12 Pages
English

Chamaeris, an earlier name for Xyridion (Iridoideae, Iridaceae) [Chamaeris, nombre anterior para Xyridion (Iridoideae, Iridaceae)]

-

Gain access to the library to view online
Learn more

Description

ABSTRACT: The name Chamaeiris Medik. is revived for taxa belonging to Iris subg. Xyridion (Tausch) Spach, subg. Gramniris Spach and subg. Spathula Spach. It has priority over Xyridion (Tausch) Fourr., a genus name that has been recently reinstated in a sense that matches Medikus’s original concept of Chamaeiris. A new arrangement is presented for this genus, which comprises 22 species, 3 subspecies and 2 varieties, in two sections and three series. 28 new combinations are stated, and the main synonymy is also included for all accepted taxa.
RESUMEN: Se recupera el género Chamaeiris Medik. para los táxones pertenecientes a Iris subg. Xyridion (Tausch) Spach, subg. Gramniris Spach y subg. Spathula Spach. Dicho nombre genérico es prioritario frente a Xyridion (Tausch) Fourr., que ha sido utilizado recientemente en un sentido que coincide plenamente con la circunscripción que inicialmente dio Medikus a Chamaeiris. Se presenta una nueva ordenación taxonómica para el género, con 22 especies, 3 subespecies y 2 variedades, en dos secciones y tres series. Se realizan 28 combinaciones nuevas y para todos los táxones aceptados se presentan sus principales sinónimos.

Subjects

Informations

Published by
Published 01 January 2011
Reads 17
Language English

Flora Montiberica 49: 60-71 (X-2011). ISSN 1988-799X


CHAMAEIRIS, AN EARLIER NAME FOR XYRIDION
(IRIDOIDEAE, IRIDACEAE)


Manuel B. CRESPO VILLALBA
CIBIO, Instituto de la Biodiversidad. Universidad de Alicante. Apartado 99.
E-03080 Alicante. crespo@ua.es



SUMMARY: The name Chamaeiris Medik. is revived for taxa belonging to Iris
subg. Xyridion (Tausch) Spach, subg. Gramniris Spach and subg. Spathula Spach. It
has priority over Xyridion (Tausch) Fourr., a genus name that has been recently rein-
stated in a sense that matches Medikus’s original concept of Chamaeiris. A new ar-
rangement is presented for this genus, which comprises 22 species, 3 subspecies and 2
varieties, in two sections and three series. 28 new combinations are stated, and the
main synonymy is also included for all accepted taxa. Key words: Chamaeiris, Xyrid-
ion, Spathula, Iris, nomenclature, taxonomy.

RESUMEN: Se recupera el género Chamaeiris Medik. para los táxones pertene-
cientes a Iris subg. Xyridion (Tausch) Spach, subg. Gramniris Spach y subg. Spathula
Spach. Dicho nombre genérico es prioritario frente a Xyridion (Tausch) Fourr., que ha
sido utilizado recientemente en un sentido que coincide plenamente con la circunscrip-
ción que inicialmente dio Medikus a Chamaeiris. Se presenta una nueva ordenación
taxonómica para el género, con 22 especies, 3 subespecies y 2 variedades, en dos sec-
ciones y tres series. Se realizan 28 combinaciones nuevas y para todos los táxones
aceptados se presentan sus principales sinónimos. Palabras clave: Chamaeiris, Xyri-
dion, Spathula, Iris, nomenclatura, taxonomía.





