Next Article in Journal
Microbiological Mechanisms of Collaborative Remediation of Cadmium-Contaminated Soil with Bacillus cereus and Lawn Plants
Previous Article in Journal
Bt-Modified Transgenic Rice May Shift the Composition and Diversity of Rhizosphere Microbiota
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Plants
Volume 13
Issue 10
10.3390/plants13101301
plants-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Taxonomic Circumscription and Nomenclatural History of Pilosella suecica (Asteraceae): A Special Case of Grey Literature in Taxonomic Botany

by
Alexander N. Sennikov
Botanical Museum, Finnish Museum of Natural History, University of Helsinki, 00014 Helsinki, Finland
Plants 2024, 13(10), 1301; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13101301
Submission received: 4 April 2024 / Revised: 2 May 2024 / Accepted: 4 May 2024 / Published: 8 May 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Taxonomy and Nomenclature of Euro + Mediterranean Vascular Plants)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The taxonomic history, nomenclature and application of the oldest species names available for the common hybrids between Pilosella caespitosa and P. lactucella are reviewed. Elias Fries created a nomenclatural and bibliographical collision when he replaced a printed label of his exsiccata Herbarium normale with its second version, distributed at a later date, in which the protologue of Hieracium suecicum had appeared. In this protologue, the new species name was validly published with a mere reference to the original description of H. auricula var. majus, thus being based on the type of the latter. In a later fascicle of the same exsiccata, Fries excluded this synonym and distributed a different morphotype of H. suecicum, which caused taxonomic confusion and re-description of the same taxon under the name H. fennicum. The surviving original material of H. auricula var. majus is rejected, and its neotype is designated, making H. suecicum the correct name for the hybrids strictly intermediate between P. lactucella and P. caespitosa. Such hybrids constitute the most common hybridogenous taxon of Pilosella in Scandinavia, Finland and neighbouring Russia, with many synonyms described from this area and partly typified here. Another hybridogenous taxon of the same origin, more similar to P. lactucella and previously known as P. cochlearis, is correctly named P. stipitiflora comb. nov. The nomenclatural value and bibliographic complexity of exsiccata, a commonly underestimated kind of grey literature in taxonomic botany, are further highlighted.

1. Introduction

Hybridisation is a common phenomenon in vascular plants. It has long been recognised as a fundamental evolutionary process [1,2], and many ancient taxonomic lineages may appear to have a hybrid background [3]. Hybridisation, as a process of reticulate evolution, commonly leads to alloploid speciation, which is often connected with polyploidy [4,5].
In contrast to hybridogenous speciation, which leads to the formation of novel evolutionary lineages, introgression is viewed as limited gene exchange between otherwise established species [6], which does not have an evolutionary effect other than changing fitness to the current and potential distribution environment, thus leading to local success and range expansions [7].
Interspecific hybridisation in Pilosella, disregarding ploidy levels, is extremely common, especially in some territories, and such hybrids are usually fertile [8,9]. The hybrids frequently appear, especially in secondary habitats, and may locally prevail over their parental taxa [9,10,11]. In Pilosella, the hybridisation includes both evolutionary scenarios, i.e., the formation of hybridogenous lineages [9] and introgression via repeated backcrossing [8]. Despite extensive experimental research on hybrid species complexes in Pilosella (e.g., [12,13,14,15]), morphological characters are considered more important than molecular markers in practical identification [16].
Type collections of the oldest species names in Pilosella have only recently been examined (e.g., [17]). In some cases, like P. fallax (Willd.) Arv.-Touv. [18] and P. kalksburgensis (Wiesb.) Soják [19], the earlier use (e.g., [20,21,22,23]) was abandoned because of misapplications. In other cases, like P. acutifolia (Vill.) Arv.-Touv. [24], the species name was transferred from one taxon (P. glacialis × P. hoppeana: [23]) to another (P. brachiata (DC.) F.W.Schultz and Sch.Bip.). Further nomenclatural perturbations of this kind can be expected in Pilosella, whose hybrid diversity in Europe counted the minimum of 122 hybridogenous “collective species”, i.e., hybrids between two or more (up to four) taxa that are considered non-hybridogenous [23]. So far, only a few of these taxa have been nomenclaturally evaluated.
Our study of the original collection of P. floribunda (Wimm. and Grab.) Fr. [25], which was recovered at the Komarov Botanical Institute, confirmed the historically predominant application of this species name to a triple hybrid between P. caespitosa (Dumort.) P.D.Sell and C.West s.l. (syn. Hieracium pratense Tausch), P. lactucella (Wallr.) P.D.Sell and C.West and P. praealta (Vill. ex Gochn.) F.Schultz and Sch.Bip. This lectotype agreed with the current use of the species name in Northern and Eastern Europe [22,26,27] and narrowed the broader taxonomic concept used in Central Europe [28].
The name P. suecica was incorrectly synonymised with the broadly defined P. floribunda on the belief that the latter is applicable to the binary hybrids between P. caespitosa and P. lactucella [28,29]. Another lumping concept, even more inclusive, subordinated P. suecica and P. floribunda to P. caespitosa on the assumption of their common hybrid origin [30]. With the lectotypification of P. floribunda [25], P. suecica became the correct name for the binary hybrid, and its lectotypification and synonymy are, therefore, of primary nomenclatural interest. This research is the main subject of the present contribution.
Similar taxa of the same hybrid origin, P. fennica and P. cochlearis, were recently accepted in some major taxonomic works and compilations [22,28]. Their identities and relationships with P. suecica are also clarified here.
Our previous work [31] has demonstrated that published exsiccata, a special kind of botanical publication and dissemination of information on plant diversity [32], have the utmost importance for the Hieracium nomenclature. The present contribution uncovers further aspects and complexities of this type of grey literature, which is still much under-explored and under-evaluated in plant taxonomy.

2. Results

2.1. Taxonomic Backbone

To characterise the non-hybridogenous species (Pilosella caespitosa, P. lactucella) and identify their hybrid parentage using morphology, the following diagnostic characters were used (Table 1), summarised from main published sources [22,29,33].
Diagnostic characters of the parental species were used for the inference of the hybrid origin already by Nägeli and Peter [34], and this approach is still considered useful in the diagnostic of Pilosella (cf. [25]). The most important diagnostic characters of P. caespitosa are a violet colouration of the stem base with abundant red-based hairs, dark green leaves with simple hairs on both surfaces and stellate pubescence on the lower side, and dark styles. The hybridisation with P. lactucella is recognisable through the yellowish-glaucous colour of leaves, which tend to be spathulate, undulate, glabrescent, with shorter and broader petioles, by low and slender stems, and by numerous slender glandular hairs in the synflorescence and along the stem; a prominent feature of this species is the sulphureous tint of its flowers, which is often recognisable in hybrids.
These characters are variously expressed in hybrids, with the dominance of diagnostic features of either of the parental species. Taking this dominance into account, three main variants can be distinguished among the hybrids between P. caespitosa and P. lactucella, which can be designated using hybrid formulas and binary names according to the standard adopted after Zahn’s monograph [20]: P. caespitosa < P. lactucella: P. stipitiflora (Nägeli and Peter) Sennikov; P. caespitosa × P. lactucella: P. suecica; P. caespitosa > P. lactucella: P. colliniformis (Nägeli and Peter) Dostál (Table 2).
In short, P. colliniformis is very similar to P. caespitosa but differs from the latter in the involucres with broad pale margins and in the leaves with a glaucous tint [33], which are partly subglabrous above. This morphotype is a hybrid with P. lactucella, which is most similar to P. caespitosa [34]. Pilosella stipitiflora closely resembles its other parent, P. lactucella, but differs in the greenish (vs. yellowish-glaucous) leaves and dark or black (vs. purely yellow) styles. It also differs from P. suecica, the intermediate variant, in its subglabrous (vs. ciliate along margins) leaves with the yellowish-glaucous (vs. greenish to green) colour, synflorescence branches with very few (if any) simple hairs and sulphureous (vs. yellow) flower colour.
The hybrids between P. caespitosa and P. lactucella are polymorphic, and there is no feasible limit between the members of this complex, neither in morphology nor in crossing barriers. However, their distinction stands for nearly 150 years, and its practical utility is therefore proven by time. The need for this taxonomic distinction is based not only on the contrasting morphology of the hybrids (some of them are hardly distinguishable from the parents by non-experts) but also on their different ecological preferences, usually coinciding with those of the parental species.
The correspondence between the historical applications of these hybrid names is given in Table 3. A broad variety of names used for these hybrids, also in various senses, indicate that the historical taxonomic circumscriptions in Pilosella were quite vague, and many (if not most) species names were variously misapplied and misinterpreted during their history. The nomenclature of Pilosella has been highly unstable, and no really established usage can be claimed in Europe.

