Gypsophila spergulifolia fm. serbica Griseb.
Creators: name: Clementi, Moreno
name: Vukojičić, Snežana
name: Miola, Antonella
name: Niketić, Marjan
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2016
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Plantae
Tracheophyta
Magnoliopsida
Caryophyllales
Caryophyllaceae
Gypsophila
Gypsophila spergulifolia
Gypsophila spergulifolia f. serbica griseb.

description: Gypsophila spergulifolia f. serbica Griseb. in Visiani & Pančić (1870: 15, Tab. XX, fig. 3)   
 Lectotype:— SERBIA. Serbia australis in m[onte] Slatibor [Zlatibor] aridis serpentinaceis, s.d., J. Pančić s.n. (GOET-014241!), Fig.6.   
 Additional specimens examined:— SERBIA. s.l., s.d., s.c s.n. (PAD-H 0022793!); SERBIA. s.l., s.d., s.c. s..n. (PAD-H 0022795!); SERBIA. In apricis M. Zlatibor S [erbia] merid[ionali] substr[ato] serpent[inaceo], Jul[io], J. Pančić s.n. (GOET!); SERBIA. M. Zlatibor S [erbia] mer[i]d[ionali], Jul[io], J. Pančić s.n. (PAD-H 0022794!).   
 Note:—From the endnote of the protologue (“Grisebach [...] binas formas distinxit”, i.e. “Grisebach [...] distinguished two forms”), as well as from the numerous letters that we analysed, it is clear that Grisebach was the first who recognised this new form. Indeed, Grisebach’s letter addressed to Pančić (11 October 1866, Jović 1998: 323, let. № 164) reads [in translation]: “both plants belong to the same species, but two forms are distinguished by the following subordinate and variable characteristics”, followed by a short description of both (“f. albanica ” and “f. serbica ”). Not so clear is whether the main description in the first paragraph on G. spergulifolia in Visiani & Pančić (1870) was meant as a wider treatment for whole species or as the protologue of the new infraspecific taxon G. spergulifolia f. serbica. Visiani and Pančić unambiguously stated that they had only seen specimens of that form (“planta Albaniae nobis adhuc invisa”), which was the one to be “hic fusius descripta” (i.e. “described more at length here” [in Visiani & Pančić 1870]). However, the heading of the whole chapter reads simply “ Gypsophila spergulifolia Griseb., Spicil. fl. Rumel. 1 p. 183”, and the differential characters of f. serbica are omitted from the main description. That paragraph does, still, include characters from the capsule and seeds, which are lacking in Grisebach’s protologue. Therefore, we conclude that the main description in the first paragraph, though based only on specimens of f. serbica, was meant to apply to the species as a whole. The name G. spergulifolia f. serbica must then be validated solely by the observations that can be found in the endnote, which contains a short diagnosis and an unambiguous attribution of both it and the name itself to Grisebach. It should be noted, furthermore, that Grisebach had distinguished the plants from Serbia as members of a new variety, not as a new form, as is evident from the label that he himself wrote for the specimen that he had received by Pančić and that kept in his herbarium, here chosen as a lectotype (but which might in fact be a holotype, since we know of no other original material). Nevertheless, when he wrote to Pančić, he used the word “forma”, which Pančić twice reported to Visiani (in litt. 18 October 1866, 8 April 1869). Visiani did not accept “forma” as a formal rank in any of his works (and both Pančić and Grisebach only very rarely did), but in preparing the manuscript for Visiani & Pančić (1870) he apparently decided not to change what he believed was Grisebach’s choice (which further confirms the ascription of the name to him). This name is accepted in Niketić (2014: 217), but in accordance with the initial intention of the author, we consider the rank of variety more appropriate. In fact, the rank of form is most often reserved for deviations from the type, usually based on a single morphological difference, that appear sporadically, while in this case there seem to exist two quite distinct vicariant taxa, as all collected specimens from Serbia closely match the diagnosis and description (dense glandular pedicels, obtuse calyx, emarginate petals, and other) (Niketić pers. obs.). At the rank of variety, the correct name for this taxon is G. spergulifolia var. serbica (Griseb.) Stroh (1939: 458).
description: Published as part of Clementi, Moreno, Vukojičić, Snežana, Miola, Antonella & Niketić, Marjan, 2016, Typification and nomenclature of the names published in Plantae Serbicae Rariores aut Novae-Decas III, pp. 85-98 in Phytotaxa 252 (2) on page 94, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.252.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/13676447