among the widely accepted groups in the INTRODUCTION
‘Iris flower clade’ (Iris sensu lato), which
have been treated at different taxonomic In the account of Iridaceae for Flora
ranks in the last two centuries. iberica, the Iberian species of Iris (sensu
In the present contribution segregation lato) will be arranged in seven genera:
of Chamaeiris Medik. is supported, a na-Iris L., Juno Tratt., Hermodactylus Mill.,
me having priority against Xyridion (Tau-Limniris (Tausch) Fourr., Xiphion
sch) Fourr., recently revived at the genus Chamaeiris Medik., and Gynandriris
rank by RODIONENKO (2005). Parl. (not included in Moraea Mill.). This
treatment is based on the existence of im-
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION portant morphological differences among
those aggregates, which allow recognition
Chamaeiris was described by MEDI-of diagnostic syndromes of morphologi-
KUS (1790) to segregate several iris spe-cal traits for each genus. A recent mole-
cies sharing peculiar flower and fruit fea-cular work of WILSON (2011) brings
tures. He included in the new genus I. new light to phylogenetic relationships
60 M.B. CRESPO
graminea L., I. spuria L. and I. foetidissi- 1877, 1892) raised to subgenus under the
ma L. (erroneously worded as ‘foetida’), illegitimate name I. subg. Apogon Baker.
and two additional names, Ch. angustifo- This latter name was treated as a subsec-
lia and Ch. desertorum, both without any tion by BENTHAM & HOOKER (1883),
description or reference to a previous one. thus validating I. subsect. Apogon Benth.
The genus was characterised by produc- & Hook. f. Similarly, DYKES (1913) ac-
ing flowers apparently lacking a perianth cepted I. sect. Apogon which he divided
tube and with 6-ribbed fruits that usually into 15 unformal groups, those named
ended in a sharp point. ‘The scarlet-seeded iris’ and ‘The Spuria
That genus name was neglected by la- group’ being devoted to species of Cha-
ter authors, who rearranged this group of maeiris. That classification was adapted
irises in different ways. SPACH (1846) by DIELS (1930), who transformed Dy-
included species of Chamaeiris in three kes’s groups in 15 subsections, both abo-
of the subgenera he recognised in Iris, ve groups resulting in I. subsect. Foetidis-
mostly based on preexisting sections of simae and I. subsect. Spuriae respecti-
TAUSCH (1823): I. subg. Xyridion (Ta- vely. This latter arrangement was follo-
usch) Spach for I. spuria plus seven re- wed basically by LAWRENCE (1953),
lated taxa, I. subg. Gramniris Spach for I. though he revised the internal relation-
graminea, and I. subg. Spathula (Tausch) ships of the infrageneric taxa and in-
Spach for I. foetidissima. Later, FOUR- cluded both subsections in I. sect. Spa-
REAU (1869) treated Xyridion and Spa- thula Tausch as I. subsect. Foetidissimae
thula as monotypic genera, respectively Diels and I. subsect. Apogon, the latter
including X. spurium (L.) Fourr. and S. with 15 series.
foetidissima (L.) Fourr. Furthermore, RODIONENKO (1961)
KLATT (1872) adopted the name Xy- in his first comprehensive revision of Iris
ridion, which he erroneously regarded as (sensu lato) compared critically all previ-
a new generic combination, in an expan- ous treatments and generated a new clas-
ded sense that implicitly included the ear- sification that recognised five genera:
lier Chamaeiris and Spathula, though no Iris, Iridodictyum Rodion., Hermodacty-
direct mention was made to any of those lus, Gynandriris, Juno and Xiphion. In
names. He also included X. flexuosum Iris he accepted six subgenera, among
(Murray) Klatt, X. laevigatum (Fisch.) which I. subg. Xyridion was recircumscri-
Klatt, X. pseudacorus (L.) Klatt, X. seto- bed to included two sections, Xyridion
sum (Pall. ex Link) Klatt, X. sibiricum and Spathula, corresponding to FOUR-
(L.) Klatt, X. tridentatum (Pursh) Klatt REAU’s (1869) homonymous genera.
and X. ventricosum (Pall.) Klatt. This The former section was divided into two
rendered Xyridion more heterogeneous series, Xyridion and Graminea (I. subg.
and virtually synonymous to the earlier Gramniris Spach).
Limniris (Tausch) Fourr. (FOURREAU, MATHEW (1989) published a revi-
1869), a name that also should have been sed, integrated system for Iris, with 6
used for the resulting aggregate. subgenera, 8 sections and 16 series. Spe-
Later authors have treated Chamaeiris cies of Chamaeiris were classified into I.
at different ranks in Iris, though usually sect. Limniris ser. Spuriae (Diels) G.H.M.
merged with other unbearded, rhizoma- Lawr. and ser. Foetidissimae (Diels) B.
tous groups of irises. BAKER (1876) gro- Mathew. The resulting classification has
uped Spach’s subgenera Xyridion, Spa- widely been followed to date by many
thula and Limniris as I. sect. Apogon Ba- horticultural associations and gardeners
ker, a name which he later (BAKER, around the world.
61
Flora Montiberica 49: 60-71 (X-2011). ISSN 1988-799X Chamaeiris, an earlier name for Xyridion


Fig. 1.- First part (lower portion, A) of the molecular tree (Maximum Likelihood) using cpDNA
(matK, trnK and ndhF) sequence data for 104 species of Iris s.l. (vide WILSON, 2011).

Recently, RODIONENKO (2005) re- tid sequence data of 104 species, which
vived Xyridion at the generic rank, tho- covers most of currently accepted supra-
ugh in a more restrictive sense than generic groups. Her excellent results (Fig.
KLATT (1872) did. Rodionenko treated 1 & 2) show that Iris is composed of ten
this genus in a way that fully matched well-supported clades that are accepted as
MEDIKUS’s (1790) original concept of subgenera, one of them being named I.
Chamaeiris, and presented an arrange- subg. Xyridion (Tausch) Spach (= Cha-
ment fitting the one he established for I. maeiris). This synthetic treatment is simi-
subg. Xyridion in 1961. This time howe- lar to that of MATHEW (1983), though
ver 19 species were included in two sec- with a deep recircumscription of most
tions, X. sect. Xyridion, X. sect. Spathula subgenera, to which small segregates
(Tausch) Rodion, and one additional se- (e.g. Pardanthopsis (Hance) L.W. Lenz,
ries, X. ser. Ludwigia (Doronkin) Rodion. Belamcanda Adans. and Hermodactylus)
(I. ser. Ludwigia Doronkin). usually regarded as autonomous genera
As said before, WILSON (2011) has are now reduced to synonymy (cf. WIL-
recently generated a comprehensive phy- SON, 2011). This leaves the wide diver-
logeny of Iris (sensu lato), based on plas- sity of Iris in its current broad sense, and
62
Flora Montiberica 49: 60-71 (X-2011). ISSN 1988-799X
M.B. CRESPO
Chamaeiris