2.2. Taxonomy and Nomenclature

2.2.1. Pilosella suecica (Fr.) F.Schultz and Sch.Bip.

Pilosella suecica (Fr.) F.Schultz and Sch.Bip. in Flora 45(27): 425 (1862). —Hieracium auricula var. majus Wahlenb., Fl. Upsal.: 261 (1820). —Hieracium suecicum Fr., Herb. Normale 9: No. 7, second version (1843–1845); Symb. Hist. Hierac.: 16 (1848). —Hieracium auricula var. suecicum (Fr.) Russow in Arch. Naturk. Liv-, Ehst- Kurlands, Ser. 2, Biol. Naturk. 3: 31 (1862). —Hieracium floribundum subsp. suecicum (Fr.) Nägeli and Peter, Hier. Mitt.-Eur. 1: 695 (1885). —Pilosella floribunda subsp. suecica (Fr.) Soják in Čas. Nár. Mus., Odd. Přír. 141(1–2): 45 (1972). —Pilosella caespitosa var. suecica (Fr.) T.Kukk in Kuusk et al., Fl. Baltic Countries 3: 97 (2003).
Type (Figure 1a,c): Sweden. “Gestricia [Gästrikland], Oslättfors,” 07.1842, P. Strömbäck [E. Fries, Herbarium Normale 9: 7] (UPS V-924935, neotype designated here; isoneotypes H, LE, S, UPS V-104897 and V-107761 etc.).
=Hieracium suecicum subsp. fennicum Norrl. in Not. Sällsk. Fauna Fl. Fenn. Förh. 13: 426 (1874). —Hieracium fennicum (Norrl.) Mela, Lyhyk. Kasvioppi Kasvio: 74 (1877). —Pilosella fennica (Norrl.) Norrl. in Acta Soc. Fauna Fl. Fenn. 2(4): 107 (1884). —Hieracium spathophyllum subsp. fennicum (Norrl.) Nägeli and Peter, Hier. Mitt.-Eur. 1: 390 (1885). —Hieracium longiscapum subsp. fennicum (Norrl.) Zahn in Engler, Pflanzenr. 82: 1293 (1923).
Type (Figure 1b,d): Finland. Tavastia australis, “Padasjoki, frisk äng”, 12.07.1873, J.P. Norrlin (H, lectotype designated here).
=Pilosella suecica subsp. cochlearis Norrl. in Acta Soc. Fauna Fl. Fenn. 2(4): 173 (1884). —Hieracium cochleare (Norrl.) Norrl. in Mela, Lyhyk. Kasvioppi Kasvio, ed. 2, 2: 210 (1884), nom. illeg., non Huter (1874). —Hieracium suecicum subsp. cochleare (Norrl.) Hjelt, Fört. Finl. Fröv. Ormb.: 13 (1884). —Pilosella cochlearis (Norrl.) Soják in Preslia 43(2): 184 (1971).
Type (Figure 2a,c): Finland. “Ad Tikkalanniemi Ostrobotniae Kajanensis, locis (plurib.) humidiusculis sec. marginem viae publicae”, 04.07.1883, H. Norrlin and J.P. Norrlin [J.P. Norrlin, Herbarium Pilosellarum Fenniae 1: 32] (H, lectotype designated here; isolectotypes H, LE, O, S).
=Hieracium floribundum subsp. cochleatum Naeg. and Peter, Hier. Mitt.-Eur. 1: 700 (1885). —Hieracium suecicum subsp. cochleatum (Naeg. and Peter) Norrl. in Acta Soc. Fauna Fl. Fenn. 3(4): 34 (1888). —Hieracium cochleatum (Naeg. and Peter) Norrl., Hier. Exs. 1: ind. (1888).
Type (Figure 2b,d): Finland. “In colliculo humili graminoso ad Korpilahti Tavastiae mediae”, 13.07.1875, J.P. Norrlin [J.P. Norrlin, Herbarium Pilosellarum Fenniae 1: 34] (H, lectotype designated here; isolectotypes H, LE, O, S).
=Hieracium floribundum subsp. ciliatifolium Nägeli and Peter, Hier. Mitt.-Eur. 1: 699 (1885). —Hieracium cochleatum subsp. ciliatifolium (Nägeli and Peter) Zahn in Engler, Pflanzenr. 82: 1298 (1923).
Type (Figure 3a,c): Sweden. “Gestricia [Gästrikland], Oslättfors”, 07.1842, P. Strömbäck [E. Fries, Herbarium Normale 9: 7] (H, lectotype designated here; isolectotypes LE, S, UPS, etc.).
=Hieracium floribundum subsp. scissum Nägeli and Peter, Hier. Mitt.-Eur. 1: 698 (1885). —Hieracium scissum (Nägeli and Peter) Brenner in Acta Soc. Fauna Fl. Fenn. 12(1): 30 (1894). —Hieracium cochleatum subsp. scissum (Nägeli and Peter) Zahn in Engler, Pflanzenr. 82: 1296 (1923).
Type (Figure 3b,d): Norway. “Torpen”, 07.1847, A. Blytt [E. Fries, Herbarium Normale 13: 8] (H, lectotype designated here; isolectotypes LE, S, UPS, etc.).
Stems: 30–60 cm tall, erect, firm; lowermost internode short, pale to deep violet; with numerous simple hairs up to 3.5 mm long and with little or without stellate pubescence below, with scattered glandular hairs 0.2–0.4 mm, rare simple hairs and very lax stellate pubescence under the inflorescence. Creeping stolons: short or rather long, with spathulate leaves almost lacking stellate pubescence on the lower surface. Leaves: pale to intensely green, basal in a rosette; rosulate 5–13 × 0.9–1.2 cm, spathulate to oblong, shortly acute, shortly narrowed towards the base, with spiculiform teeth; cauline 1–2 (mostly in the basal part of the stem), like the basal but smaller and less narrowed to the base; all glabrous above, with some rigid, violet-based simple hairs along the middle nerve and the margin and solitary to rare stellate hairs along the middle nerve beneath, uppermost subglabrous. Inflorescence: corymbiform, usually compact, with 7–10 capitula; branches: rather firm, with abundant blackish glandular hairs 0.3–0.5 mm long, solitary simple hairs 2–2.5 mm long and dense stellate indumentum. Involucral bracts: inner 7–8.5 × 0.9–1.1 mm, olive or blackish-green with dark margins, broadly acute at the apex, with rare thin dark simple hairs ca. 2 mm long, rather dense thin black glandular hairs 0.5–0.6 mm long and scarce stellate pubescence throughout. Flowers: 12–13 mm long; ligules yellow. Styles: dark or pale dark. Achenes: ca. 2 mm long.
Ecology: Natural and disturbed meadows and grasslands in secondary habitats (roadsides, yards, and pastures).
Distribution: Native in Central and Northern Europe [28]; in Finland northwards up to Ostrobottnia ultima and Regio kuusamoensis, abundant [29]; in Eastern Europe northwards up to Russian Karelia [22,37]. Alien outside Europe: in Russian Siberia [38] and North America [39].

