Hybrids in Crepidiastrum (Asteraceae)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
植物研究雑誌 J. Jpn. Bot. 82: 337–347 (2007) Hybrids in Crepidiastrum (Asteraceae) Hiroyoshi OHASHIa and Kazuaki OHASHIb aBotanical Garden, Tohoku University, Sendai, 980‒0862 JAPAN; E-mail: [email protected] bLaboratory of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Osaka University, Suita, Osaka, 565‒0871 JAPAN (Recieved on June 14, 2007) Crepidiastrixeris has been recognized as an intergeneric hybrid between Crepidias- trum and Ixeris, Paraixeris or Youngia, but the name is illegitimate. Three hybrid species have been recognized under the designation. Two of the three nothospecies are newly in- cluded and named in Crepidiastrum. Crepidiastrum ×nakaii H. Ohashi & K. Ohashi is proposed for a hybrid previously known in hybrid formula Lactuca denticulatoplatyphy- lla Makino or Crepidiastrixeris denticulato-platyphylla (Makino) Kitam. Crepidiastrum ×muratagenii H. Ohashi & K. Ohashi is described based on a hybrid between C. denticulatum (Houtt.) J. H. Pak & Kawano and C. lanceolatum (Houtt.) Nakai instead of a previous designation Crepidiastrixeris denticulato-lanceolata Kitam. Key words: Asteraceae, Crepidiastrixeris, Crepidiastrum, intergeneric hybrid, notho- species. Hybrids between Crepidiastrum and specimens kept at the herbaria of Kyoto Ixeris, Paraixeris or Youngia have been University (KYO), University of Tokyo (TI) treated as members of ×Crepidiastrixeris and Tohoku University (TUS). (Kitamura 1937, Hara 1952, Kitamura 1955, Ohwi and Kitagawa 1992, Koyama 1995). Taxonomic history of the hybrids It was introduced as a representative of The first hybrid known as a member of the intergeneric hybrid (Knobloch 1972). present ×Crepidiastrixeris was found by Hybridity of ×Crepidiastrixeris denticulato- Makino (1917). He described the hybrid platyphylla (Makino) Kitam. (= Lactuca in the genus Lactuca as that between L. ×denticulatoplatyphylla Makino) has been denticulata Maxim. and L. lanceolata confirmed in cytology and genetics (Ono and Makino var. platyphylla Makino and named Satô 1935, Ono 1937, 1938, Saito et al. it L. denticulatoplatyphylla Makino. Makino 2003, 2006). Three hybrid species are (1917) characterized morphology of the hy- recorded in ×Crepidiastrixeris:×C. brid and showed the differences between it denticulato-lanceolata,×C. denticulato- and its supposed parents in habit, stem, platyphylla and ×C. surugensis (Kitamura leaves, heads, and flowers. When Nakai 1955, Koyama 1995). These names were, (1920) established the genera Crepidiastrum however, erroneously proposed in nomencla- Nakai and Paraixeris Nakai, he included ture. This paper intends to clarify their taxo- Lactuca lanceolata and L. lanceolata var. nomic position and nomenclature. This study platyphylla in Crepidiastrum as C. has been made on examination of herbarium lanceolatum (Houtt.) Nakai and C. —337— 338 植物研究雑誌 第82巻第6号平成19年12月 lanceolatum var. latifolium Nakai, respec- lacks a statement of the names of one of the tively, whereas he included L. denticulata parent genera (cf. ICBN H.9.1 in McNeill and L. ×denticulatoplatyphylla in Paraixeris et al. 2006). ×Crepidiastrixeris was treated as P. denticulata (Maxim.) Nakai and P. again by Kitamura (1955) with citation of denticulato-platyphylla (Makino) Nakai, re- parent genera as “Crepidiastrum ×Youngia”, spectively. but it is invalid for the name of nothogenus Following Nakai’s generic concept, between Crepidiastrum and Youngia, be- Kitamura (1937) considered that Lactuca cause ×Crepidiastrixeris does not adopt ×denticulatoplatyphylla Makino is an inter- Youngia as one of the names of parental generic hybrid between Crepidiastrum and genera combining into a single word (cf. Ixeris and named the nothogenus ×Crepi- ICBN H.6.2 in McNeill et al. 2006). diastrixeris Kitam. Later, Kitamura (1955) While the treatment for generic concept by treated ×Crepidiastrixeris as a hybrid be- Pak and Kawano (1992) is acceptable, tween Crepidiastrum and Youngia. Recently, ×Crepidiastrixeris was not treated by them Pak and Kawano (1992) united Paraixeris in Crepidiastrum, perhaps because ×Crepi- with Crepidiastrum and proposed a new diastrixeris is invalid. However, all the par- combination Crepidiastrum denticulatum ents of the species in ×Crepidiastrixeris are (Houtt.) J. H. Pak & Kawano. While the included in Crepidiastrum, hence it is appro- taxonomic position of one parent of ×Crepi- priate to shift the hybrids in ×Crepidiastri- diastrixeris has changed from Lactuca xeris to Crepidiastrum. (Makino 1917) through Paraixeris (Nakai 1920), Ixeris (Kitamura 1937) and Youngia Specific names for the hybrids (Kitamura 1955) to Crepidiastrum (Pak and Lactuca ×denticulatoplatyphylla Makino Kawano 1992), the name ×Crepidiastrixeris was proposed