Juno parvula Vved., 2016

Boltenkov, Eugeny V., 2016, Typification of the junos names (Iridaceae) published by A. I. Vvedensky, Phytotaxa 252 (2), pp. 143-148 : 146-147

Juno parvula Vved. , sp. nov.

Juno parvula Vvedensky (1963: 425) , nom. inval.

Holotype:— UZBEKISTAN. [Surxondaryo Region], M. m. Tadshikorum , ad declivia argilloso-saxosa montium Tschulbair supra p. Sina, alt. ca. 2600 mt., 23 May 1929 fl., 30 June fr., Vvedensky s.n. ‘ Herbarium Florae Asiae Mediae’, Nr. 1005 ineditus ( TASH0000320 !, the individual on the upper right side of the sheet).

Isotypes:— UZBEKISTAN. M. m. Tadshikorum , ad declivia argilloso-saxosa montium Tschulbair supra p. Sina, alt. ca. 2600 mt., 23 May 1929 fl., 30 June fr., Vvedensky s.n. ‘ Herbarium Florae Asiae Mediae’, Nr. 1005 ineditus ( TASH0000320 !, the individual on the upper left side of the sheet) ; [Label printed]: Uzbekistania , ad declivia argilloso-saxosa montium Tschulbair supra pag. Sina, ca. 2600 m s. m, 23 May 1929, A. Vvedensky s.n. ‘ Herb. Fl. USSR’, Exs. No. 5447 ( BM000832581 !, E00705973 !, K001045492 !, LE0050093 !, LE0050094 !, MW0021783 !) ; [Label handwritten]: Uzbek SSR, on fine-grained soil and rocky slopes of the Chulbair Mountains above Sina Village , ca. 2600 m, 23 May 1929, A. I. Vvedensky s.n. No. 5447 [originally in Russian] ( LE0050092 !, and 13 duplicate specimens) .

Latin description:—“ Juno parvula Vvedensky ” (1963: 425).

Notes:—In the protologue of Juno parvula, Vvedensky (1963) indicated the exsiccatum no. 663, belonging to “Herbarium Florae Asiae Mediae”, and “Taschkento conservatur [ TASH]” as the place of deposition of “Typus”. However the exsiccatum indicated in the protologue was not published. These specimens were used for publishing the exsiccatum under the no. 5447 in the “Herbarium of the USSR Flora”. On the printed labels to this exsiccatum, made by Vvedensky, it was indicated as follows: “The published plants are the isotypes of this species [ J. parvula ]”. All the specimens are plants at the stages of flowering and fructification. No collection date was indicated in the protologue; the holotype label (handwritten by Vvedensky) contains the dates of collection at these stages; for the rest of the specimens, only the date of collection at the flowering stage is indicated. It is evident that the type material of this species includes pieces of plants collected at different times, which is contrary to Art. 8.2. of the ICN ( McNeill et al. 2012), and, therefore, validation of this species name is required; see also Martínez-Azorín & Crespo (2014) for further information on this matter. Following Vvedensky, we here select the specimen at the flowering stage as the holotype of J. parvula .

Juno popovii Vvedensky (1935a: 152) ≡ Iris popovii (Vved.) Vvedensky (1935b: 562)

Protologue citation:—“Peter the Great Mountain Range, Gardanikaftar Pass, wet clayey soil on the edge of a snow patch, 17.VII.1911, fl., A. Golbek 271” [originally in Russian].

Lectotype (designated here):— TAJIKISTAN. [Districts of Republican Subordination], Emirate of Bukhara , Darwaz Province , Peter the Great Mountain Range, Gardanikaftar Pass, 17 July 1911, A. Golbek s.n. [originally in Russian] ( LE0050095 !).

Other original material examined:— TAJIKISTAN.[Districts of Republican Subordination], Emirate of Bukhara, Darwaz Province, Peter the Great Mountain Range, Gardanikaftar Pass, 1 July 1911, A. K. Golbek 271 [originally in Russian] ( LE 0050096!).