2.2.2. Pilosella stipitiflora (Nägeli and Peter) Sennikov

Pilosella stipitiflora (Nägeli and Peter) Sennikov, comb. nov. —Hieracium floribundum subsp. stipitiflorum Nägeli and Peter, Hier. Mitt.-Eur. 1: 699 (1885). —Hieracium suecicum var. stipitiflorum (Nägeli and Peter) Brenner in Acta Soc. Fauna Fl. Fenn. 9 (5): 39 (1893). —Hieracium stipitiflorum (Nägeli and Peter) Brenner in Acta Soc. Fauna Fl. Fenn. 12 (1): 30 (1894). —Hieracium cochleatum subsp. stipitiflorum (Nägeli and Peter) Zahn in Engler, Pflanzenr. 82: 1296 (1923).
Type (Figure 4): Finland. “In clivulo macro ad Nygård Tavastiae meridionalis”, 03.07.1882, J.P. Norrlin [J.P.Norrlin, Herbarium Pilosellarum Fenniae 1: 25] (H, lectotype designated here; isolectotypes H, LE, O, S).
Stems: 15–25 cm tall, erect, slender, pale green; with few to scattered simple hairs (dark-based in the lower part) and very sparse stellate pubescence, with numerous glandular hairs 0.2–0.4 mm. Creeping stolons: short or rather long, with narrowly spathulate leaves lacking stellate pubescence on the lower surface. Leaves: yellowish-green or pale green, basal in a rosette; rosulate 3–10 × 0.5–1 cm, narrowly spathulate or oblanceolate, obtuse, gradually narrowed to a broad or narrow petiole, with spiculiform teeth; cauline 1–2 (mostly in the basal part of the stem), like the basal but smaller and less narrowed to the base; all glabrous except for the basal part, with some rigid simple hairs along the middle nerve and the margin. Inflorescence: loosely corymbiform or irregularly branched, with 3–7 capitula; branches: slender, with abundant blackish glandular hairs 0.2–0.4 mm long and with or without solitary simple hairs and thin stellate indumentum. Involucral bracts: inner 6–7 × 0.8–1 mm, olive-green with pale margins, broadly acute at the apex, with few to sparse thin dark simple hairs 1–2 mm long, rather dense thin black glandular hairs 0.4–0.5 mm long and scarce stellate pubescence throughout. Flowers 10–11 mm long; ligules sulphureous. Styles pale dark or dark. Achenes: ca. 2 mm long.
Ecology: Natural and disturbed meadows and grasslands in secondary habitats (roadsides, yards and pastures).
Distribution: As for Pilosella suecica. This hybrid often occurs in the presence of P. lactucella.

3. Discussion

3.1. Confusing History of Hieracium suecicum

Fries [35] separated Hieracium suecicum Fr. and placed it between Hieracium auricula L. (now Pilosella lactucella) and Hieracium floribundum (Pilosella floribunda). According to our comparisons of his diagnostic characters (Table 4), Fries differentiated this new species from P. lactucella using flat, broader, obovate leaves (vs. undulate, narrower, ligulate), larger corymbose inflorescence and prominently dark styles. Pilosella floribunda was said to differ from the new species by narrower (lanceolate or spathulate) leaves and yellowish styles; this description was based on the plants belonging to P. floribunda in the sense of its lectotype, i.e., hybrids with P. praealta [25].
In 1843, Fries [40] distributed a specimen from eastern Sweden under the name “Hieracium dubium L.”, which appeared on its printed label (Figure 5a) and in the index to the exsiccata set. This set was distributed to main herbarium institutions in the first turn, e.g., to Helsinki (pers. obs.) and Berlin [34]. Afterwards, Fries found this species name inappropriate because of its ambiguous application. He decided that this taxon should be recognised as a new species, which he named H. suecicum. To reflect this name change, between 1843 and 1845, Fries [41] printed and distributed a new version of the same label (Figure 5b), in which the new species name appeared and was accompanied by a synonym, “H. Auricula β. majus. Wahlenb. Suec. et Ups.” This reference to the previously published descriptions of H. auricula var. majus Wahlenb., including its protologue [42,43,44], makes the new species name validly published as a replacement name for this variety (Art. 6.12 [45]), thus based on the nomenclatural type of the latter (Art. 7.4 [45]). As the protologue of H. suecicum was published in the most unusual and obscure place (a replacement label for the exsiccata, which was present only in the sets distributed after the name change, in a limited number of copies available in herbarium collections rather than libraries), it attracted very scarce attention from taxonomic researchers (e.g., [46]), most of whom are still used to give credit for the valid publication of this species name to the later monograph [35]. The exact publication time of this label is uncertain: it postdates the original distribution of the exsiccata set [40], in which the old name appeared, but predates a checklist of Scandinavian plants by Fries [47], in which this label was cited under the changed name.
In the protologue of H. suecicum, Fries [41] also referred to “H. dubium L. meo sensu, sed nomen ambiguum mittendum”. This text is not a nomenclatural reference (because Fries abandoned H. dubium as an ambiguous and therefore unusable name and did not include it as a nomenclatural synonym) but a reference to his earlier [40] misapplication for the same plant. Similarly, this synonym was cited pro parte (regarding Swedish plants only, i.e., excluding foreign synonyms, one of which subsequently provided a lectotype of this species name [17]) in the first Hieracium monograph [35]. For this reason, H. suecicum is not a superfluous and illegitimate name as erroneously believed by Bräutigam and Greuter [28].
Fries incorporated the new taxonomy into his checklist of Scandinavian vascular plants and cryptogams [47] and his first monograph on the taxonomy of Hieracium worldwide [35]. Other researchers (e.g., [48]) adopted the change, using the specimen in the exsiccata as a taxonomic reference. But, after a few years, Fries changed his mind and noted that the plants of “H. dubium” in his earlier opinion [40] may be identical to H. auricula var. majus, which is not a synonym of H. suecicum that differs from the aforementioned variety in its yellow flowers with red stripes beneath (vs. sulphureous flowers in H. auricula = P. lactucella). Fries published the new circumscription of H. suecicum on herbarium labels in another issue of his exsiccata [49], adding a diagnosis of the flower colour. The plants that he distributed as the new “type” of H. suecicum were similar to the previous variant but demonstrated much greater morphological proximity to P. lactucella (stems slender, less hairy, leaves smaller, less greenish-coloured and much less hairy, flowering heads smaller).
Indeed, in his second monograph of Hieracium, Fries [36] confirmed the placement of the former H. dubium among the synonyms of H. auricula = P. lactucella and restored the variety H. auricula var. majus, but this variety was accepted in his own circumscription [50] for a vigorous variant of the species. The variety started its history from his earlier publication [51] rather than the actual protologue [42], but the varietal name was not validly published in that place because of the lack of a separate description.
In 1862, Fries [36] maintained H. auricula var. majus of Wahlenberg [42] as a partial synonym of H. suecicum, and interpreted it on the basis of its locality, Wahlenberg’s personal communication and herbarium collections. He did not refer to the suitability of the descriptions of the taxon in Wahlenberg’s works, probably because of their apparent mismatch: Wahlenberg [42,43,44] described plants with regularly hairy leaves, whereas Fries [35,36] stated that his H. suecicum has subglabrous leaves that are hairy only along the basal part of their margin. Fries’ description did not match the plants distributed in the first time [40], but perfectly agreed with the plants of the second distribution [49], which he considered typical of the species.
As the varietal name H. auricula var. majus Wahlenb. provides the type of H. suecicum Fr., its typification is required to establish the nomenclatural application of the latter name. Almquist [52] examined the original material of Wahlenberg in the herbarium collections at Uppsala and reported that it contains three plants on a single herbarium sheet (Figure 6), two being complete and identifiable and the third one currently lacking flowers and therefore dismissed from consideration. The specimen (probably plant 2 in particular) was identified as H. floribundum subsp. suecicum (Fr.) Nägeli and Peter by H. Dahlstedt, the most renowned Swedish expert on Hieracium s.l. Almquist disagreed on this identity and assigned the first plant (with stems and leaves abundantly covered by long simple hairs) to H. pratense subsp. colliniforme (Peter) Zahn and the second plant (with stems and leaves subglabrous) to H. auricula = P. lactucella s.str. I partly agree with both interpretations in a way that the plants are referable to a hybrid complex between P. lactucella and P. caespitosa s.l., to which the name P. suecica belongs; the first plant represents a morphotype most resembling P. caespitosa (=H. collinum subsp. colliniforme Peter [34]), and the second plant is a variant more closely approaching P. lactucella (=H. suecicum or H. floribundum subsp. suecicum [34,36,49,53]).
A comparison of diagnostic characters stated in the protologue of H. auricula var. majus [42] with the same characters of preserved specimens in Herbarium Wahlenberg at UPS and the exsiccata distributed by Fries [40,49] (Table 5) unambiguously shows that Wahlenberg described the hybrids between P. lactucella and P. caespitosa, and the first interpretation by Fries [40] is matching the protologue. However, the second interpretation by Fries [49] is fully congruent with the second specimen in the original collection of Wahlenberg, which was indirectly referred to by Fries in 1862 [36]. Neither of the original specimens in Herbarium Wahlenberg agrees with the protologue, being in serious conflict with some major diagnostic characters used by Wahlenberg [42]: plant height (first specimen) or pubescence (second specimen). Specimens that are part of the original material but in conflict with the protologue cannot be used for lectotype designation because this type of choice can be superseded under Art. 9.19 [45]. Almquist [52] alluded that the first (hairy) specimen of the original material is an alien plant; it has, therefore, been collected by chance because of its unusual appearance. Similarly, the second (subglabrous) specimen may have been another chance collection that is linked with the protologue [45] but does not necessarily belong to the intended taxonomic circumscription. As no part of the available original material of H. auricula var. majus is suitable for lectotypification, a neotype may be designated under Art. 9.13 [45].
For the neotype designation, I propose a specimen distributed in the exsiccata [40] that was the first and most appropriate interpretation of the protologue. The neotype specimen (Figure 1a,c) has the most vigorous plants of the collection, with well-developed inflorescences and partly branched stems. Their leaves are ciliate along the margins and sparsely hairy on surfaces, in agreement with the original description of H. auricula var. majus in the protologue [42].

