58. Lotus capensis Houtt.,

Nat. Hist. II(10): 311, tab. 65, fig. 3. 1779.

Lectotypus (designated here by Callmander): SOUTH AFRICA: Cape, Auge s.n. [?] (G-PREL [G00818107]!).

= Lotononis umbellata (L.) Benth . in London J. Bot. 2: 602. 1843.

Notes. – Lotus capensis was considered to be a synonym of Lotononis umbellata by MERRILL (1938: 347). The former was not cited by VAN WYK (1991) in his revision of Lotononis (DC.) Eckl. & Zeyh. A note by R. Dahlgren (Lund, 15.I.1959) on the Cape herbarium collection confirms that Houttuyn’s species belongs to Lotononis . Lotus suffruticosus Burm. f. (BURMAN f., 1768: 22) undoubtedly represents the same taxon. Houttuyn cited Burman’s binomial in Nat. Hist. II(10): Aanwyz. Plaat. [2]. 1779. No type specimen of the latter has been located in G-PREL but a fragment is present in G-DC [G00477415].