Fig. 2.- Second part (upper portion, B) of the molecular tree (Maximum Likelihood) using
cpDNA (matK, trnK and ndhF) sequence data for 104 species of Iris s.l. (vide WILSON, 2011).
The position of Chamaeiris (= I. subg. Xyridion) is marked in red.
introduces a not disruptive taxonomic fra- sis and Belamcanda), both showing weak
mework that could be comfortable for morphological support in their new cir-
many botanists. cumscriptions.
Wilson’s treatment is technically cor- Conversely, many of Wilson’s newly
rect and revives successfully some mor- defined subgenera are indeed composed
phologically natural groups such as ‘Si- of a number of monophyletic aggregates
phonostylis’, ‘Nepalensis’, ‘Crossiris’ or that are morphologically consistent when
‘Lophiris’, which were widely neglected analysed individually. In the case of I.
in recent times, or included in larger subg. Xiphium, Wilson includes small
groups to which they are not closely rela- groups such as Hermodactylus, Iridodic-
ted. However, it still generates heteroge- tyum, Xiphion and Alatavia Rodion., as
neous subgenera which can only be defi- well as I. masia Dykes, this resulting in a
ned by a number of variable morphologi- group hard to define as a whole from a
cal characters. This is the case for instan- morphological basis. Nonetheless, if each
ce of I. subg. Xiphium (incl. Hermodacty- one is accepted as a genus, characteriza-
lus and Iridodictyum) or I. subg. Pardan- tion is much easier and they become taxo-
thopsis (Hance) Baker (incl. Pardanthop- nomical units of a more practical use.
63
Flora Montiberica 49: 60-71 (X-2011). ISSN 1988-799X Chamaeiris, an earlier name for Xyridion

As in other groups of Iridaceaae, All clades in WILSON’s (2011) com-
morphology is highly convergent across bined tree can be equally treated in dif-
the whole ‘Iris flower clade’, being very ferent taxonomic ranks, the final decision
difficult to find apomorphies defining wi- being a matter of taxonomic preference.
der groups (e.g. Wilson‘s subgenera). On A reclassification of the ‘Iris flower cla-
the contrary, syndromes of morphological de’ in smaller, morphologically consistent
traits exist allowing easy characterization groups that is being prepared by the au-
of particular clades that can be segregated thor (CRESPO, in prep.), will reorganize
as genera, and that usually show particu- Iris (s.l.) in more than 10 genera. This al-
lar geographic distributions. This is the ternative analytic option admits most ge-
thcase of Juno, Xiphion, Hermodactylus, nera widely accepted within the 19 cen-
Evansia, Xiridion, Pardanthopsis, Belam- tury (as shown before). Therefore, it does
canda, Siphonostylis, Alatavia, or Limni- not increase significantly nomenclatural
ris, among others. Many of them are inflation, and brings some advantages for
currently in use by horticulturists who taxonomists. Every segregate can be easi-
can even identify their species in a vege- ly characterised and referred by a single
tative state. generic name (which contains morpholo-
gical and biogeographic information),
instead of a combination of infrageneric The case of I. subg. Xyridion
epithets that can difficult understanding.
According to the discussion by MAR-In WILSON’s (2011) combined tree
TÍNEZ-AZORÍN & al. (2011) on the ge-of three cpDNA regions, species of Cha-
nus concept and limits when molecular, maeiris (= I. subg. Xyridion sensu Wil-
morphological and geographical data are son) form a strongly supported clade (Fig.
put together, Chamaeiris is reinstated 2), with also a strong internal support in
here to stabilize its use at the genus rank, all its branches, and a topology that is ful-
according to Medikus’s original circum-ly congruent with the infrageneric arran-
scription, since it has priority against Xy-gement of RODIONENKO (2005).
ridion (sensu RODIONENKO, 2005). Phylogenetically it is sister to an ex-
Additional data on the genus are presen-panded I. subg. Xiphium clade formed by
ted by the latter author for Xyridion. Xiphion, Hermodactylus and Iridodicty-
um. This latter genus however is not mo-

nophyletic, since I. kolpakowskiana Re- CONCLUSION
gel is sister to the rest of clades. This is
congruent with morphological data. In The new arrangement of Chamaeiris
fact, RODIONENKO (1961) placed this shown below agrees basically with RO-
species in a particular section called Iri- DIONENKO’s (2005) concept of Xyrid-
dodictyum sect. Monolepis Rodion., ion, and will be followed in the forthco-
which later he segregated as the genus ming account of Iridaceae for ‘Flora ibe-
Alatavia Rodion. Molecular data would rica’. Two sections with three series are
support its recognition at the genus rank. recognised that include 22 species, 3 sub-
Morphological affinities among those species and 2 varieties. The genus is here
groups in I. subg. Xiphium (sensu Wil- lectotypified on Iris graminea L., a plant
son) were exposed clearly by RODIO- that was called ‘chamaeiris’ by some pre-
NENKO (1961) and support phylogenetic Linnean authors such as DODONAEUS
relationships, though divergences exist (1583: 247), who was cited in the proto-
that difficult characterization of the whole logue by MEDIKUS (1790). By doing so,
aggregate as circumscribed by Wilson. one of the natural groups in Chamaeiris
64
Flora Montiberica 49: 60-71 (X-2011). ISSN 1988-799X
M.B. CRESPO
can retain a name that is very popular It includes 22 species, widely distribu-
among gardeners: ‘The Spuria irises’ (Ch. ted in Europe −excepting the northern te-
ser. Spuriae). rritories−, SW and C of Asia, and N of
The taxonomic treatment presented Africa. Its highest diversity is found in
below is based mostly on morphological, the mountain ranges from Turkey and the
biogeographic and chromosome number Caucasus to western Himalaya.
evidence, as summarised by BOWLEY
a. Chamaeiris sect. Chamaeiris (1997), though a narrower species con-