3.2. Early Synonyms of Hieracium suecicum

Norrlin [54] accepted the name Hieracium suecicum according to its reinterpretation [36,49], as a hybrid with the prominently dominating characters of P. lactucella. Ahead of the other Scandinavian authors, he held a narrow taxonomic concept and distinguished closely related and morphologically similar morphotypes of different hybrid origins. Since Fries shifted the circumscription of his H. suecicum, the hybrid between P. caespitosa and P. lactucella with intermediate morphology required a new name.
This hybrid was described as H. suecicum subsp. fennicum Norrl. [54] based on several specimens collected in three Finnish historical provinces: Tavastland (Häme), Savolaks (Savo) and Norra Karelen (Pohjois-Karjala), i.e., the central part of southern Finland. This name was quickly elevated to the species rank under Hieracium and Pilosella [53,55] and subsequently accepted in major taxonomic treatments [22,56]. A good specimen collected by Norrlin from Häme, his home province and main area of botanical research at that time, is designated here as lectotype (Figure 1b,d).
In his first detailed treatment of the Scandinavian Pilosella, Norrlin [53] provided a more detailed classification, in which he separated further subspecies and varieties from P. suecica and P. fennica. One of the new segregates, P. suecica subsp. cochlearis Norrl., was characterised by essentially the same characters as P. fennica in the previous works but deviated from the latter in smaller flowering heads. This segregate was accepted for the hybrid with the dominating characters of P. lactucella by some later authors (e.g., [23]), although its original specimens have the intermediate characters of their inflorescences and leaves. A specimen with larger plants distributed by Norrlin in his exsiccata [57] is designated here as lectotype (Figure 2a,c) to confirm this taxonomy. The specimens distributed by Norrlin in the later exsiccata [58] belong to the hybrid with the dominating characters of P. lactucella and may have had an influence on the subsequent acceptance of the species name in that sense.
Nägeli and Peter [34] published the most elaborated treatment of Pilosella in “Central Europe”, which, despite its restrictive title, included taxa from Scandinavia and Finland. They made extensive use of Norrlin’s exsiccata and accepted most of his taxa, albeit not necessarily in the same circumscription. They renamed Norrlin’s P. suecica subsp. cochlearis but distributed its syntypes between two subspecies, H. floribundum subsp. suecicum (Fr.) Nägeli and Peter and H. floribundum subsp. cochleatum Naeg. and Peter. The latter is not a nomenclatural replacement for P. suecica subsp. cochlearis because it included a reference to a single (and untypical) syntype of Norrlin’s subspecies name rather than to its protologue. For this reason, the subspecies name, corrected by Nägeli and Peter [34] to avoid later homonymy at the species rank, is the name of a new taxon with its own type material [31]; it is not a superfluous and, therefore, illegitimate replacement as incorrectly interpreted by Bräutigam & Greuter [28]. In agreement with this interpretation, its lectotype (Figure 2b,d) is designated from the exsiccata [57] cited in its protologue. This specimen also belongs to the hybrid with the intermediate morphology but is represented by small plants with depauperate inflorescences.
Contrary to the treatment of Bräutigam and Greuter [28], the combination P. cochlearis was not validly published by Norrlin, although it appeared in print in his taxonomic treatment [53] and on a single label in his exsiccata [57]. The definitive classification in these works was provided by Norrlin in the list of accepted taxa in the taxonomic treatment [53] (pp. 173–174) and in the index to the exsiccata [57], whereas the names appearing in the other parts of the text and on the label were provisional [31]. Pilosella cochlearis remained validly unpublished until its acceptance by Soják [59], who provided conditions for its valid publication and correctly noted that Norrlin did not accept the species.
Nägeli and Peter [34] included a set of Elias Fries’ Herbarium normale in their work. They used many specimens from these exsiccata to establish further new taxa. The specimens distributed as H. dubium [40] were named H. floribundum subsp. ciliatifolium Nägeli and Peter (Figure 3a,c), which is, therefore, a nomenclatural synonym of H. suecicum by our typification of the latter. The specimens distributed as H. floribundum [60] were described as H. floribundum subsp. scissum Nägeli and Peter (Figure 3b,d). These specimens do not belong to H. floribundum according to its common historical interpretation and our lectotype [25] but are referable to the hybrid with the intermediate morphology, which is named H. suecicum here, only slightly deviating towards P. lactucella by the shape of leaves. As the personal collection of Peter no longer exists [61], we designate lectotypes of both names from the exsiccata set at the University of Helsinki.
These lectotypifications provide the earliest synonyms of P. suecica. Further synonyms are expected from the Finnish Hieracium works [31] and elsewhere, but this synonymy requires a thorough inventory of the original material, which is still pending.

3.3. Pilosella stipitiflora Is the Correct Name for “P. cochlearis”

The hybrid between P. caespitosa and P. lactucella, which strongly resembles the latter parent, is morphologically distinct, and its recognition is, therefore, practical (cf. [22,23]. As the previously accepted names, i.e., P. suecica [22,34,53] or P. cochlearis [23], represent the morphologically intermediate hybrid, they are not suitable, and another name should be applied.
In the concept of Norrlin [53], P. suecica was accurately circumscribed to include plants resembling P. lactucella. Nägeli and Peter [34] separated a specimen distributed by Norrlin under the name P. suecica into a new subspecies, H. floribundum subsp. stipitiflorum Nägeli and Peter, which represented a minor deviation towards P. caespitosa. This taxon has been elevated to the species rank by Brenner [62] and currently provides the earliest legitimate name for this hybrid taxon. It is lectotypified here with a specimen from Norrlin’s exsiccata, and a new combination in Pilosella is effected to conform to the current taxonomy.

