Phytotaxa 291 (3): 201–208 ISSN 1179-3155 (print edition) http://www.mapress.com/j/pt/ PHYTOTAXA Copyright © 2017 Magnolia Press Article ISSN 1179-3163 (online edition) https://doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.291.3.4

A new species of Amaranthus () from Mexico

IVONNE SÁNCHEZ-DEL PINO1,3, DONALD PRATT2 & HILDA FLORES-OLVERA1* 1Departamento de Botánica, Instituto de Biología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Apartado Postal 70-233, C.P. 04510 México, D.F. México; [email protected] 2Department of Biology, Stephen F. Austin State University, P.O. Box 13001 SFA-Station, Nacogdoches, Texas 75961, U.S.A. 3Current address: Centro de Investigación Científica de Yucatán, A.C. Calle 43 x 32 y 34 No 130. Col. Chuburná de Hidalgo. C.P. 97205, Mérida, Yucatán. *author for correspondence

Abstract

A new endemic species of Amaranthus—Amaranthus neei—from Mexico is described, illustrated, and compared to the pu- tatively related species. A. neei is known from the Valley of Mexico (South of Hidalgo, Mexico city, and State of Mexico), Michoacán, Puebla, Veracruz, and Chiapas. The new species is a monoecious herb characterized by its long, pungent, erect or recurvate, and bracteoles, (2–)3–5 minute pistillate sepals or absent, ovate, oblong to linear, apex acute to obtuse, and fruits circumscissile, irregularly dehiscent to indehiscent. Infrageneric circumscription of A. neei is discussed together with its critical taxonomic position within the currently accepted infrageneric classification of Amaranthus.

Keywords: , fruit dehiscence, monoecious species, sepals

Resumen

Se describe e ilustra una especie mexicana endémica nueva de Amaranthus—Amaranthus neei—que se distribuye en el Valle de México (sur de Hidalgo, Ciudad de México y Estado de México), Michoacán, Puebla, Veracruz y Chiapas. A. neei se compara con las posibles especies relacionadas. La nueva especie es monoica y caracterizada por tener brácteas y bractéolas largas, pungentes, erectas o recurvadas, (2–)3–5 sépalos pistilados diminutos o ausentes, ovados, oblongos a lineares, ápice agudo a obtuso y fruto circuncísil, irregularmente dehiscente o indehiscente. Se discute la circunscripción infragenérica de A. neei así como su problemática ubicación taxonómica dentro de la clasificación infragenérica actual de Amaranthus.

Palabras clave: Caryophyllales, dehiscencia del fruto, especie monoica, sépalos

Introduction

Amaranthus Linnaeus (1753: 989) (Amaranthaceae Juss.) is a genus of about 70–75 species, of which about 40 are native to America, the remaining ones being alien to the other continents (see e.g., Costea & DeMason 2001, Costea et al. 2001, Mosyakin & Robertson 2003, Bayón 2015, Iamonico 2015). Amaranthus includes monoecious or dioecious herbs, which are characterized by alternate , minute, unisexual, unibracteate, bibracteolate, and uniovulate flowers, sepals usually five, free stamens and fruit either an utricle or pyxis (Bayón 2015). Flowers are arranged in complex (thyrsoid paracladia) which can be found in the axils of leaves, or are aggregated in elongating, terminal or axillary spike- or panicle-like structure (for details see e.g., Webberling 1992, Pratt & Clark 2001, Bayón 2015, Iamonico 2015). These complex structures are usually referred in literature inaccurately as “terminal or lateral spikes or panicles”. The classification of the genus Amaranthus still remains unresolved. The more recent proposal was made by Mosyakin & Robertson (1996) who divided the genus into three subgenera and several sections based on breeding system, pistillate flower, sepal number, type, bracts, and fruit characters: 1) subgen. Acnida (Linnaeus 1753: 1027) Aellen ex K.R. Robertson (1981: 283), the dioecious , 2) subgen. Amaranthus, monoecious species with long spiciform-cylindric terminal synflorescences, usually five sepals, and fruits dehiscent, and 3) subgen.