cept is favoured here. This tries to avoid a1. Chamaeiris ser. Chamaeiris
construction of too wide and heterogene- = Iris ser. Graminea Rodion., Rod Iris: 192
ous ‘species’ that will difficult taxonomic (1961); ≡ Xyridion ser. Graminea (Rodion.)
understanding and probably will render Rodion. in Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Lenin-
artificial groups not consistent after mole- grad) 90(1): 58 (2005)
= I. subg. Gramniris Spach in Ann. Sci. Nat. cular analyses. Thus, the subspecies rank
Bot. ser. 3, 5: 96 (1846) is applied to populations showing cons-

tant and evident morphological traits, 1. Chamaeiris graminea (L.) Medik. in
which are restricted to particular geogra- Hist. & Commentat. Acad. Elect. Sci. The-
phical areas. The variety rank is used for od.-Palat. 6: 418 (1790); ≡ Iris graminea L.,
populations with morphological peculiari- Sp. Pl.: 39 (1753), basion.; ≡ Xiphion gra-
ties, mostly due to special local conditi- mineum (L.) Schrank in Flora (Regensb.) 7,
Beibl. 2: 17 (1824); ≡ Xyridion gramineum ons, not related to geographical patterns.
(L.) Klatt in Bot. Zeitung (Berlin) 30: 500 A short diagnosis is presented for so-
(1872); ≡ Limniris graminea (L.) Fuss, Fl. me taxa to justify their treatments.
Transsilv.: 637 (1866); ≡ I. compressa
Moench, Methodus: 529 (1794), nom. illeg. Chamaeiris Medik. in Hist. & Commentat.
[syn. subst.]; ≡ I. suavis Salisb., Prodr. Stirp. Acad. Elect. Sci. Theod.-Palat. 6: 417 (1790)
Chap. Allerton: 44 (1796), nom. illeg. [syn.
− Lectotypus generis (here selected): Ch.
subst.]
graminea (L.) Medik. [Iris graminea L.]
= Iris sylvatica Balb., Cat. Stirp. Hort. Bot.
= Xyridion (Tausch) Fourr. in Ann. Soc. Linn.
Taurin. 1813: 44 (1813); ≡ I. graminea var.
Lyon, ser. 2, 17: 163 (1869); ≡ Iris sect. Xyridion
sylvatica (Balb.) Nyman, Consp. Fl. Eur.: Tausch, Hort. Canal. 1 [sine pag.] (1823), basion.;
702 (1882); ≡ I. graminea subsp. sylvatica ≡ I. subg. Xyridion (Tausch) Spach in Ann. Sci.
(Balb.) K. Richt., Pl. Eur. 1: 256 (1890); ≡ Nat., Bot. ser. 3, 5: 94 (1846)
Xiphion gramineum subsp. sylvaticum Diagnosis: Rhizomatose perennial
(Balb.) Arcang., Comp. Fl. Ital. ed. 2: 157 herbs. Leaves isobilateral, usually fetid
(1894) when crushed. Flowers with perianth tube
Chromosome number: 2n = 34. usually bearing nectar drops on the outer
Distribution: C, W and S Europe, Tur-surface; outer tepals usually fiddle-sha-
key, S Ukraine and the Caucasus. ped, with canaliculate haft; inner tepals

usually erect, about equalling the length 1a. Chamaeiris graminea subsp. pseudo-
of outers. Stigma bifid, with 2 triangular, cyperus (Schur) M.B. Crespo, comb. nov.
acute points. Capsule coriaceous, with 6 ≡ Iris pseudocyperus Schur, Enum. Pl.
longitudinal ribs, sometimes shortly win- Transsilv.: 657 (1866), basion.
ged and arranged in 3 pairs, each one on Chromosome number: 2n = ?
each angle, and ending in an evident Distribution: SE Europe (Romania,
beak. Seeds without arile, either angulose Slovakia and neighbouring areas).
with testa papiraceous, irregularly nerved Observations: It differs from the type
and surcate on the back, or globose with by its more robust habit in all its parts;
testa fleshy, coloured, almost smooth. leaves broader and thicker; flowers lar-
65
Flora Montiberica 49: 60-71 (X-2011). ISSN 1988-799X Chamaeiris, an earlier name for Xyridion