4. Materials and Methods

Historical herbarium collections are examined de visu at the University of Helsinki (H) and as digital images at the University of Uppsala (UPS). As the main Hieracium collections of Albert Peter have been destroyed [61], lectotypes of plant names established by this author are selected from the exsiccata cited in the protologues (sets kept at H). Lectotypes of plant names established by J.P. Norrlin are designated from his personal collection. Plant morphology, variability and distributions are evaluated on the basis of the herbarium collections at H and personal field observations.
The taxonomy of hybrid species of Pilosella follows the long-established tradition [19,20,22,23,34] in the acceptance of more than one species-level hybridogenous taxon between two parental species.
The nomenclature of the Finnish taxa is based on my previous inventory [31] with minor updates. Nomenclatural evaluations and decisions are based on the current International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi and plants [45]. Plant names are applied according to their nomenclatural types, except for Pilosella caespitosa (Dumort.) P.D.Sell and C.West, P. colliniformis (Nägeli and Peter) Dostál and P. praealta (Vill. ex Gochn.) F.Schultz and Sch.Bip., whose types are currently lacking, which are used in agreement with the main recent treatments [22,23,33].

5. Conclusions

The newly discovered protologue of Hieracium suecicum is based on H. auricula var. majus, whose original material is variable and not matching the protologue, but the designated neotype agrees with the original understanding and the current use of this species name in Northern and Eastern Europe. Pilosella suecica is the earliest correct name for all hybrids between P. caespitosa and P. lactucella, to which the name P. floribunda has been misapplied.
Numerous species names have been applied to various morphotypes resulting from the crosses between P. lactucella and P. caespitosa s.l., which demonstrate more or less intermediate morphology but may approach either of the parental species in their diagnostic characters. A few of such species names (P. cochlearis, P. fennica, P. suecica) have been recently in use by some authors [22,23]. I advise against the taxonomic recognition of such morphotypes because of their recurrent polytopic origin and the lack of morphological, ecological and biological delimitation.
A hybrid variant of P. lactucella with the introgression from P. caespitosa is morphologically close to P. lactucella but clearly differs from the latter in its spathulate and greenish-glaucous (vs. lingulate and yellowish-glaucous) leaves, more robust stems with scattered dark simple hairs (vs. very slender stems with few pale simple hairs), inflorescences corymbose (vs. loosely branched), involucres dark (vs. pale) and styles dark or black (vs. yellow). The taxonomic recognition of such plants is justified by their close morphological and ecological proximity to their parent (P. lactucella), which makes them dissimilar to the morphologically intermediate hybrids; yet they cannot be taxonomically treated as part of the species because of their interspecific hybrid origin. The correct name for these hybrids is P. stipitiflora. Such plants can be further placed in the P. suecica aggr. in the current classification of Pilosella [28].
The exsiccata published by Elias Fries, Herbarium normale plantarum rariorum et criticarum Sueciae, were standard reference for understanding taxonomic concepts in vascular plants of Scandinavia (with the neighbouring territories of Finland and Russia) in the 19th century. However, due to their old age and obscure bibliographic information, this exsiccata, as a nomenclatural reference, clearly belong to the corpus of grey literature, whose relevant inaccessibility and complexity may significantly hinder research in plant nomenclature [63]. Irregularities in their publication process have been already noted with the discovery of casual supplements [64]; the present contribution brings to light the very unusual practice of later re-issuing of the printed matter for individual numbers in this exsiccata, which may, as in the case of Hieracium suecicum, contain important nomenclatural novelties. Such a practice, if not properly explained and bibliographically deciphered, may mislead taxonomists and recorders to incorrect nomenclatural interpretations.

Funding

This research received no external funding. The APC was funded by the University of Helsinki.

Data Availability Statement

No new datasets were generated during this study. The herbarium specimens used in this work are publicly available at the Universities of Helsinki and Uppsala.