Notes:—In the protologue, Vvedensky indicated a single gathering with the word “ Typus ” as deposited in “Herb. Inst. Bot. Acad. Sc. URSS [ LE]”. After a detailed examination of the material in LE, it was established that the original material could include two specimens. The content of these labels significantly disagrees with the protologue, which seems to correspond to a mixture of two different labels: one specimen has the date indicated in the protologue with no field number; the other has the field number with a different collection date. Both specimens are accompanied by a printed label with Vvedensky’s note “ Juno popovii Vved. sp. n. June 1932 ”. The specimen LE0050096 has a printed label, on which O. Fedtschenko handwrote: “ Iris rosenbachiana Rgl. 22 November 1913 ”.

Juno svetlanae Vvedensky (1971: 322) ≡ Iris svetlanae (Vved.) T.Hall & Seisums in Ikinci et al. (2011: 300) Protologue citation:—“E bulbis a Kovalevskaja, Tscherneva et Vvedensky in collibus gypsaceis inter p.p. Tojtschi et Kzyltscha in valle fl. Kaschka-Darja a. 1958 lectis in Horto Botanico Academiae Scientiarum UzSSR. enatus. 12.III.1962 fl. Kovalevskaja et Vvedensky”.

Neotype (designated here):— TAJIKISTAN. [Districts of Republican Subordination], [Label 1]: SW spurs of the Gissar Mountain Range , near Kyzylcha Village, 1958, s. coll., s.n.; [Label 2]: The bulbs are collected between Kyzylcha and Teutsch, 12 April 1958 [originally in Russian] ( TASH0000483 !).

Notes:—In the protologue, Vvedensky indicated a single specimen, collected in the Tashkent botanical garden and deposited in TAK, subsequently incorporated in TASH, as a “Typus” of Juno svetlanae . This material was not found during the detailed examination of the herbarium material in TASH, where most of Vvedensky’s material is deposited, as well as in other herbaria. A cultivated specimen from Vvedensky’s collection, which came from the same locality as the original material, was designated as the neotype. This specimen has three labels handwritten by Vvedensky, on which the species name is not indicated. On one of the labels, it is written as follows: “From the Sveta’s garden, 28 March [19]61. [Flowers] are bright yellow, fall and crest are a little brighter. Near Kyzylcha Village, 1958” [originally in Russian].

Juno tadshikorum Vvedensky (1935a: 152) ≡ Iris tadshikorum (Vved.) Vvedensky (1935b: 563)

Protologue citation:—“Darwas, between Sary-Tash and Tavildara, on the pass, on stony soil (9000’–10000’), 17.VI.1897, fl., Korshinsky 5096“ [originally in Russian].

Holotype: — TAJIKISTAN. [Gorno-Badakhshan Autonomous Region], Darwas, between Sary-Tash and Tavildara, on the pass, on stony soil (9000’–10000’), Turkestania, 17 June [18]97, S. Korshinsky 5096 [originally in Russian] ( LE0050120 !).

Notes:—The protologue indicates the date, the field number, and the place of deposition of the original material: “Herb. Inst. Bot. Acad. Sc. URSS [ LE]”. Vvedensky used one specimen for describing Juno tadshikorum , and thus it should be considered the holotype. The specimen is accompanied by a printed label with Vvedensky handwriting: “ Juno tadshikorum m. June [19]32”.

Juno vicaria Vvedensky (1963: 425) ≡ Iris vicaria (Vved.) T.Hall & Seisums in Ikinci et al. (2011: 300)

Protologue citation:—“E jugo Hissarico prope Schargun”.

Holotype:— UZBEKISTAN. [Surxondaryo Region], M. m. Tadshikorum , inter lapides ad declivia saxosa in montibus Hissaricis supra p. Schargun, alt. ca. 1250 mt., 14 April 1928, Vvedensky s.n. ‘ Herbarium Florae Asiae Mediae’, Nr. 1001 ineditus ( TASH0000322 !).

