Rubus creticus Tourn. ex L.

Beek, Abraham Van De, 2016, Validations of the Rubus taxa in Tournefort’s Institutiones and their Corollarium in later literature, Adansonia 38 (1), pp. 35-53 : 46

a. Rubus creticus Tourn. ex L.

In Strand, Flora Palestina: 15 (1756) . — Amoenitates Academicae: 457 (1788). — Lectotype (hic designatus): Greece, Crete, Tournefort 6073 (P-TRF[ P00680425 ]) ( Fig. 6 ).

REMARKS

Together with R.aetnicus ,this is one of the most interesting species in the list.Tournefort found it on Crete and the specimen in his collection is identical to that which is presently called R. sanctus Schreb. It is the only Rubus species which occurs on Crete. It was validated in the dissertation of B.J. Strand, Flora Palestina (1756), under the auspices of Linnaeus who must be considered as its author. The name occurs in a list of names as ‘ Rubus creticus T.’ and it is thus valid due to Tournefort’s description.

Tournefort journeyed to the East together with other botanists ( Desfontaine 1808; Lack 1996). Four of them collected the Crete bramble. Next to Tournefort’s sample, one specimen is found in the herbarium of Jussieu (Herbier d’Antoine Laurent de Jussieu 14.327, P-JU), one in the collection of Vaillant (“ Rubus Creticus , triphyllus , parvo flore, Tournef. Creta 1700 ”; P) and one was brought to Berlin by Gundelsheimer. Gundelheimer’s collection of plants from his travels to the East was elaborated by Gleditsch. Since he did not have sufficient time to finish this work, he sent a number of specimens to Schreber in Munich who described these in his Icones (1766). Among them was the sample of the Cretan Rubus .

Aubriet was also one of the participants in the journey and he made drawings of the collected plants under the direct supervision of Tournefort ( Desfontaine 1808). The picture of ‘ Rubus creticus , triphyllus , flore parvo ’ is published in Desfontaine (1808). In addition, Desfontaine gives full descriptions based on the notes of Tournefort, the drawings of Aubriet and the plants in the collections of Tournefort, Jussieu and Vaillant. Because they travelled together, Tournefort would have seen all three samples. However, his own plant is, of course, the most dependable, and it is a good specimen, so that it is the obvious choice for the lectotype.

Figures

FIG. 6. — Lectotype of R. creticus Tourn. ex L. (P00680425).