Acknowledgments

Mats Hjertson (Uppsala) kindly provided images of historical collections from UPS. Open access funding provided by University of Helsinki.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Stebbins, G.L. The role of hybridization in evolution. Proc. Am. Philos. Soc. 1959, 103, 231–251. [Google Scholar]
  2. Wissemann, V. Plant evolution by means of hybridization. Syst. Biodivers. 2007, 5, 243–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Stull, G.W.; Pham, K.K.; Soltis, P.S.; Soltis, D.E. Deep reticulation: The long legacy of hybridization in vascular plant evolution. Plant J. 2023, 114, 743–766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Alix, K.; Gérard, P.R.; Schwarzacher, T.; Heslop-Harrison, J.S. Polyploidy and interspecific hybridization: Partners for adaptation, speciation and evolution in plants. Ann. Bot. 2017, 120, 183–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Qiu, T.; Liu, Z.; Liu, B. The effects of hybridization and genome doubling in plant evolution via allopolyploidy. Mol. Biol. Rep. 2020, 47, 5549–5558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Rieseberg, L.H.; Wendel, J.F. Introgression and its consequences in plants. In Hybrid Zones and the Evolutionary Process; Harrison, R.G., Ed.; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1993; pp. 70–109. [Google Scholar]
  7. Suarez-Gonzalez, A.; Lexer, C.; Cronk, Q.C.B. Adaptive introgression: A plant perspective. Biol. Lett. 2018, 14, e20170688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Krahulcová, A.; Krahulec, F.; Chapman, H.M. Variation in Hieracium subgen. Pilosella (Asteraceae): What do we know about its sources? Folia Geobot. 2000, 35, 319–338. [Google Scholar]
  9. Fehrer, J.; Krahulcová, A.; Krahulec, F.; Chrtek, J.; Rosenbaumová, R.; Bräutigam, S. Evolutionary aspects in Hieracium subgenus Pilosella. In Apomixis: Evolution, Mechanisms and Perspectives; Hörandl, E., Grossniklaus, U., van Dijk, P., Sharbel, T., Eds.; Koeltz Scientific Books: Königstein, Germany, 2007; pp. 359–390. [Google Scholar]
  10. Urfus, T.; Krahulec, F.; Krahulcová, A. Hybridization within a Pilosella population: A morphometric analysis. Folia Geobot. 2014, 49, 223–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Krahulcová, A.; Krahulec, F.; Vladimirov, V. Impact of interspecific hybridization within a polyploid agamic complex of Pilosella (Asteraceae, Cichorieae) in Bulgaria compared with Central Europe. Willdenowia 2018, 48, 345–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Krahulec, F.; Krahulcová, A.; Fehrer, J.; Bräutigam, S.; Schuhwerk, F. The structure of the agamic complex of Hieracium subgen. Pilosella in the Šumava Mts and its comparison with other regions in Central Europe. Preslia 2008, 80, 1–26. [Google Scholar]
  13. Krahulec, F.; Krahulcová, A.; Rosenbaumová, R.; Plačková, I. Production of polyhaploids by facultatively apomictic Pilosella can result in formation of new genotypes via genome doubling. Preslia 2011, 83, 471–490. [Google Scholar]
  14. Krahulec, F.; Krahulcová, A.; Urfus, T.; Doležal, J. Populations of Pilosella species in ruderal habitats in the city of Prague: Consequences of the spread of P. aurantiaca and P. rothiana. Preslia 2020, 92, 167–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Doležal, J.; Krahulcová, A.; Urfus, T.; Krahulec, F. Residual sexuality of the apomict Pilosella rubra under natural conditions in the Krkonoše Mts. Preslia 2020, 92, 403–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Moffat, C.E.; Ensing, D.J.; de Clerck-Floate, R.A.; Pither, J. Morphology delimits more species than molecular genetic clusters of invasive Pilosella. Am. J. Bot. 2015, 102, 1145–1159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Ferrer-Gallego, P.P. Typification of fourteen Linnaean names in the genus Hieracium (Compositae). Taxon 2021, 70, 880–896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Gottschlich, G. Hieracium fallax—Verabschiedung eines vertrauten Namens. Kochia 2013, 7, 25–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Gottschlich, G. Synopse der für Deutschland nachgewiesenen Arten und Unterarten der Gattung Hieracium s.l. (Hieracium s.str. und Pilosella), aufgeschlüsselt nach Vorkommen in den einzelnen Bundesländern. Forum Geobot. 2020, 9, 1–59. [Google Scholar]
  20. Zahn, K.H. Compositae–Hieracium. Sect. Pilosellina–Praealtina. In Das Pflanzenreich; Engler, A., Ed.; W. Engelmann: Leipzig, Germany, 1923; Volume 82, pp. 1147–1705. [Google Scholar]
  21. Üksip, A. Hieracium L. In Flora of the USSR; Schischkin, B.K., Bobrov, E.G., Eds.; Academy of Sciences of the USSR: Moscow, Russia; Leningrad, Russia, 1960; Volume 30, pp. 1–732. [Google Scholar]
  22. Schljakov, R.N. Pilosella Hill. In Flora of the European Part of the USSR; Tzvelev, N.N., Ed.; Science Publishers: Leningrad, Russia, 1989; Volume 8, pp. 300–379. [Google Scholar]
  23. Bräutigam, S.; Greuter, W. A new treatment of Pilosella for the Euro-Mediterranean flora [Notulae ad floram euro-mediterraneam pertinentes 24]. Willdenowia 2007, 37, 123–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Gottschlich, G. Pilosella sphaerocephala (Rchb.) F. W. Schultz & Sch. Bip. [Med-Checklist Notulae, 29]. Willdenowia 2010, 40, 195. [Google Scholar]
  25. Sennikov, A.N. The taxonomic history of Pilosella floribunda (Asteraceae), a common hybridogenous aggregate of Central, Northern and Eastern Europe. Nord. J. Bot. 2024. submitted. [Google Scholar]
  26. Sennikov, A.N. Hieracium L., Pilosella Hill. In The Identification Manual of Vascular Plants of the Tambov Region; Sukhorukov, A.N., Ed.; Grif and Co: Tula, Russia, 2010; pp. 298–305. [Google Scholar]
  27. Tyler, T. Nyheter bland svenska stångfibblor. Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 2017, 111, 312–330. [Google Scholar]
  28. Bräutigam, S.; Greuter, W.  Pilosella. In Compositae. Euro+Med Plantbase—The Information Resource for Euro-Mediterranean Plant Diversity, 2007–2009; Greuter, W., von Raab-Straube, E., Eds.; Freie Universität Berlin: Berlin, Germany; Available online: http://ww2.bgbm.org/EuroPlusMed/ (accessed on 4 January 2024).
  29. Jalas, J. Pilosella Hill. In Retkeilykasvio (Field Flora of Finland), 4th ed.; Hämet-Ahti, L., Suominen, J., Ulvinen, T., Uotila, P., Eds.; Finnish Museum of Natural History: Helsinki, Finland, 1998; pp. 479–483. [Google Scholar]
  30. Kukk, T.; Gudžinskas, Z. Pilosella Hill. In Flora of the Baltic Countries. Compendium of Vascular Plants; Kuusk, V., Tabaka, L., Jankevičienė, R., Eds.; Estonian Agricultural University, Institute of Zoology and Botany: Tartu, Estonia, 2003; Volume 3, pp. 85–102. [Google Scholar]
  31. Sennikov, A.N. Bibliographic catalogue of Hieracium and Pilosella names published by Finnish authors. Norrlinia 2002, 9, 1–109. [Google Scholar]
  32. Triebel, D.; Uribe-Holguin, C.; Seifert, S.; Weiss, M.; Scholz, P. Connecting IndExs editors and exsiccata IDs with Wikidata for disambiguation of people names and work in botanical and mycological collections. Biodivers. Inf. Sci. Stand. 2022, 6, e93585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Sell, P.D.; West, C. Hieracium L. (incl. Pilosella Hill). In Flora Europaea; Tutin, T.G., Heywood, V.H., Burges, N.A., Moore, D.M., Valentine, D.H., Walters, S.M., Webb, D.A., Chater, A.O., DeFilipps, R.A., Richardson, I.B.K., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1976; Volume 4, pp. 358–410. [Google Scholar]
  34. Von Nägeli, C.W.; Peter, A. Die Hieracien Mittel-Europas; Verlag von R. Oldenbourg: München, Germany, 1885; Volume 1, pp. 1–931. [Google Scholar]
  35. Fries, E.M. Symbolae ad Historiam Hieraciorum; Leffler & Sebell: Uppsala, Sweden, 1848; pp. 1–220. [Google Scholar]
  36. Fries, E.M. Epicrisis Generis Hieraciorum; Uppsala Universitets Arsskrift: Uppsala, Sweden, 1862; pp. 1–158. [Google Scholar]
  37. Sennikov, A.N. Pilosella Hill. In A Compendium of Karelian Flora (Vascular Plants); Kravchenko, A.V., Ed.; Karelian Scientific Centre of the Russian Academy of Sciences: Petrozavodsk, Russia, 2007; pp. 263–266. [Google Scholar]
  38. Tupitzina, N.N. The Hawkweeds of Siberia; Science Publishers: Novosibirsk, Russia, 2004; pp. 1–208. [Google Scholar]