Isotypes:— UZBEKISTAN. Uzbekistania, inter lapides ad declivia saxosa in montibus Hissaricis supra pag. Schargun, ca. 1250 m s. m., [1] 4 April 1928, A. Vvedensky s.n. ‘Herb. Fl. USSR’, Exs. No. 5449 ( BM 000832580!, E 00705955!, LE 0050124!, LE 0050125!, MW 0021782!).

Notes:—In the Juno vicaria protologue, the holotype was not explicitly designated. Vvedensky (1963) indicated the exsiccatum no. 666, belonging to “Herbarium Florae Asiae Mediae” and “Taschkento conservatur [ TASH]”, as the place of deposition of “Typus”. However, the exsiccatum indicated in the protologue was not published. These specimens were used for publishing the exsiccatum under the no. 5449 in the “Herbarium of the USSR Flora”. On the printed labels of this exsiccatum, the text of which was composed by Vvedensky, it was indicated that “The published plants are the isotypes of this species [ J. vicaria ]”. The label to the holotype was handwritten by Vvedensky without indicating the plant name. On the labels to the isotypes, the date of collection is erroneous. All the original material refers to the same gathering.

Juno zenaidae Vvedensky (1971: 322) ≡ Iris zenaidae (Vved.) Khassanov & Rakhimova (2012: 178)

Protologue citation:—“E bulbis a Z. Botschantseva in jugo Ferganico ad r. Aubek sub rupibus a. 1933 lectis in Horto Botanico Universitatis Asiae Mediae sub no. 581 enatus. 7.IV.1934 fl. Vvedensky”.

Holotype:— KYRGYZSTAN. [Jalal-Abad Region], E bulbis a Z. Botschantseva in jugo Ferganico ad r. Aubek sub rupibus a. 1933 lectis in Horto Botanico Universitatis Asiae Mediae sub no. 581 enatus, 7 April 1934, Vvedensky s.n. ( TASH0000323 !).

Notes:—In the protologue, Vvedensky indicated a single specimen from TASH as “Typus”. The gathering is represented in TASH by a single specimen, and thus it should be considered the holotype. This specimen is accompanied by a printed label with Vvedensky’s handwriting “ Juno zenaidae Vved. sp. n. Typus. 7 October [19]69”.

It is important to note that the names Iris kopetdagensis and Juno kopetdagensis were published neither by Vvedensky (1935b, 1971), nor by other authors ( Wendelbo & Mathew 1975: 61). Vvedensky first used the name I. kopetdagensis in “Flora of the USSR ” (1935b: 575) without the Latin description of the species, and he noted as follows: “Seen in the culture from the Kara-Kala outskirts [ Turkmenistan, Balkan Province]; the type is in Tashkent [originally in Russian]”. A later work ( Vvedensky 1971: 322) provided a Latin diagnosis for Juno kopetdagensis , which was a translation of the earlier published Russian description. In this source, Vvedensky noted: “The species was described in 1935 from plants collected near Kara-Kala (Kopet Dag); currently, the type is lost [originally in Russian]”. Nevertheless, Vvedensky (1971) did not indicate the “ type ” (Art. 40.1 of ICN, McNeill et al. 2012) of J. kopetdagensis , and this name was not validly published again. It is probable that the herbarium specimens for this name were not made, and the description of plants was based on the cultivated plants that have not been preserved. Vvedensky (1971) indicated that the plants presented under the name J. kopetdagensis had a strong resemblance to Juno drepanophylla (Aitch. & Baker) Rodionenko (1961: 208) , a species widely distributed in the Kopet Dag. From my point of view, the plants from the Kara-Kala outskirts, named Iris / Juno kopetdagensis , refer to Juno drepanophylla , and for this reason I don’t consider it necessary to validate the name J. kopetdagensis here.