ger, not scented; falls with blade and haft zae (Prodán) M.B. Crespo, comb. nov.; ≡
Iris brandzae Prodán in Bul. Grad. Bot. subequal in size.
Univ. Cluj 15: 103 (1936); ≡ I. sintenisii
2. Chamaeiris pontica (Zapa ł.) M.B. Cres- subsp. brandzae (Prodán) Webb & Chater
in Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 76(4): 315 (1978) po, comb. nov.; ≡ Iris pontica Zapa ł., Con-
sp. Fl. Galic. Crit. 1: 191 (1906), basion.; ≡ Chromosome number: 2n = 20.
Xyridion ponticum (Zapa ł.) Rodion. in Bot. Distribution: SE of Europe (Romania
Zhurn. (Moscow & Leningrad) 90(1): 59 and neighbouring areas).
(2005) Observations: It differs by being more
= Iris humilis M. Bieb., Fl. Taur.-Caucas. 1: robust and less glaucous; leaves linear,
33 (1808), nom. illeg. [non Georgi, Bemerk. wider (up to 4 mm wide), less abundantly
Reise Russ. Reich 1: 196 (1775)]; ≡ I.
nerved; spathes more strongly inflated. marschalliana Bobrov in Bot. Mater. Gerb.
Endemic to central-eastern Europe. Bot. Inst. Komarova Akad. Nauk S.S.S.R.
20: 7 (1960) [syn. subst.]
a2. Chamaeiris ser. Spuriae (Diels) M.B. Chromosome number: 2n = 72.
Crespo, comb. nov.; ≡ Iris subsect. Spuriae Distribution: SE Europe to S Ukraine
Diels in Engl. & Prantl, Nat. Pflanzenfam. and the Caucasus, extending into Russian
ed. 2, 15a: 502 (1930), basion.; ≡ I. ser. Central Asia. Still incompletely known.
Spuriae (Diels) G.H.M. Lawr. in Gentes
Herb. 8(4): 361 (1953) 3. Chamaeiris sintenisii (Janka) M. B.
= Iris sect. Xyridion Tausch, Hort. Canal. 1 Crespo, comb. nov.; ≡ Iris sintenisii Janka
[sine pag.] (1823); ≡ I. subg. Xyridion (Ta-in Természetrajzi Füz. 1: 244 (1877), ba-
usch) Spach in Ann. Sci. Nat., Bot. ser. 3, 5: sion.; ≡ I. graminea subsp. sintenisii (Janka)
94 (1846) K. Richt., Pl. Eur. 1: 256 (1890); ≡ Xyridion

sintenisii (Janka) Rodion. in Bot. Zhurn. 5. Chamaeiris. aurea (Klatt) M.B. Crespo,
(Moscow & Leningrad) 90(1): 58 (2005),
comb. nov.; ≡ Xyridion aureum Klatt in comb. inval.
Bot. Zeitung (Berlin) 30: 501 (1872), ba-Chromosome number: 2n = 16, 32.
sion.; ≡ Iris spuria subsp. aurea (Klatt) Dy-Distribution: SE Europe (Balkans),
kes, Gen. Iris: 64 (1913); ≡ I. aurea Lindl.
SW Russia and Turkey. in Bot. Reg. 33: t. 59 (1847), nom. illeg. [non

Link, Enum. Hort. Berol. Alt. 1: 59 (1821)]; ≡ I. 3a. Chamaeiris sintenisii subsp. lorea
crocea Jacquem. ex R.C. Foster in Contr.
(Janka) M.B. Crespo, comb. nov.; ≡ Iris Gray Herb. 114: 41 (1936) [syn. subst.]
lorea Janka in Természetrajzi Füz. 1: 245
= Iris crocea Jacquem. ex Baker in J. Linn.
(1877), basion.; ≡ I. foetidissima subsp. lo-
Soc., Bot. 16: 141 (1877); in Gard. Chron.
rea (Janka) K. Richt., Pl. Eur. 1: 258 (1890) ser. 3, 6: 584 (1876); Handb. Irid.: 15
Chromosome number: 2n = 72. (1892) [nom. omnia inval.]
Distribution: C and S Italy. Chromosome number: 2n = 40.
Observations: It differs from the type Distribution: Kashmir, above 1500 m
by its longer spathes (6-7 cm long, ins- altitude.
tead of 4-6 cm in the type), strongly kee-
led; standards narrower, subacute. 6. Chamaeiris carthaliniae (Fomin) M.
B. Crespo, comb. nov.; ≡ Iris carthali-
4. Chamaeiris urumovii (Velen.) M.B. niae Fomin in V ěstn. Tiflissk. Bot. Sada
Crespo, comb. nov.; ≡ Iris urumovii Velen. 14: 44 (1909), basion.; ≡ I. spuria subsp.
in Oesterr. Bot. Z. 52: 155 (1902), basion. carthaliniae (Fomin) B. Mathew, Iris:
Chromosome number: 2n = 20. 117 (1981); ≡ Xyridion carthaliniae (Fo-
min) Rodion. in Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Distribution: SE Europe (Bulgaria and
Leningrad) 90(1): 58 (2005) neighbouring areas).
Chromosome number: 2n = 44.
4a. Chamaeiris urumovii subsp. brand Distribution: Caucasus to W Georgia
66
Flora Montiberica 49: 60-71 (X-2011). ISSN 1988-799X
M.B. CRESPO
(near Tiflis and Gruzia). Chromosome number: 2n = 44.
Distribution: Still unknown; probably
7. Chamaeiris halophila (Pall.) M.B. Cres- Kashmir, C Asia and Mongolia.
po, comb. nov.; ≡ Iris halophila Pall., Rei-
se Russ. Reich. 2, Anh.: 733 (1773), basion.; 10. Chamaeiris longepedicellata (Czec-
≡ I. spuria var. halophila (Pall.) Ker Gawl. zott) M.B. Crespo, comb. nov. ≡ Iris lon-
in Bot. Mag. 28: tab. 1131 (1808); ≡ I. gepedicellata Czeczott in Acta Soc. Bot.
ochroleuca subsp. halophila (Pall.) Asch. & Poloniae 9: 44 (1932), basion.
Graebn., Syn. Mitteleur. Fl. 3: 497 (1906); Chromosome number: 2n = ?
≡ I. spuria subsp. halophila (Pall.) B. Ma- Distribution: Turkey (Galatia, in the
thew & Wendelbo in Rech., Fl. Iranica 112: Eldiven-Cagh mountains).
23 (1975); ≡ Xyridion halophilum (Pall.)