  39. Wilson, L.M.; Fehrer, J.; Brautigam, S.; Grosskopf, G. A new invasive hawkweed, Hieracium glomeratum (Lactuceae, Asteraceae), in the Pacific Northwest. Can. J. Bot. 2006, 84, 133–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Fries, E.M. Herbarium Normale Plantarum Rariorum et Criticarum Sueciae; Wahlsröm & Låstbom: Uppsala, Sweden, 1843; Volume 9, nos. 1–100. [Google Scholar]
  41. Fries, E.M. Herbarium Normale Plantarum Rariorum et Criticarum Sueciae, 2nd ed.; Wahlsröm & Låstbom: Uppsala, Sweden, 1843–1845; Volume 9, no. 7. [Google Scholar]
  42. Wahlenberg, G. Flora Upsaliensis Enumerans Plantas Circa Upsaliam Sponte Crescentes; Typis et impensis R. Acad.; Typographorum: Uppsala, Sweden, 1820; pp. 1–495. [Google Scholar]
  43. Wahlenberg, G. Flora Suecica; Palmblad & C: Uppsala, Sweden, 1826; Volume 2, pp. 429–1117. [Google Scholar]
  44. Wahlenberg, G. Flora Suecica, 2nd ed.; Palmblad & C: Uppsala, Sweden, 1833; Volume 2, pp. 447–1134. [Google Scholar]
  45. Turland, N.J.; Wiersema, J.H.; Barrie, F.R.; Greuter, W.; Hawksworth, D.L.; Herendeen, P.S.; Knapp, S.; Kusber, W.-H.; Li, D.-Z.; Marhold, K.; et al. International Code of Nomenclature for Algae, Fungi, and Plants (Shenzhen Code): Adopted by the Nineteenth International Botanical Congress, Shenzhen, China, July 2017; Koeltz Botanical Books: Glashütten, Germany, 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Puel, T. Catalogue des Plantes qui Croissent dans le Département du Lot; J.-P. Combarieu: Cahors, France, 1852; pp. 1–248. [Google Scholar]
  47. Fries, E.M. Summa Vegetabilium Scandinaviae; E Typographia Academica: Uppsala, Sweden, 1845; Volume 1, pp. 1–258. [Google Scholar]
  48. Grisebach, A. Commentatio de distributione Hieracii generis per Europam geographica (cont.). Gelehrte Anzeigen 1854, 38, 185–192. [Google Scholar]
  49. Fries, E.M. Herbarium Normale Plantarum Rariorum et Criticarum Sueciae; Wahlsröm & Låstbom: Uppsala, Sweden, 1858; Volume 15, nos. 1–100. [Google Scholar]
  50. Fries, E.M. Novitiae Florae Suecicae. Editio Altera, Auctior et in Formam Commentarii in Cel. Wahlenbergii Floram Suecicam Redacta; Berling: Lund, Sweden, 1828; pp. 1–306. [Google Scholar]
  51. Fries, E.M. Flora Hallandica Sistens Enumerationem Vegetabilium in Hallandia Sponte Nascentium, Additis Locis Natalibus et Observationibus Selectis; Berling: Lund, Sweden, 1818; pp. 1–159. [Google Scholar]
  52. Almquist, E. Vad är Hieracium auricula β majus Wahlenberg? Bot. Not. 1966, 119, 259–264. [Google Scholar]
  53. Norrlin, J.P. Anteckningar öfver Finlands Pilosellae. Acta Soc. Fauna Fl. Fenn. 1884, 2, 1–176. [Google Scholar]
  54. Norrlin, J.P. Några anteckningar till mellersta Finlands (n. v. Tavastlands) flora. Not. Sällsk. Fauna Fl. Fenn. Förh. 1874, 13, 421–436. [Google Scholar]
  55. Mela, A.J. Lyhykäinen Kasvioppi ja Kasvio; Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura: Helsinki, Finland, 1877; pp. 1–197. [Google Scholar]
  56. Norrlin, J.P. Suomen keltanot. In Suomen Kasvio, 5th ed.; Cajander, A.K., Ed.; Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura: Helsinki, Finland, 1906; pp. 613–746. [Google Scholar]
  57. Norrlin, J.P. Herbarium Pilosellarum Fenniae; University of Helsinki: Helsinki, Finland, 1884; Volume 1, nos. 1–100. [Google Scholar]
  58. Norrlin, J.P. Hieracia Exsiccata; University of Helsinki: Helsinki, Finland, 1888; Volume 1, nos. 1–145. [Google Scholar]
  59. Soják, J. Přehled československých druhů rodu Pilosella Hill. Preslia 1971, 43, 183–186. [Google Scholar]
  60. Fries, E.M. Herbarium Normale Plantarum Rariorum et Criticarum Sueciae; Wahlsröm & Låstbom: Uppsala, Sweden, 1949; Volume 13, nos. 1–100. [Google Scholar]
  61. Wagenitz, G. Index Collectorum Principalium Herbarii Gottingensis; Im Selbstverlag des Instituts: Göttingen, Germany, 1982; pp. 1–214. [Google Scholar]
  62. Brenner, M. Spridda bidrag till kännedom af Finlands Hieracium-former. III. Nyländska Piloselloidea. Acta Soc. Fauna Fl. Fenn. 1894, 12, 1–59. [Google Scholar]
  63. Sennikov, A.N. Taraxacum stepanekii, a replacement name for Taraxacum roseolum Kirschner & Štěpánek non Charit., with nomenclatural notes on the taxonomic legacy of Boris S. Kharitontsev in the digital era. Botanica 2024, 30, 51–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Sennikov, A.N.; Kozhin, M.N. Taxonomic revision of the Erigeron acris group (Asteraceae) in Murmansk Region, Russia, reveals a complex pattern of native and alien taxa. PhytoKeys 2023, 235, 83–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Plants 13 01301 g001
Figure 1. Type specimens of Pilosella suecica and its synonyms: (a) Hieracium auricula var. majus Wahlenb. =H. suecicum Fr., neotype sheet; (b) H. suecicum subsp. fennicum Norrl., lectotype sheet; (c) H. auricula var. majus, inflorescence; (d) H. suecicum subsp. fennicum, inflorescence.
Figure 1. Type specimens of Pilosella suecica and its synonyms: (a) Hieracium auricula var. majus Wahlenb. =H. suecicum Fr., neotype sheet; (b) H. suecicum subsp. fennicum Norrl., lectotype sheet; (c) H. auricula var. majus, inflorescence; (d) H. suecicum subsp. fennicum, inflorescence.
Plants 13 01301 g001
Plants 13 01301 g002
Figure 2. Type specimens of Pilosella suecica and its synonyms: (a) Pilosella suecica subsp. cochlearis Norrl., lectotype sheet; (b) Hieracium floribundum subsp. cochleatum Naeg. and Peter, lectotype sheet; (c) P. suecica subsp. cochlearis, inflorescence; (d) H. floribundum subsp. cochleatum, inflorescence.
Figure 2. Type specimens of Pilosella suecica and its synonyms: (a) Pilosella suecica subsp. cochlearis Norrl., lectotype sheet; (b) Hieracium floribundum subsp. cochleatum Naeg. and Peter, lectotype sheet; (c) P. suecica subsp. cochlearis, inflorescence; (d) H. floribundum subsp. cochleatum, inflorescence.
Plants 13 01301 g002
Plants 13 01301 g003
Figure 3. Type specimens of Pilosella suecica and its synonyms: (a) Hieracium floribundum subsp. ciliatifolium Nägeli and Peter, lectotype sheet; (b) H. floribundum subsp. scissum Naeg. and Peter, lectotype sheet; (c) H. floribundum subsp. ciliatifolium, inflorescence; (d) H. floribundum subsp. scissum, inflorescence.
Figure 3. Type specimens of Pilosella suecica and its synonyms: (a) Hieracium floribundum subsp. ciliatifolium Nägeli and Peter, lectotype sheet; (b) H. floribundum subsp. scissum Naeg. and Peter, lectotype sheet; (c) H. floribundum subsp. ciliatifolium, inflorescence; (d) H. floribundum subsp. scissum, inflorescence.
Plants 13 01301 g003
Plants 13 01301 g004
Figure 4. Type specimens of Pilosella stipitiflora (Nägeli and Peter) Sennikov (Hieracium floribundum subsp. stipitiflorum Nägeli and Peter): (a) lectotype sheet; (b) inflorescence.
Figure 4. Type specimens of Pilosella stipitiflora (Nägeli and Peter) Sennikov (Hieracium floribundum subsp. stipitiflorum Nägeli and Peter): (a) lectotype sheet; (b) inflorescence.
Plants 13 01301 g004
Plants 13 01301 g005
Figure 5. Elias Magnus Fries, Herbarium normale 9: 7, printed labels: (a) First version, distributed in 1843; (b) Second version, distributed in 1843–1845. Source: University of Helsinki.
Figure 5. Elias Magnus Fries, Herbarium normale 9: 7, printed labels: (a) First version, distributed in 1843; (b) Second version, distributed in 1843–1845. Source: University of Helsinki.
Plants 13 01301 g005
Plants 13 01301 g006
Figure 6. Surviving original material of Hieracium auricula var. majus Wahlenb., complete herbarium sheet (UPS V-922601).
Figure 6. Surviving original material of Hieracium auricula var. majus Wahlenb., complete herbarium sheet (UPS V-922601).
Plants 13 01301 g006
Table 1. Diagnostic characters for Pilosella caespitosa s.l., P. lactucella and their hybrids with the intermediate morphology (P. suecica).
Table 1. Diagnostic characters for Pilosella caespitosa s.l., P. lactucella and their hybrids with the intermediate morphology (P. suecica).
TaxonPilosella lactucellaPilosella suecicaPilosella caespitosa
stemslender, 15–25 cm long, yellowish-green, with numerous short glandular hairs and scattered thin simple hairsusually robust, 20–50 cm long, green or dark green, base red, with sparse to dense stiff simple hairs (red-based below)robust, 25–40 cm long, dark green, base red, with dense stiff simple hairs (red-based below)