Accepted by Duilio Iamonico: 4 Dec. 2016; published: 13 Jan. 2017 201 Albersia (Kunth 1838: 144) Grenier & Godron (1856: 3), monoecious species primarily with axillary, glomerate or short-spiciform synflorescences, sepals usually less than 5, and fruits indehiscent. Some authors (e.g. Hernández- Ledesma et al. 2015: 304) provisionally proposed a synonymization of all the infrageneric names. Amaranthus is economically very important, including cultivated [i.e. grain amaranths: A. caudatus Linnaeus (1753: 990), A. cruentus Linnaeus (1759: 1269), and A. hypochondriacus Linnaeus (1753: 991)] and potherbs [A. tricolor Linnaeus (1753: 989), and A. blitum Linnaeus (1753: 990) [≡ A. lividus Linnaeus (1753: 990)], all of which are also used as ornamentals (Sauer 1967). Amaranthus also contains a suite of important agricultural and range weeds including: A. albus Linnaeus (1759: 1268), A. hybridus Linnaeus (1753: 990), A. palmeri S. Watson (1877: 274), A. powellii S. Watson (1875: 347), A. retroflexus Linnaeus (1753: 991), A. spinosus Linnaeus (1753: 991), and A. tuberculatus (Moquin-Tandon 1849: 277) Sauer (1955: 18). Among the latter species, the Amarathus hybridus species complex, a group of five species [including also A. bouchonii Thellung (1926: 4), A. cacciatoi (Aellen ex Cacciato 1966: 618) Iamonico (2013: 239), and A. quitensis Kunth (1817: 194)] and the three cultivated grain amaranths (Sauer 1967, Adhikary & Pratt 2015, Iamonico 2015), has been the focus of recent studies (e.g., Iamonico 2012, Adhikary & Pratt 2015, Sánchez-del Pino & Solis-Fernández 2015). The genus Amaranthus, as well as the A. hybridus complex, is considered difficult to identify, either because taxonomists did not take time to examine these plants carefully (Robertson 1981) or they have been considered taxonomically problematic due to nomenclatural confusions or absence of reliable diagnostic characters (Adhikary & Pratt 2015, Iamonico 2015). Recently, statistical tools have been used to better delimit the circumscription of some Amaranthus taxa (Iamonico 2012, Adhikary & Pratt 2015). As part of a floristic study (Sánchez-del Pino et al. 1999) and taxonomic investigations on Amaranthus (Pratt 1999, Pratt & Clark 2001), we examined herbarium specimens from central Mexico that cannot be ascribed to any of the currently known Amaranthus species. As a consequence we here propose to describe a new species for science.

Material and Methods

Specimens of species complex from the main Mexican herbaria (MEXU, CHAPA, and ENCB) were examined directly in each institution. Other material was studied from CANB, F, MO, NY, TEX, WIS, and XAL (acronyms according to Thiers 2016+). A distribution map was created using ArcGIS 9.2 software (ESRI 1999–2006).

Taxonomy

Amaranthus neei Pratt, Sánchez-del Pino, & Flores Olv., sp. nov. (Figs. 1‒2)

Type:—MEXICO. Puebla: San Miguel Zoapan, northwestern slopes of Pico de Orizaba. Ruderal in the village, does not seem to be a weed of surrounding fields. 19°05’N, 97°21’W, 2900 m.a.s.l., 7 September 1986, Nee 33033 (holotype MEXU!, isotypes CANB, MO, NY, TEX, WIS, XAL!).

Diagnosis:—Monoecious, annual herbs, up to 75 cm long. Stems erect or branched from the base or above, deeply furrowed, reddish to brown, sparse pubescent with uniseriate trichomes, becoming dense near the synflorescences. Leaves alternate, green (sometimes reddish), glabrous, petiolate [petioles 5–45(–50) mm long], estipulate, sometimes with purple V-shaped marks on young leaves; blade ovate [(5–)15–100 × (5–)7–55 mm], apex acute (sometimes obtuse) and mucronulate or mucronate, base attenuate-cuneate. Synflorescence an indeterminate heterocladic thyrse, 0.5– 15.0(–25.0) cm long with dichasial partial synflorescences. Flowers unibracteate, bibracteolate; and bracteoles lanceolate (1.5–2.5 × 0.4–0.8 mm), membranous, brown, green to reddish, conduplicate and enclosing developing, immature flowers, apex pungent, erect or recurvate, decurrent along midrib; midrib 1.6–3.0 mm long, greatly exceeding the bract lamina, flowers, and fruits. Perianth uniseriate. Staminate flowers with 4 or 5 well-developed sepals; outer sepals 1.6–2.4 × 0.5–0.7 mm, slightly conduplicate, cup-like, enfolding the other three, midrib not evident; inner sepals 1.5–2.8 × (0.2–)0.4–0.6 mm, flat, in an overlapping ring around the stamens, ovate, oblong to linear, midrib not evident. Stamens (2–)4–5. Pistillate flowers without sepals or with (2–)3–5 sepals consisting of minute flaps of tissue to well-developed; outer sepals 0.4–0.6 (in fruit 0.8–1.1) × 0.1–0.4 (in fruit 0.2–0.4) mm, inner sepals 0.4–0.5 (in fruit 0.7–0.9) × 0.1 (in fruit up to 0.4) mm, closely adpressed against the utricle and of the same colour, usually not evident