as the name for the hybrid be- has not been changed. tween Lactuca denticulata and L. lanceolata var. platyphylla (Makino 1917). The word Generic name ×Crepidiastrixeris denticulatoplatyphylla is combined with When ×Crepidiastrixeris was proposed, epithets of the parents. Accordingly, denti- Kitamura (1937) adopted Ixeris denticulata culatoplatyphylla is a formula, not a true (Houtt.) Nakai, rather than Paraixeris epithet (ICBN H.10.3 in McNeill et al. denticulata (Houtt.) Nakai, as one of the 2006). The designation Lactuca ×denticula- parents instead of the previous Lactuca toplatyphylla Makino is not to be considered denticulata (Houtt.) Maxim. considered by as the specific name for the hybrid. Nakai Makino (1917). Kitamura (1937) quoted the (1920) treated Makino’s designation as a name in Ixeris as “Ixeris denticulata Nakai name under Paraixeris to be P. denticulato- in Tokyo Bot. Mag. XXXIV (1920) p. 155” platyphylla (Makino) Nakai. Nakai’s desig- (on page 236 in Act. Phytotax. Geob. vol. 6. nation is not also regarded as the specific 1937) as if it was correctly published by name for the hybrid, because it is based on a Nakai (1920), although Nakai (1920) himself formula designating Makino’s hybrid (ICBN clearly adopted Paraixeris denticulata. The 23.6(d) in McNeill et al. 2006). Accordingly, nothogenus was named ×Crepidiastrixeris there is no name for the hybrid founded by that is apparently derived from a combina- Makino (1917). tion of Crepidiastrum and Ixeris, but Kitamura (1937) treated Paraixeris Kitamura did not specify Ixeris as one of surugensis Hisauti as a member of the parents of the nothogenus. The name is, ×Crepidiastrixeris,and made a new combi- therefore, invalid because its publication nation for the species; ×C. surugensis December 2007 Journal of Japanese Botany Vol. 82 No. 6 339 (Hisauti) Kitam. This name is also invalid phylla (Makino) Kitam. in Act. Phytotax. under ×Crepidiastrixeris. Yonekura (2005) Geob. 6: 235 (1937), nom. illeg.; H. Hara, treated this hybrid in Crepidiastrum. Enum Sperm. Jap. 2: 188 (1952); Ohwi, Fl. Kitamura (1942) added a third hybrid Jap.: 1251 (1953); Kitam. in Mem. Coll. to ×Crepidiastrixeris as ×C. denticulato- Sci., Univ. Kyoto, ser. B, 22: 115 (1955); lanceolata Kitam. that was presumed to be a Ohwi, Fl. Jap. ed. rev. 1418 (1965); Ohwi & hybrid between Crepidiastrum lanceolatum Kitag., New Fl. Jap. rev. 1569 (1992); H. and Youngia denticulata. The epithet-like Koyama, Fl. Jap. IIIb:24(1995); Lee, word “denticulato-lanceolata” was com- Lineamenta Fl Korea: 1135 (1996); T. Ohba bined from the epithets of the parents. in Chibaken no shizenshi 4, Chibaken Accordingly, denticulatoplatyphylla should shokubutsushi: 647 (2003)]. be regarded a formula, not a true epithet Crepidiastrum platyphyllum × Paraixeris (ICBN H.10.3 in McNeill et al. 2006). denticulata: Ono & al., Revised Makino’s ×Crepidiastrixeris denticulato-lanceolata New Illustr. Fl. Jap. 826, fig. 3303 (1989). Kitam. is not to be considered the specific Hybrida e Crepidiastro denticulato name for the hybrid. A new name for this (Houtt.) J. H. Pak & Kawano et C. hybrid is, therefore, proposed in this paper. platyphyllo (Franch. & Sav.) Kitam. exorta, inter parentes media praeter magnum semen. Enumeration of the hybrids Differt ab Crepidiastro denticulato caule Crepidiastrum Nakai in Bot. Mag. valido sine stolone, folio leviter crasso, (Tokyo) 34: 147 (1920); Pak & Kawano in capitulo denso, flosculo minori 8–11 (12– Mem. Fac. Sci. Kyoto Univ. ser. Biol. 15:50 15 in C. denticulato); ab C. platyphyllo caule (1992). et ramo gracili, folio minori amplexicauli [×Crepidiastrixeris Kitam. in Act. paucidenticulato, flosculo numerosi (5–6 in Phytotax. Geob. 6: 235 (1937), nom. illeg.; C. platyphyllo). H. Hara, Enum. Sperm. Jap. 188 (1952); Type: Japan. central Honshu. Kanagawa Ohwi, Fl. Jap. 1251 (1953); Kitam. in Mem. Prefecture. Hayama. Nov. 1921. T. Nakai Coll. Sci., Univ. Kyoto, ser. B, 22: 115 (TI–holo, iso). [Figs. 1A, B] (1955); Ohwi, Fl. Jap. ed. rev. 1418 (1965); Distr.: Japan. central Honshu: Chiba, Knobloch in Taxon 21: 100 (1972); Ohwi Tokyo (Is. Miyake), Kanagawa (Miura & Kitag., New Fl. Jap. rev. 1569 (1992); H. Peninsula) and Shizuoka (Izu Peninsula) Koyama in K. Iwatsu. & al., Fl. Jap. IIIb:24 Prefectures; and south Korea. (1995)]. Japanese name: Yakushi-wadan (Makino 1. Crepidiastrum ×nakaii H. Ohashi & 1917). K. Ohashi, hybr. nov. [Figs. 1–2] The epithet is dedicated to Dr. Takenoshin = Crepidiastrum denticulatum (Houtt.) Nakai who created Crepidiastrum and J. H. Pak & Kawano × C. platyphyllum Paraixeris. (Franch. & Sav.) Kitam. ×Crepidiastrixeris denticulato-platyphylla Lactuca ×denticulatoplatyphylla Makino (Makino) Kitam. has been applied as a in J. Jap. Bot. 1:11(1917); F. Maek. & al., scientific name for the hybrid