Klatt in Bot. Zeitung (Berlin) 30: 500 (1872) 11. Chamaeiris monnieri (DC.) M.B.
= Iris gueldenstaedtiana Lepech. in Acta
Crespo, comb. nov.; ≡ Iris monnieri DC.
Acad. Petr. 1: 292 (1781); ≡ I. gueldensta-
in Redouté, Liliac. 5: t. 236 (1808), basion.; edtiana subsp. gueldenstaedtiana Nyman,
≡ I. spuria subsp. monnieri (DC.) Dykes,
Consp. Fl. Eur. 4: 702 (1882); ≡ I. spuria
Gen. Iris: 63 (1913); ≡ Xiphion monnieri subsp. gueldenstaedtiana (Lepech.) Solda-
(DC.) Alef. in Bot. Zeitung (Berlin) 21: 297 no in Thaiszia 4(2): 121 (1994); ≡ Xyridion
(1863); ≡ Xyridion monnieri (DC.) Klatt in
gueldenstaedtianum (Lepech.) Klatt in Bot.
Bot. Zeitung (Berlin) 30: 500 (1872) Zeitung (Berlin) 30: 501 (1872)
Chromosome number: 2n = 40. = Iris desertorum Gueldenst., Reis. Russ-
Distribution: Rhodes and Crete (Gree-land 1: 80. 1787. ≡ I. spuria var. deserto-
ce) and possibly Cilicia (S Turkey). rum (Gueldenst.) Ker Gawl. in Bot. Mag.
28: tab. 1131 (1808)
12. Chamaeiris notha (M. Bieb.) M.B. = Iris stenogyna F. Delaroche in Redouté,
Crespo, comb. nov.; ≡ Iris notha M. Bieb., Liliac. 6: t. 310 (1811); ≡ Xyridion steno-
Cent. Pl. Ross. Merid. 3: t. 77 (1843), ba-gynum (F. Delaroche) Klatt in Bot. Zeitung
sion.; ≡ I. spuria subsp. notha (M. Bieb.) (Berlin) 30: 500 (1872)
Asch. & Graebn., Syn. Mitteleur. Fl. 3: 496 Chromosome number: 2n = 44.
(1906); ≡ I. spuria var. notha (M. Bieb.) Distribution: SE Europe, Caucasus,
R.R. Stewart, Annot. Cat. Vasc. Pl. W. Siberia, Iran, Afghanistan, W Mongolia
Pakistan & Kashmir: 65 (1972); ≡ Xyridion
and N-NW China (Gansu and Xinjiang).
nothum (M. Bieb.) Klatt in Bot. Zeitung

(Berlin) 30: 500 (1872) 8. Chamaeiris haussknechtii (Bornm. ex
Chromosome number: 2n = 38.
Baker) M.B. Crespo, comb. nov.; ≡ Iris
Distribution: Caucasus to Armenia, haussknechtii Bornm. ex Baker, Handb.
Georgia and Azerbaijan. Irid.: 4 (1892), basion.
= Iris graminifolia Freyn in Oesterr. Bot. Z.
13. Chamaeiris orientalis (Mill.) M.B. 44: 326 (1894)
Crespo, comb. nov.; ≡ Iris orientalis Mill., = Iris kerneriana Asch. & Sint. ex Baker,
Gard. Dict. ed. 8: nº 9 (1768), basion.; ≡ Handb. Irid.: 16 (1892), nom. inval.; ≡ Xy-
Xyridion orientalis (Mill.) Rodion. in Bot. ridion kernerianum (Asch. & Sint. ex Ba-
Zhurn. (Moscow & Leningrad) 90(1): 58 ker) Rodion. in Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Le-
(2005) ningrad) 90(1): 58 (2005), comb. inval.
= Iris ochroleuca L., Mant. Pl. Altera: 175 Chromosome number: 2n = 18.
(1771); ≡ I. spuria subsp. ochroleuca (L.) Distribution: N Turkey (Balikesir to
Dykes, Gen. Iris: 64 (1913); ≡ Xyridion
Enzincan and neighbouring areas). ochroleucum (L.) Klatt in Bot. Zeitung (Ber-

lin) 30: 500 (1872) 9. Chamaeiris lilacina (Borbás) M.B. Cres-
Chromosome number: 2n = 40.
po, comb. nov.; ≡ Iris lilacina Borbás in
Distribution: NE Greece, the Aegean Math. Termész. Közlem. 13: 49 (1875),
Islands, and Turkey (to Kayseri). Collec-basion.
67
Flora Montiberica 49: 60-71 (X-2011). ISSN 1988-799X Chamaeiris, an earlier name for Xyridion