202 • Phytotaxa 291 (3) © 2017 Magnolia Press SÁNCHEZ-DEL PINO ET AL. without close examination; ovate, oblong to linear, apex acute to obtuse, base truncate, midrib absent or present. Ovary uniovulate (0.6–1.0 × 0.4–0.6 mm); style absent; stigmas 2–3, 0.4–1.0 mm long, feathery, often poorly preserved in fruit and appearing short due to breakage. Fruit as a single-seeded utricle, ovate to orbicular [1.5–2.2 × (1.0–)1.2–1.6 mm], papery, bladder-shaped; circumscissile, irregularly dehiscent or indehiscent, sometimes polymorphic on a single individual. Seed 0.75–1.50 mm diameter, lustrous, brown or black, lenticular; embryo annular.

FIGURE 1. Amaranthus neei. a. ; b. Composite view of synflorescence; d, e Staminate flower. c, f, g; Pistillate flower; h. Indehiscent and dehiscent fruit, exploded view.

A new species of Amaranthus from Mexico Phytotaxa 291 (3) © 2017 Magnolia Press • 203 FIGURE 2. Holotype of Amaranthus neei (MEXU!).

204 • Phytotaxa 291 (3) © 2017 Magnolia Press SÁNCHEZ-DEL PINO ET AL. Etymology:—The epithet neei is dedicated to Dr. Michael Nee for his work in plant . Dr. Nee collected the specimen assigned as the type of this species. Vernacular names:—Amaranthus neei is known in the Valley of Mexico as “chia”, “quintonil” and “quiltonil”. In Capácuaro (Michoacán) it is known as “parxn”. Phenology:—Flowering and fruiting times September‒December; old fruits with probably viable seeds are persistent in plants through March. Habitat:—The species grows in primary and disturbed vegetation in xerophytic scrub, oak, and pine forest. It also grows along roadsides or in cultivated fields, and in salty soils (elevation 2250–2900 m. a.s.l.). Distribution area:—Amaranthus neei is an endemic Mexican species growing at the Valley of Mexico (South of Hidalgo, Mexico city and State of Mexico), Michoacán, Puebla, Veracruz and Chiapas (Fig. 3).

FIGURE 3. Distribution map of Amaranthus neei.

Conservation status:—Amaranthus neei has a wide distribution through the Valley of Mexico, Michoacán, Puebla, Veracruz and Chiapas, frequently growing in disturbed vegetation, and falls under the category of Least Concern (LC), following IUCN (2012) criteria. Taxonomical notes:—On the basis of our careful examination of specimens, Amaranthus neei was confused with A. hybridus and A. hypochondriacus, or labeled as Amaranthus sp. The type collection was identified as “A. hybridus vel aff.”, thus indicating uncertainty of the specimen’s affinities, and one of the isotypes (WIS) bears an annotation label identified as A. hybridus. The diagnostic features of Amaranthus neei are its long bracts and minute (2–)3–5 to absent pistillate sepals which lack an evident midrib. This species has also laminas reduced in bracts and bracteoles and short thyrses. A. neei is morphologically similar with the cultivated grain amaranths, especially A. hybridus, A. caudatus, and A. cruentus (Table 1). Sepal size is similar among these three species, however sepals are shorter in A. neei or absent.

TABLE 1. Morphological comparison among , A. cruentus, A. hybridus, and A. neei. All characters refer to pistillate flowers. Amaranthus hybridus, Amaranthus neei A. caudatus, A. cruentus Sepal number 5 0, (2–)3–5 Sepal size > 1.00 mm ≤ 1.00 mm (when present) Sepal midrib Present Absent or present Sepal apex Acute Acute/obtuse Dehiscence Regular Irregular to regular

