Vachellia bolei (R.P. Subhedar) Ragupathy, Seigler, Ebinger & Maslin

Deshpande, Anup S., Krishnan, Sellappan & Janarthanam, Malapati K., 2018, Lectotypification of some Senegalia and Vachellia species (Mimosoideae, Leguminosae) from India, Phytotaxa 333 (1), pp. 131-136 : 134-135

Vachellia bolei (R.P. Subhedar) Ragupathy, Seigler, Ebinger & Maslin Nuytsia 24: 21 (2014)

Basionym: Acacia bolei R.P. Subhedar (1985: 440) ; A. wightii Baker ex Benth. (1875: 506) , nom. illeg., non Wight & Arnott (1834: 274); Vachellia wightii Ragupathy, Seigler, Ebinger & Maslin, Phytotaxa 162: 177 (2014), nom. illeg. (superfl.). Ist Step Lectotype:— INDIA. [Penins. Ind. Or.], Wight KD 896 (lectotype K, isolectotype CAL) (vide, Subhedar, 1985).

IInd Step Lectotype (designated here):— INDIA. Travancore , Sea Coast, Tinnevelly District, June 1835, Wight 896 [ K000791143 image!] Fig. 3 ; Isolectotype: K000791142 (image!): Sea Coast , Tirunevelly District, June 1835, Wight 896 ; Syntype: CAL0000012942 !, Sea Coast , Tirunelvelly District, June 1835, Wight 896 .

Distribution: — India. Tamil Nadu (Tirunelvelli District)

Notes: — Bentham (1875) described Acacia wightii based on material collected by Wight from ‘Tinnevelly District’, Peninsular India. However, since this epithet was preoccupied the name is illegitimate, therefore, Subhedar (1985) provided a new name for the species, i.e. Acacia bolei Subhedar (1985: 440) . When transferring this name to Vachellia Raghupathy et al. (2014) erroneously based their new combination on the illegitimate name, A. wightii Baker ex Benth. ; therefore, the name V. wightii Ragupathy, Seigler, Ebinger & Maslin is also illegitimate, being superfluous. Maslin (2014) rectified this error by publishing a new combination, Vachellia bolei (R.P. Subhedar) Ragupathy, Seigler, Ebinger & Maslin.

We have located four collections made by Wight from India that are potential types, namely, Wight 592, 595, 597 and 896; these specimens were located at herb. CAL, E and K. Of these sheets, Wight 592, 595 and 597 are labelled A. wightii Graham , but this is clearly a misidentification because the specimens are of Albizzia amara . These fruiting specimens do not have spines and the pinnae and leaflets are more numerous, which corresponds to Albizzia . There are annotations on these sheets identifying them as Albizzia amara . In the protologue of A. wightii Baker ex Benth. , it is clearly mentioned as pods unknown (‘ Legumen ignotum ’). Hence, these specimens do not agree with the protologue of A. wightii Baker ex Benth. Subhedar (1985) regarded Wight 896 as the lectotype of A. wightii , noting that there were specimens at both CAL and K, but not specifying which herbarium contained the lectotype. This treatment is considered as a 1 st step lectotypification. Furthermore, we now know that there are three specimens of Wight 896, one housed at CAL (CAL0000012942!) and two at K [K000791142 and K000791143 (image!)]. These specimens are considered to be original material and all three are regarded as syntypes. Of these Wight 896 (K000791143) is selected here as lectotype for the name Acacia wightii as 2 nd step lectotypification. This is a flowering specimen and well preserved compared to other specimen (K000791142).

Figures

FIGURE 3. Acacia bolei R.P. Subhedar K.D. (Wight 896 [K000791143 image!], K; Lectotype). ©RBG, Kew