(1910), basion.; = I. spuria var. hispanica tions from the Balkans and Syria are pro-
Dykes, Gen. Iris: 60 (1913) bably garden escapes.
Chromosome number: 2n = 38.
14. Chamaeiris prilipkoana (Kem.-Nath.) Distribution: Saline, drier soils of C-E
M.B. Crespo, comb. nov.; ≡ Iris prilipkoa- Spain.
na Kem.-Nath. in Grossh., Opred. Rast. Observations: It differs by its shorter,
Kavk.: 635 (1949), basion. robust stems; leaves shorter and narro-
= Iris demetrii Achv. & Mirzoeva in Trans. wer, almost completely concealing the
Bot. Inst. Acad. Sci. Armen. SSR 7: 27
stem internodes; flowers smaller.
(1950); ≡ I. spuria subsp. demetrii (Achv.
& Mirzoeva) B. Mathew, Iris: 117 (1981); 17. Chamaeiris sogdiana (Bunge) M.B.
≡ Xyridion demetrii (Achv. & Mirzoeva)
Crespo, comb. nov.; ≡ Iris sogdiana Bunge
Rodion. in Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Lenin-
in Mém. Acad. Imp. Sci. St.-Pétersbourg
grad) 90(1): 58 (2005)
Divers Savans 7: 507 (1847) basion.; ≡ I. Chromosome number: 2n = 38.
gueldenstaedtiana var. sogdiana (Bunge)
Distribution: S Caucasus (Armenia, Baker, Handb. Irid.: 14 (1892); ≡ I. halo-
Azerbaijan, and neighbouring areas). phila var. sogdiana (Bunge) Skeels in Bull.
Bur. Pl. Industr. U.S.D.A. 223: 61 (1911); ≡
15. Chamaeiris pseudonotha (Galushko) I. spuria subsp. sogdiana (Bunge) B. Ma-
M.B. Crespo, comb. nov.; ≡ Iris pseudono- thew, Iris: 118 (1981); ≡ Xyridion sogdia-
tha Galushko, Fl. Severn. Kavk.: 9 (1983), num (Bunge) Nevski in Trudy Bot. Inst.
basion.; ≡ Xyridion pseudonothum (Galush- Akad. Nauk S.S.S.R., ser. 1, Fl. Sist. Vyssh.
ko) Rodion. in Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Le- Rast. 4: 331 (1937)
ningrad) 90(1): 58 (2005) Chromosome number: 2n = ?
Chromosome number: 2n = ? Distribution: C Asia, Kazakhstan, NE
Distribution: Caucasia (S Russia). Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Kashmir and

NW-N China. 16. Chamaeiris reichenbachiana (Klatt)

M.B. Crespo, comb. nov.; ≡ Iris reichenba- 18. Chamaeiris spuria (L.) Medik. in Hist.
chiana Klatt in Linnaea 34: 613 (1868), & Commentat. Acad. Elect. Sci. Theod.-
excl. syn., basion.; ≡ Xyridion reichenbachi- Palat. 6: 417 (1790); ≡ Iris spuria L., Sp.
anum (Klatt) Klatt in Bot. Zeitung (Berlin) Pl.: 39 (1753), basion.; ≡ Xyridion spurium
30: 500 (1872); ≡ I. spuria var. reichenba- (L.) Fourr. in Ann. Soc. Linn. Lyon nov.
chiana (Klatt) Dykes, Gen. Iris: 60 (1913) ser., 17: 163 (1869)
= Iris maritima Lam., Fl. Franç. 3: 497 = Iris subbarbata Joo in Verh. Mitth. Sie-
(1779), nom. illeg. [non Mill., Gard. Dict. ed. 8: benbürg. Vereins Naturwiss. Hermannstadt
nº 11 (1768)]; ≡ I. spuria var. maritima 2: 98 (1851), basion.; ≡ I. gueldenstaedtia-
Dykes, Gen. Iris: 59 (1913) [syn. subst.]; ≡ I. na subsp. subbarbata (Joo) Nyman, Consp.
spuria subsp. maritima (Dykes) P. Fourn., Fl. Eur. 4: 702 (1882) ≡ I. spuria var. sub-
Quatre Fl. Fr.: 190 (1935); ≡ Xyridion barbata (Joo) Dykes, Gen. Iris: 62 (1913)
maritimum (Dykes) Rodion. in Bot. Zhurn. Chromosome number: 2n = 22, 38.
(Moscow & Leningrad) 90(1): 58 (2005)
Distribution: N, C and E Europe
= Iris spathulata Lam., Encycl. 3(1): 300
(from Sweden to Hungary). (1789), nom. illeg. pro parte [non L. f., Suppl.

Pl.: 99 (1782)]
18a. Chamaeiris spuria var. danica (Dy-Chromosome number: 2n = 38.
kes) M.B. Crespo, comb. nov.; ≡ Iris Distribution: W Mediterranean (SE
spuria var. danica Dykes, Gen. Iris: 61
France, E Spain, Algeria). (1913), basion.