A new species of Amaranthus from Mexico Phytotaxa 291 (3) © 2017 Magnolia Press • 205 The subgeneric position of Amaranthus neei is not a simple issue since this species diplays a mix of features from subgen. Amaranthus, subgen. Acnida, and subgen. Albersia sect. Pyxidium according to Mosyakin & Robertson (1996) (Table 2). Subgenus Amaranthus and subgenus Albersia sect. Pyxidium has been recognized on the basis of the fruit dehiscence, while into the subgen. Acnida fruit is always dehiscent except for A. bouchonii (Wilkin 1992, Mosyakin & Roberston 1996, Costea et al. 2001), and for A. hybridus, which has been occasionally observed to have irregularly dehiscent fruits within a population, or even in the same plant (Costea et al. 2001). A. neei shows fruit dehiscence, irregularly dehiscent or indehiscent. However, it is possible the individuals of A. neei with irregularly dehiscent fruits are less mature than plants with dehiscent utricles. Some specimens seem to have nevertheless indehiscent fruits with mature seeds. As a consequence, it is possible that the dehiscence character of A. neei is not related to plant maturity. Further studies need to confirm this hypothesis.

TABLE 2. Comparison of Amaranthus neei to subgen. Amaranthus and subgen. Albersia sect. Pyxidium. Subgen. Amaranthus Subg. Acnida Subgen. Albersia Amaranthus neei sect. Pyxidium Breeding System Monoecious Dioecious Monoecious Monoecious Synflorescence Heterocladic thyrse Heterocladic thyrse Various Heterocladic thyrse Pistillate sepals number 5 0, (1–2), 5 3, (4–)5 0,(2–)3,5 Fruit Dehiscent Variable Dehiscent Variable

Concerning the inflorescence structure, most of the members belonging to the sect. Pyxidium display axillary dichasia, while some species (A. blitum, A. tricolor, and A. viridis) show terminal synflorescences, which are supposedly characteristic of the subgen. Amaranthus (Eliasson 1988, Mosyakin & Robertson 1996). Some specimens [Nee 33066 (NY)] appear to be intermediate between A. hybridus and A. neei from the morphological point of view, underscoring the potential relationship between these two species (hybridization?). However, a relationship between the monoecious A. neei and the dioecious subgen. Acnida cannot be ruled out. Recent phylogenetic work on Amaranthus indicated that subgen. Acnida may be polyphyletic, and that there has been at least one reversal from dioecy to monoecy in the North American Atlantic coast species A. pumilus Rafinesque (1808: 360; see Waselkov 2013). Some members of subgen. Acnida show variable patterns of dehiscence and sepals very similar to those here reported for A. neei (Pratt & Clark 2001). Furthermore, hybrids are known to form between A. hybridus and species belonging to the subgen. Acnida (Pratt 1999, Tranel et al. 2002, Trucco et al. 2009). Based on these trends, an affinity between A. neei involving either a reversal to monoecy or a hybrid origin between members of subgenera Acnida and Amaranthus is possible. Amaranthus neei highlights the need for further analysis of infrageneric classifications within Amaranthus. We therefore decline to place A. neei within any of the current sugeneric rank proposed by Mosyakin & Robertson (1996) as the diagnostic character given by these author (inflorescence structure, pistillate sepals number, and fruit dehiscence) appears to be uncertain from the taxonomical point of view. In addition, some authors (e.g., Iamonico 2015) indicated that the classification of Mosyakin & Robertson (1996) is somewhat tenuous and that new taxa at section and subsection levels could be described. Specimens examined:—MEXICO. Chiapas: Mpio. Tenejapa, Paraje Matsab, 05 October 1966, Alush Shilon Ton 1313 (MEXU). Mpio. Tenejapa, Paraje Sholeh 12 January 1966, Alush Shilon Ton 536 (MEXU). Mpio. Tenejapa, in the colonia ‘Ach’lum 10 October 1966, Alush Shilon Ton 1373 (MEXU). Yalichín, Pilalchen, Chamula, 09 December 1988, López & Martínez 749 (MEXU). Mpio. Zinacantán Valley floor in Zinacatán center, 05 April 1966, Laughlin 610 (MEXU). México city: Delegación Tlalpan, Topilejo, 2650 m, 27 November 1976, Ventura 2426 (ENCB, MEXU). Colonia San Jacinto, 22 April 1962, Villegas 12 (ENCB). W of Huipulco, 2250 m, 09 November 1963, Villegas 266 (ENCB). Barranca de Solís Grande, Lomas Altas de Chapultepec, 20 November 1962, Huerta s.n. (ENCB). Hidalgo: Mpio. Zempoala, Zempoala, 2450 m, 28 September 1975, Ventura 339 (ENCB). State of Mexico: 6 km al N de Huehuetoca, 2300 m, 18 October 1972, Aguilar s.n. (ENCB). Mpio. Texcoco, experimental fields of the Autonomous University of Chapingo, 16 October 1976, Bolaños 75, 77 (MEXU). Coacalco de Berriozabal, 01 February 1977, Espinosa 8 (MEXU). San Miguel Xaltocan, 10 March 1977, Espinosa 93 (MEXU). Cráter del Volcán Loma Larga, Temamtla, 2850 m, Ibarra 14 (MEXU). Zumpango, San Juan Citlaltepec, orilla N del lago de Zumpango, 09 November 1975, Barrios 102 (ENCB). Michoacán: Sansungua Capácuaro, 04 September 1967, Rees & Bille 1334 (MEXU). Puebla: Mpio. Zacapoaxtla, Comaltepec, 20 January 2010, Mapes & Basurto 1201 (MEXU). Mpio. Zautla, San Miguel Tenextatiloyan, 18 December 2009, Mapes & Basurto 1192 (MEXU). Veracruz: Altotonga, 07 June 1974, Ramos & Fernández R-58 (F).

