Pilger 1925: 98–99 , nom. nov. pro. P. gentianoides Sibth. & Sm. , nom. superfl. et illeg. {Arts. 52.1 and 52.2}], Moore et al. 1976, Ianovici et al. 2010).

Influenced by Bornmüller’s understanding of P. griffithii, Pilger (1925) proposed the new combination P. gentianoides var. griffithii , which was later raised to the subspecies rank in Patzak & Rechinger (1965). Both Pilger (1937) and Patzak & Rechinger (1965) cited the collection W. Griffith 415-3 for P. gentianoides var. griffithii and P. gentianoides subsp. griffithii , respectively, and simultaneously also for another species from Afghanistan, i.e. P. aitchisonii . The protologue of P. aitchisonii ( Pilger 1927: 1099–1100) gave the following information on the type: “ Afghanistan: Kurrum Valley (1879—J. E. T. Aitchison n. 516, 646—Typus!)”. Since Pilger (1927) comprises a study of the Plantago collections at DD, there is no doubt that he referred to this herbarium when he indicated the type of P. aitchisonii , and this was later confirmed by himself ( Pilger 1937). I was able to locate the holotype at DD ( Figure 2 ), and an isotype was also found at K (barcode 000779586).

The morphological comparison between the types of P. griffithii and P. aitchisonii , as well as the comparison between the morphological descriptions for these taxa, left it clear that these two names should be considered synonymous. It seems that Pilger completely overlooked the earlier specific epithet P. griffithii when describing P. aitchisonii as a new species, what was followed by Patzak & Rechinger (1965). This hypothesis is corroborated by the fact that the same collection (W. Griffith 415-3) is cited simultaneously for both taxa.

Specimens of P. griffithii were up until now being confusingly referred to as P. aitchisonii and/or P. gentianoides subsp. griffithii ( Patzak & Rechinger 1965, Rahn 1996, Li et al. 2011). Plantago griffithii is characterised by glabrous leaves (distinguishing it from P.himalaica ), long and very lax spikes (distinguishing it from P.gentianoides , P.himalaica and P. tatarica ), globose pyxidia (distinguishing it from P. asiatica , P. depressa and P. gentianoides ), and ellipsoid seeds (distinguishing it from P. major ). Further studies are necessary to ascertain the distribution and conservation status of this species.

Selected additional specimens examined: — AFGHANISTAN. Miyan Deh, Minjan , 2550 m, 1 July 1948, L. Edelberg 2184 ( C) ; Hauz-i-Mahiha , 2500 m, 16 July 1948, M. Köie 2481- B ( C) . IRAN. Kerman, prope Mahuneh , 2000 m, 19 August 1892, J. Bornmüller 4600 ( C) .

Figures

FIGURE 1. Holotype of Plantago griffithii (W. Griffith 415-3, K-000779585). Copyright: Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew.Available online at: http://specimens.kew.org/herbarium/K000779585

FIGURE 2. Holotype of Plantago aitchisonii (J.E.T. Aitchison 516/646, DD). Copyright: Forest Research Institute, Dehradun, India.