Podandrogyne colombiana Iltis & Cochrane
date: label: Collection Date
content: 26 Feb 1939 and 2 Mar 1939
name: label: Biogeographical Region
content: 83 - Western South America
label: Collector
content: Ellsworth P. Killip
label: Collector
content: H. Garcia
label: Max. Elevation
content: 2350
label: Min. Elevation
content: 1900
notes: label: Notes
content: One of 2 sheets (1770780 & 2271420), both recorded as "isotype" but annotated as "Holotype sheet 1" and "Holotype sheet 2", respectively. Email from Ted Cochrane, July 2017: The HOLOTYPE of Podandrogyne colombiana Iltis & Cochrane is cited (in Revista Acad. Colomb. Ci. Exact. 17(65): 266. 1989) as being in US. However, your herbarium holds two sheets of Killip and García 33917, which were identified as belonging to a single specimen by annotator Iltis in 1959, when he scribbled “Holotype sheet 1” on one and “Holotype sheet 2” on the other. Because they were not cross-labeled as being parts of a single gathering by the collectors or by US staff at the time of labeling, mounting, or accessioning, apparently only one of the two sheets can be the holotype (ICN Art. 8). I take that to be US Catalog No. 2271420/Barcode 00170326, bearing as it does a prime inflorescence as well as leaves, and US No. 1770780/Barcode 00170325 to be an isotype. Whoever entered label information in your collections databse, not feeling that he/she was in a position to make such a decision, listed both sheets as isotypes. REPLY (John K. Boggan): This is a very odd case. US 1770780, judging from both the stamped number and the label, appears to be the original sheet, indicated on the original label as “UNICATE”. But the sheet stamped 2271420 bears a label that was typed at a later date (perhaps by Hugh Iltis himself), with the data copied from the other sheet (including “Unicate”), labeled as “1770780” (typed) with “a” later added in pen. Sheet 1770780 bears indications that material was removed from it (bits of glue from now-absent straps, possibly not visible in the online image), and I believe all this material may have been originally mounted on that one sheet, and later divided at Iltis's request. He indicated the separated material as “1770780 a”, not realizing that US staff would give this sheet its own individual sheet number stamp upon mounting. If this is the case, then I believe these may in fact represent two sheets of a single specimen, as labeled. However, where I am not certain is whether all the annotations in blue pen are by Iltis. Why they were both recorded as “isotype” is a mystery to me (this was done many years ago, by a previous staff member).
label: Record Last Modified
content: 11 Jul 2017
label: Specimen Count
content: 1
place: label: Place
content: San Antonia, W of Cali, near summit of Cordillera Occidental., Valle del Cauca, Colombia, South America - Neotropics
setName: label: See more items in
content: Botany
label: See more items in
content: Flowering plants and ferns
label: See more items in
content: Type Register
publisher: label: Published Name
content: Podandrogyne colombiana Iltis & Cochrane
dataSource: label: Data Source
content: NMNH - Botany Dept.
identifier: label: Barcode
content: 00170326
label: USNM Number
content: 2271420
objectType: label: Type Citation
content: Iltis, H. H., Cochrane, T. S. 1989. Revista Acad. Colomb. Ci. Exact. 17 (65): 266.
label: Type Status
content: Holotype
taxonomicName: label: Taxonomy
content: Plantae Dicotyledonae Brassicales Cleomaceae