206 • Phytotaxa 291 (3) © 2017 Magnolia Press SÁNCHEZ-DEL PINO ET AL. Aknowledgments

We thank the Directors and Curators of the herbaria cited for providing facilities to examine the specimens. We are also grateful to Ma. del Rosario García-Peña (MEXU) for herbarium logistics, and to L. Andrés González Sierra (CICY) for making the distribution map. Special thanks to D. Iamonico (Rome) whose comments improved this manuscript. We appreciate Albino Luna for the beautiful illustration.

References

Adhikary, D. & Pratt, D.B. (2015) Morphologic and Taxonomic Analysis of the Weedy and Cultivated Amaranthus hybridus Species Complex. Systematic Botany 40 (2): 604‒610. https://doi.org/10.1600/036364415x688376 Bayón, N.D. (2015) Revisión Taxonómica de las Especies Monoicas de Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae): Amaranthus subg. Amaranthus y Amaranthus subg. Albersia. Annals of the Botanical Garden 101 (2): 261‒383. https://doi.org/10.3417/2010080 Cacciato, A. (1966) II genere Amaranthus a Roma en el Lazio. Annali di Botanica Roma 28: 618. Costea, M. & DeMason, D.A. (2001) Stem morphology and anatomy in Amaranthus L. (Amaranthacea)-Taxonomic significance. Journal of the Torrey Botanical Society 128 (3): 254‒281. https://doi.org/10.2307/3088717 Costea, M., Sanders, A. & Waines, G. (2001) Preliminary results toward a revision of the Amaranthus hybridus complex (Amaranthaceae). Sida 19: 931‒974. Eliasson, U. (1988) Floral morphology and taxonomic relations among the genera of Amaranthaceae in the New World and the Hawaiian Islands. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 96: 235‒283. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8339.1988.tb00683.x ESRI (1999–2006) ArcMap 9.2. ESRI Redlands, CA. Grenier, M. & Godron, M. (1856) Flore de France, vol. 3. J.-B. Baillière, Paris, 779 pp. Hernández-Ledesma, P., Berendsohn, W.G., Borsch, T., von Mering, S., Akhani, H., Arias, S., Castañeda-Noa, I., Eggli, U., Eriksson, R., Flores-Olvera, H., Fuentes-Bazán, S., Kadereit, G., Klak, C., Korotkova, N., Nyffeler, R., Ocampo, R., Ochoterena, H., Oxelman, B., Rabeler, R.K., Sanchez, A., Schlumpberger, B.O. & Uotila, P. (2015) A taxonomic backbone for the global synthesis of species diversity in the angiosperm order Caryophyllales. Willdenowia 45 (3): 281‒383. https://doi.org/10.3372/wi.45.45301 Iamonico, D. (2012) subsp. cacciatoi comb. et stat. nov. (Amaranthaceae). Nordic Journal of Botany 30: 12‒16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-1051.2011.01080.x Iamonico, D. (2013) Amaranthus cacciatoi (Aellen ex Cacciato) Iamonico, comb. nov. Euro+Med-Checklist notulae, 2. Willdenowia 43: 239‒249. Iamonico, D. (2015) Taxonomic revision of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae) in Italy. Phytotaxa 199 (1): 1‒84. https://doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.199.1.1 IUCN (2012) IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria: Version 3.1. Second edition. Available from: http://www.iucnredlist.org/ technical- documents/categories and-criteria (accessed 25 October 2016) Kunth, K. (1817) Amaranthus quitensis Kunth. In: Bonpland A., Humboldt, A. & Kunth, C. (Eds.) Nova genera et species plantarum vol. 2. Librariae Graeco-Latino-Germanico, Paris, 405 pp. Kunth, K. (1838) Flora Berolinensis, Vol. 2. Duncker et Humblot, Berlin, 438 pp. Linnaeus, C. (1753) Species Plantarum, vol. 2. Laurentii Salvii, Holmiae, 639 pp. Linnaeus, C. (1759) Systema Naturae Ed. 10, vol. 2. Laurentii Salvii, Holmiae, 1384 pp. Moquin-Tandon C. (1849) Amaranthaceae Juss. In: Candolle, A. de (Ed.) Prodromus Systematis Naturalis Regni Vegetabilis, vol. 13 (2). Victori Masson, Parisiis, pp. 231‒424. Mosyakin, S.L. & Robertson, K.R. (1996) New infrageneric taxa and combinations in Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae). Annales Botanici Fennici 33: 275‒281. Mosyakin, S.L. & Robertson, K.R. (2003) Amaranthus L. In: Flora of editorial Committee (Eds.) Flora of North America North of Mexico (Magnoliophyta: Caryophyllidae, part 1), vol. 4. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 410‒435. Pratt, D.B. (1999) Taxonomic Revision of Amaranthus rudis and A. tuberculatus (Amaranthaceae). Master’s Thesis. Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, 68 pp.

