Chloris bournei Rangachariar & Tadulingam (1921: 189)

Landge, Shahid Nawaz & Shinde, Rajendra D., 2022, Lectotypification of Chloris bournei (Poaceae: Chloridoideae) and its distribution in India, Phytotaxa 554 (3), pp. 293-296 : 293-295

Chloris bournei Rangachariar & Tadulingam (1921: 189) .

Lectotype (hic designatus):— INDIA. Tamil Nadu state, Coimbatore , central farm, 8 December 1916, Rangachariar 13718 [typographical error for 1318] (MH!) [Barcode: MH00002646] ; Syntypes: Gidikuppa [whereabouts uncertain, but probably in Karnataka], 11 December 1901, C.A. Barber 5348 (MH!) [Bracode: MH00037528] ; Karnataka state, Bellary district , Toranagallu, A.G. Bourne 3594 (K barcode K000245175 [digital image!], available at http://specimens.kew.org/herbarium/K000245175 & barcode K000245176 [digital image!], available at http://specimens.kew.org/herbarium/K000245176) ; Andhra Pradesh state, Godaveri district, Samalkot [Samalkota], 19 January 1918, s.coll. 15457 (K barcode K000245177 [digital image!], available at http://specimens.kew.org/ herbarium/K000245177) ; Karnataka state, Bellary district , Toranagallu, s.coll. s.n. (K barcode K000885797 [digital image!], available at http://specimens.kew.org/herbarium/K000885797) .

Lectotypification Note: Chloris bournei was described without any holotype citation. Rather, the authors loosely cited some specimens in the protologue, such as “Loc. Coimbatore, on black cotton soil. Herb. Madras.— 1317, 1318, 4443, 5348, 6166, 6569 coll. Rangachariar ”. After communicating with MH herbarium, where the type specimens were indicated to be kept, the concerned authorities replied, that, only two specimens i.e. 5348 & 13718 [typographic error for 1318], are extant while others were untraceable. However, the former specimen was collected by C. A. Barber from Gidikuppa [probably an orthographic error for Gadikoppa in the state of Karnataka] and not by Rangachariar from Coimbatore as it was indicated in the protologue. Therefore , it appears that the original type citation is erroneous (as it contains typographical errors in citation of collector’s name and the locality) and such mistakes may be corrected according to Art. 9.2 of Shenzhen Code ( Turland et al. 2018). Another specimen that appeared in the protologue is “ Bourne 3594”, belonging to “Ex. herb. Rangachariar” which later became a part of “herb. Bourne”. Bourne 3594 is present at K in two preparations ( Barcodes : K000245175 & K000245176). Thus , these two specimens are very likely to have been the uncited syntypes. Bourne’s collection antedates Barber’s by almost 16 months which should have been the strong reason as to why the species had been eponymised after the former’s name. Furthermore , according to the protologue, two more gatherings are known from Bellary district [presently in Karnataka state] and Samalkota [presently in the state of Andhra Pradesh] respectively. However , with the exception of the localities, no other information was available in the protologue. While searching for these specimens, we could trace the two specimens collected from Bellary (Barcode: K000885797) and Samalkota (Barcode: K000245177) which were present at K. They may be considered as uncited syntypes as well. From all these cited and uncited syntype an appropriate specimen can be designated as lectotype in conformity with Art. 9.6 of Schenzhen Code ( Turland et al. 2018). Anderson (1974), in his monograph of Chloris , indicated “Type MH not seen”, and might have found the illustration from the protologue clear enough for identification of the species. He , however, did not designate a lectotype for the name. The specimen “ Rangachariar 13718” [typographic error for 1318 in the protologue] at MH belongs to the cited syntypes and is a good material with abundant spikelets as compared to “ C.A. Barber 5348” which has a few spikelets and leaves. The former specimen agrees well with the description given in the protologue. Thus, Rangachariar 13718 ( Fig. 1 ) is designated here as lectotype of the name Chloris bournei . All the other specimens by different collectors and gatherings are to be treated as syntypes.

Note:— Chloris bournei can be easily identified by a combination of certain characters, such as: 2–3 fertile florets in the spikelets, fertile lemma long awned and its mid nerve (keel) and margin densely villous throughout the length and spikes have a peculiar bead-like appearance and are villous. For a detailed account of its correct identification and a key to identify other congeners, refer to ( Landge & Shinde 2022).

In our recent exhaustive search for the specimens of Chloris bournei from Maharashtra at BSI, Pune herbarium, we could be able to locate a misplaced folder for decades bearing three herbarium specimens (Barcodes: BSI0000048675, BSI0000048676 & BSI0000048677). These specimens were correctly identified as C. bournei . Based on which, its distribution in India has been updated from the previous publication ( Landge & Shinde 2022). The distribution is based on the herbarium specimens studied at BLAT, BSI, K and MH, and literature studied. Many specimens of this species at BSI from the state of Karnataka had been erroneously identified as C. gayana by previous workers which now have been corrected.

Distribution:— Maharashtra, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu: so far known from these states of Peninsular India. Endemic to India.

Specimens Examined of Chloris bournei

INDIA. Andhra Pradesh state, Godaveri district, Samalkot [Samalkota], 19 January 1918, s.coll. 15457 (K) [Barcode: K000245177] . Maharashtra state, Dhond , 6 September 1956, S.K. Jain 6194 (BSI) [Barcode: BSI0000048675]; ibid, 25 November 1956, S.K. Jain 9559 (BSI) [Barcode: BSI0000048676 & BSI0000048677] . Karnataka state, Bagewadi-Muddevihal rd. 32 km, 16 August 1976, N.P. Singh 142988 (BSI) [Barcode: BSI0000048664 & BSI0000048665]; Dharwad, 19 November 1997, P.V. Prasannit 176765 (BSI) [Barcode: BSI0000048668]; Bellary district, 2 August 1958, G.S. Puri 39900 (BSI) [Barcode: BSI0000048669]; ibid, s.d., s.coll., s.n. (BSI) [Barcode: BSI0000048685]; Gidikuppa [whereabouts uncertain, but probably in Karnataka], 11 December 1901, C.A. Barber 5348 (MH!) [Bracode: MH00037528]; Bellary district , Toranagallu, A.G. Bourne 3594 (K) [Barcode: K000245175 & K000245176]; ibid, s.coll. s.n. (K) [Barcode: K000885797]. Humnabad-Bagalkot rd 42 km, 16 January 1976, N.P. Singh 142537 B (BSI) [Barcode: BSI0000048666 & BSI0000048667] . Tamil Nadu state, Coimbatore , central farm, 8 December 1916, Rangachariar 13718 [typographical error for 1318] (MH!) [Barcode: MH00002646] .

Figures

FIGURE 1. Lectotype of the name Chloris bournei (© The Director, Botanical Survey of India, Kolkata).