Chromosome number: 2n = 38. 16a. Chamaeiris reichenbachiana var.
Distribution: N Europe (Saltholm Is- hispanica (Bernátsky) M.B. Crespo,
land, Denmark). comb. nov.; ≡ Iris spathulata f. hispanica
Observations: It differs by its more Bernátsky in Oesterr. Bot. Z. 60: 343
68
Flora Montiberica 49: 60-71 (X-2011). ISSN 1988-799X
M.B. CRESPO
robust habit in all its parts; stems taller, b. Chamaeiris sect. Spathula (Tausch)
with broader leaves; flowers larger. M.B. Crespo, comb. nov.; ≡ Iris sect. Spa-
thula Tausch, Hort. Canal. 1 [sine pag.]
19. Chamaeiris violacea (Klatt) M.B. Cres- (1823), basion.; ≡ Iris subg. Spathula (Ta-
po, comb. nov.; ≡ Xyridion violaceum Klatt usch) Spach in Ann. Sci. Nat., Bot. ser. 3, 5:
in Bot. Zeitung (Berlin) 30: 500 (1872), ba- 97 (1846); ≡ Spathula (Tausch) Fourr. in
sion.; ≡ Iris violacea Klatt in Linnaea 35: Ann. Soc. Linn. Lyon, ser. 2, 17: 163
384 (1867), nom. illeg. [non Savi, Bot. Etrusc. (1869); ≡ Xyridion sect. Spathula (Tausch)
2: 9 (1815), nec Sweet, Hort. Brit.: 393 (1826)]; Rodion. in Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Lenin-
≡ I. klattii Kem.-Nath. in Grossh., Opred. grad) 90(1): 59 (2005)
Rast. Kauk.: 635 (1949) [syn. subst.] = Iris sect. Apogon subsect. Foetidissimae
= Iris daenensis Kotschy ex Baker in J. Diels in Engl. & Prantl, Nat. Pflanzenfam.
Linn. Soc., Bot. 16: 140 (1877) ed. 2, 15a: 502 (1930); ≡ I. sect. Limniris
= Iris musulmanica Fomin in V ěstn. Ti- ser. Foetidissimae (Diels) B. Mathew, Iris:
flissk. Bot. Sada 14: 46 (1909); ≡ I. spuria 14 (1983)
subsp. (Fomin) Takht. in
Takht. & Fed., Fl. Erevana ed. 2: 330 22. Chamaeiris foetidissima (L.) Medik. in
(1972); ≡ Xyridion musulmanicum (Fomin) Hist. & Commentat. Acad. Elect. Sci. The-
Rodion. in Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Lenin- od.-Palat. 6: 418 (1790) [sphalm. ‘foetida’];
grad) 90(1): 58 (2005) ≡ Iris foetidissima L., Sp. Pl.: 39 (1753),
basion.; ≡ Xiphion foetidissimum (L.) Parl., Chromosome number: 2n = 44.
Nuov. Gen. Spec.: 45 (1854); ≡ Spathula Distribution: E Turkey, N Caucasus,
foetidissima (L.) Fourr. in Ann. Soc. Linn. Georgia, E Azerbaijan, and N and W
Lyon ser. 2, 17: 163 (1869); ≡ Xyridion Iran.
foetidissimum (L.) Klatt in Bot. Zeitung
(Berlin) 30: 500 (1872) 20. Chamaeiris xanthospuria (B. Mathew
= Iris foetida Lam., Encycl. 3(1): 299 (1789)
& T. Baytop) M.B. Crespo, comb. nov.; ≡
Chromosome number: 2n = 40. Iris xanthospuria B. Mathew & T. Baytop
Distribution: N Africa (Morocco and in Garden (London) 107(11): 446 (1982), ba-
Algiers), W and S Europe (from Ireland, sion.; ≡ Xyridion xanthospurium (B. Mat-
hew & T. Baytop) Rodion. in Bot. Zhurn. Scotland and Portugal to S Italy and Mal-
(Moscow & Leningrad) 90(1): 58 (2005) ta), Azores and the Canary Islands.
Chromosome number: 2n = 40. Observations: MEDIKUS (1790) re-
Distribution: C and S Turkey. ferred this species as ‘Ch. foetida’, tho-
ugh he attributed the authority of the ba-
a3. Chamaeiris ser. Ludwigia (Doronkin) sionym (‘Iris foetida’) to Linnaeus and
M.B. Crespo, comb. nov.; ≡ Iris ser. Lud- also cited explicitly the same synonym,
wigia Doronkin in Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & ‘Spatha foetida Dodon. p. 245’ (DODO-
Leningrad) 75(3): 413 (1990), basion.; ≡ Xy- NAEUS, 1583), as LINNAEUS (1753)
ridion ser. Ludwigia (Doronkin) Rodion. in
did. Therefore it is here regarded as an or-Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Leningrad) 90(1): 59
thographic error without nomenclatural (2005)
consequences, and the combination is at-
21. Chamaeiris ludwigii (Maxim.) M.B. tributed to Medikus.
Crespo, comb. nov. ≡ Iris ludwigii Maxim.
in Bull. Acad. Imp. Sci. Saint-Pétersbourg
26: 508(-509) (1880), basion.; ≡ Xyridion Tentative key for species of Chamaeiris
ludwigii (Maxim.) Rodion. in Bot. Zhurn.
(Moscow & Leningrad) 90(1): 59 (2005) 1. Stem with a longitudinal ridge; seeds with
Chromosome number: 2n = ? scarlet or white fleshy testa, long persis-
Distribution: Altai Mountains (E Ka- tent after dehiscence (sect. Spathula) .......
...................................... Ch. foetidissima zakhstan).
69
Flora Montiberica 49: 60-71 (X-2011). ISSN 1988-799X