A new species of Amaranthus from Mexico Phytotaxa 291 (3) © 2017 Magnolia Press • 207 Pratt, D.B. & Clark, L.G. (2001) Amaranthus rudis and A. tuberculatus—one species or two? Journal of the Torrey Botanical Society 128: 282‒296. https://doi.org/10.2307/3088718 Rafinesque, C. (1808) Medical Repository ser. 2, vol. 5. New York. Robertson, K.R. (1981) The genera of Amaranthaceae in the Southeastern . Journal of the Arnold Arboretum 62 (3): 267‒ 313. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.part.11251 Sánchez-del Pino, I., Flores Olvera, H. & Valdés, J. (1999) La familia Amaranthaceae en la flora halófila y gipsófila de México. Anales del Instituto de Biología Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Serie Botánica 70 (1): 29‒135. Sánchez-del Pino, I. & Solis-Fernández, K.Z. (2015) Amaranto (Xtez): su morfología y colecta en algunas zonas de la región maya. Quick Digital. México, 48 pp. Sauer J.D. (1955) Revision of the dioeciuos Amaranths. Madroño 13 (1): 5‒46. Sauer, J.D. (1967) The grain amaranths and their relatives: a revised taxonomic and geographic survey. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 54: 103‒137. https://doi.org/10.2307/2394998 Thellung A. (1926) Amaranthus bouchonii Thell. spec. (?) nov. Monde Plantarum 27 (160): 4. Thiers, B. (2016) Index herbariorum, a global directory of public herbaria and associated staff. New York Botanical Garden´s Virtual Herbarium. Available from: http://sweetgum.nybg.org/ih (accessed 26 May 2016) Tranel, P.J., Wassom, J.J., Jeschke, M.R. & Rayburn, A.L. (2002) Transmission of resistance from a monoecious to a dioeciuos weedy Amaranthus species. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 105: 674‒679. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-002-0931-3 Trucco, F., Tatum, T., Rayburn, A.L. & Tranel, P.J. (2009) Out of the swamp: Unidirectional hybridization with weedy species may explain the prevalence of as a weed. New Phytologist 184: 819‒827. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.02979.x Waselkov, K.E. (2013) Population genetics and phylogenetic context of weed evolution in the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae). Phdegree’s Thesis. Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, 252 pp. Watson, S. (1875) Revision of the Genus Ceanotus, and Descriptions of New Plants, with a Synopsis of the Western Species of Silene. Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 10: 333‒350. https://doi.org/10.2307/20021421 Watson, S. (1877) Descriptions of New Species of Plants, with Revisions of Certain Genera. Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 12: 246‒278. https://doi.org/10.2307/25138455 Weberling, F. (1992) Morphology of Flowers and Inflorescences Cambridge Press, Cambridge, 405 pp. Wilkin, P. (1992) The status of Amaranthus bouchonii Thellung within Amaranthus L. section Amaranthus: new evidence from studies of morphology and isozymes. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 108: 253‒267. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8339.1992.tb00242.x

208 • Phytotaxa 291 (3) © 2017 Magnolia Press SÁNCHEZ-DEL PINO ET AL.