Timonius wallichianus Valeton (1909a: 36)

Chen, Junhao & Wong, Khoon Meng, 2020, Typification and nomenclatural notes on Bornean Timonius (Rubiaceae: Guettardeae), Phytotaxa 446 (2), pp. 114-120 : 119

Timonius wallichianus Valeton (1909a: 36)

Type: — SINGAPORE. Sin. loc., 1822 (♀ and ♂), Wallich s.n. [EIC 6217] (lectotype K-W [K001123325], first step designated in Wong (1988), second step designated in Wong et al. (2019); isolectotypes BR [BR0000005754595], K-W [K001123326], PH [ PH 00023297]).

Notes: —Although T. wallichianus was excluded in early enumerations of the Bornean flora ( Merrill 1921a, Masamune 1942), it has been more recently recorded in East Kalimantan ( Sidiyasa et al. 1999). The name “ Bobea wallichiana ” was invalidly published by Korthals (1851: 211), lacking any description or diagnosis. Therefore, Valeton’s name was incorrectly stated in protologue as a combination “ Timonius wallichianus (Korth.) Valeton ”. Valeton (1909a) proceeded to equate T. wallichianus with T. rumphii sensu Hooker (1880: 127) non Candolle (1830: 461), a misapplied name that was based on the specimen Wallich s.n. [EIC 6217]. The Wallich specimen was cited in Valeton’s protologue and indeed represents T. wallichianus , and hence Wong (1988) cited it as the holotype of T. wallichianus . However, a Malacca collection by Ridley and collections from Banka by Teijsmann and Kobus were also cited in Valeton’s protologue. The original material of T. wallichianus therefore comprises several elements, and the use of the term holotype in Wong (1988) is a correctable error that should be corrected to lectotype. Although Wong (1988) is considered to have effectively lectotypified this name, a second-step lectotypification was performed in Wong et al. (2019) as there are two specimens of the Wallich collection in K-W.