leavesspathulate, gradually narrowed to a broad petiole, glaucous or yellowish-green, glabrous except for the basal part (margins and central nerve beneath long-ciliate)obovate or oblanceolate, long-attenuate into a narrow petiole, pale or intensely green, margins ciliate, surfaces glabrous or sparsely hairy, some stellate pubescence belowoblanceolate, attenuate into a narrow petiole, dark green, margins ciliate, surfaces abundantly hairy, stellate pubescence below
inflorescencebranches with abundant short glandular hairsbranches with stiff glandular hairs and sparse to abundant long simple hairsbranches with stiff glandular hairs and abundant long simple hairs
phyllaries6–7 mm long, with slender glandular hairs and single simple hairs8–9 mm long, with stiff glandular hairs and rare simple hairs8–9 mm long, with stiff glandular hairs and abundant simple hairs
flowerssulphureousyellowyellow
stylesyellowdark to blackblack
Table 2. Diagnostic characters for Pilosella stipitiflora, P. suecica and P. colliniformis, the main variants of hybrids between P. caespitosa and P. lactucella.
Table 2. Diagnostic characters for Pilosella stipitiflora, P. suecica and P. colliniformis, the main variants of hybrids between P. caespitosa and P. lactucella.
Hybrid TaxonPilosella stipitiflora
(P. caespitosa < P. lactucella)		Pilosella suecica
(P. caespitosa × P. lactucella)		Pilosella colliniformis
(P. caespitosa > P. lactucella)
stemslender, 15–25 cm long, pale green, with numerous short glandular hairs and scattered simple hairs (dark-based below)usually robust, 20–50 cm long, green or dark green, base red, with sparse to dense stiff simple hairs (red-based below)robust, 25–45 cm long, dark green, base usually red, with abundant stiff simple hairs (red-based below)
leavesspathulate or oblanceolate, gradually narrowed to a broad to narrow petiole, yellowish-green or pale green, glabrous except for the basal part (margins and central nerve beneath long-ciliate)obovate or oblanceolate, long-attenuate into a narrow petiole, pale or intensely green, margins ciliate, surfaces glabrous or sparsely hairy, with some stellate pubescence belowoblanceolate, attenuate into a narrow petiole, dark green and slightly glaucous, margins ciliate, surfaces abundantly hairy (unevenly so above), with stellate pubescence below
inflorescencebranches with abundant short glandular hairs and possibly single simple hairsbranches with stiff glandular hairs and sparse to abundant long simple hairsbranches with stiff glandular hairs and abundant long simple hairs
phyllaries6–7 mm long, with pale margins, with slender glandular hairs and sparse simple hairs8–9 mm long, dark, with stiff glandular hairs and rare simple hairs8–9 mm long, with broad pale margins, with stiff glandular hairs and abundant simple hairs
flowerssulphureousyellowyellow
styles(pale) darkdark to blackblack
Table 3. Nomenclature of main hybrids between Pilosella caespitosa and P. lactucella in major taxonomic works (as appeared in the cited works but with plant name authorship corrected).
Table 3. Nomenclature of main hybrids between Pilosella caespitosa and P. lactucella in major taxonomic works (as appeared in the cited works but with plant name authorship corrected).
Hybrid TaxonP. caespitosa < P. lactucellaP. caespitosa × P. lactucellaP. caespitosa > P. lactucella
Fries, 1848 [35]H. suecicum Fr., p.p.H. suecicum Fr., p.p.; H. floribundum Wimm. and Grab. p.p.–
Fries, 1862 [36]H. suecicum Fr., sensu Fries (1862)H. floribundum Wimm. and Grab. var.–
Nägeli and Peter, 1885 [34]H. floribundum subsp. cochleatum Nägeli and Peter; H. auricula subsp. magnauricula Nägeli and PeterH. spathophyllum PeterH. collinum subsp. colliniforme Peter
Zahn, 1923 [20]H. cochleatum (Nägeli and Peter) Norrl.; H. auricula subsp. magnauricula Nägeli and PeterH. longiscapum Boiss. and Kotschy ex Arv.-Touv.H. floribundum Wimm. and Grab.; H. pratense subsp. colliniforme (Peter) Zahn
Sell and West, 1976 [33]H. lactucella subsp. magnauricula (Nägeli and Peter) P.D.SellH. floribundum Wimm. and Grab.H. caespitosum subsp. colliniforme (Peter) P.D.Sell
Schljakov, 1989 [22]P. suecica (Fr.) F.Schultz and Sch.Bip., sensu Fries (1862)P. fennica (Norrl.) Norrl.P. colliniformis (Nägeli and Peter) Dostál
Bräutigam and Greuter, 2007 [23]P. cochlearis (Norrl.) SojákP. floribunda (Wimm. and Grab.) Fr.P. caespitosa subsp. colliniformis (Peter) P.D.Sell and C.West
this workP. stipitiflora (Nägeli and Peter) SennikovP. suecica (Fr.) F.Schultz and Sch.Bip.P. colliniformis (Nägeli and Peter) Dostál
Table 4. Diagnostic characters of Hieracium suecicum and related species as used by Fries [35], with the author’s emphasis in Italics.
Table 4. Diagnostic characters of Hieracium suecicum and related species as used by Fries [35], with the author’s emphasis in Italics.
Characters/SpeciesHieracium auriculaHieracium suecicumHieracium floribundum
stolonsrhizomate repente stoloniferorhizomate repente stoloniferorhizomate repente substolonifero
basal leavesfoliis lingulatis obtusis glaucis utrinque nudis versus basin ciliatisfoliis obovatis planis obtusis glaucis utrinque nudis et glabris… folia laete glauca, versus basin tantum ciliatafoliis lanceolatis spathulatisque viridi-glaucescentibus margine carinaque l. utrinque setosis, subtus rare flocculoso-stellulatis, primariis obtusis
cauline leavesscapo subunifolioscapo submonophylloscapo monophyllo
inflorescencesscapo… apice cymosocorymbo composito fastigiatoscapo… oligocephalo corymboso furcatove
inflorescence branchespedunculis simplicibus arcuato-adscendentibus, furcatoveramis patentibus polycephalissursum pedunculisque glanduliferis… nigricante nigrohispidis
phyllariessquamis obtusis pallidisinvolucris subnudis ovatiscum involucro ovato-globoso nigricante nigrohispidis, squamis obtusis concoloribus
stylesstylo luteo glabrostylo fusco-hispidulostylo luteo
Table 5. Diagnostic characters of Hieracium auricula and H. auricula var. majus [42], compared with those of herbarium specimens in the original collection of H. auricula var. majus (UPS) and the exsiccata of H. suecicum [40,49]. Matching characters of herbarium specimens in bold, mismatching ones in Italics.
Table 5. Diagnostic characters of Hieracium auricula and H. auricula var. majus [42], compared with those of herbarium specimens in the original collection of H. auricula var. majus (UPS) and the exsiccata of H. suecicum [40,49]. Matching characters of herbarium specimens in bold, mismatching ones in Italics.
Characters/Taxon or SpecimenHieracium auricula s.str.Hieracium auricula var. majusHerb. Wahlenberg, Plant 1Herb. Wahlenberg, Plant 2Herbarium Normale IX: 7
stemsscapus plerumque spithamalisscapis plusquam pedalibus supra medium bi-trifidisca. 20 cm, unbranchedca. 30 cm, unbranched30–40 cm, unbranched or branched
inflorescencescapus bi-triflorusramis subumbellatisumbelliform, 6 flowering headsumbelliform, 4 flowering headsumbelliform, 5–7 flowering heads
leavesfolia glabra et ad basin tantum ciliatafoliis ubique ciliatishairy along margins and on both sideshairy along margins at the base onlyhairy along margins and sparsely so on both sides
stolonsstolonibus repentibusstolonibus plerisque scapiferiscreeping, rudimentarycreeping, sterilecreeping, sterile, sometimes flowering
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Sennikov, A.N. The Taxonomic Circumscription and Nomenclatural History of Pilosella suecica (Asteraceae): A Special Case of Grey Literature in Taxonomic Botany. Plants 2024, 13, 1301. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13101301

AMA Style

Sennikov AN. The Taxonomic Circumscription and Nomenclatural History of Pilosella suecica (Asteraceae): A Special Case of Grey Literature in Taxonomic Botany. Plants. 2024; 13(10):1301. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13101301

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sennikov, Alexander N. 2024. "The Taxonomic Circumscription and Nomenclatural History of Pilosella suecica (Asteraceae): A Special Case of Grey Literature in Taxonomic Botany" Plants 13, no. 10: 1301. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13101301

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop