Phytotaxa 263 (1): 001–017 http://www.mapress.com/j/pt/ Copyright © 2016 Magnolia Press ISSN 1179-3155 (print edition) Article PHYTOTAXA ISSN 1179-3163 (online edition) http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.263.1.1 Checklist and typification of Heterostemma (Apocynaceae, Asclepiadoideae, Ceropegieae) MICHELE RODDA The Herbarium, Singapore Botanic Gardens, 1 Cluny Road, 259569 Singapore. rodda.michele@gmail.com Abstract All names in Heterostemma and their known synonyms are listed. Lectotypes are designated for 33 names and a neotype is designated for Stapelia quadrangula. Dittoceras is synonymised with Heterostemma and three new combinations are validated. Key words: Dittoceras, lectotypification, neotypification, Oianthus Introduction Heterostemma Wight (1834: 42) is the only genus in subtribe Heterostemminae (Endress et al. 2014). Heterostemminae is sister to the three other subtribes of Ceropegieae (Meve & Liede 2004). The genus comprises of 30 to 40 species found in Australia, Bangladesh, China, India, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Nepal, New Guinea, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Vietnam and Western Pacific Islands (Swarupanandan et al. 1989, Forster 1992). The species of Heterostemma are characterised by terrestrial twining habit, thin (non-succulent) lanceolate to orbicular leaves, extraaxillary pseudo-umbelliform to raceme-like inflorescences, rotate to urceolate corollas, staminal corona with five basally connate lobes spreading or sub-erect, with or without an adaxial horned appendage, poorly developed terminal anther appendages, erect subquadrate to oblong pollinia with a germinating mouth on the inner margin, slender single or paired follicles, winged seeds with a long coma (Swarupanandan et al. 1989, Forster 1992, Li et al. 1995, Jagtap & Singh 1999). The genus has been revised in various regional accounts (e.g. Hooker 1883b, Costantin, 1912, Backer & Bakhuizen van den Brink 1965, Swarupanandan et al. 1989, Forster 1992, Gilbert et al. 1995, Jagtap & Singh 1999), two new species have been published in recent years (Lin et al. 2010, Tran & Kim 2010) and a generic revision is in preparation (Rodda in prep.). The genus Symphysicarpus Hasskarl (1857: 101) was transferred to Heterostemma by Boerlage (1899: 438) without presenting any motivation to do so, however the synonymy has not been questioned in any later treatments. Oianthus Bentham (1876: 79, t. 1191) was synonymised with Heterostemma by Swarupanandan et al. (1989) and Heterostemma sect. Oianthus Swarupan. & Sasidh. in Swarupanandan et al. (1989: 253) was created to accommodate its four species. Oianthus was originally considered separated from Heterostemma based on its urceolate-globose flowers and on the lack of an adaxial horned appendage on the corona lobes. The discovery of an intermediate species, Heterostemma vasudevani Swarupan. & Sasidh. in Swarupanandan et al. (1989: 257), with a discoid-urceolate corolla and corona lobes with an appendage led to the inclusion of Oianthus in Heterostemma the was therefore recircumscribed. Heterostemma sect. Oianthus was indicated as endemic to South Asia (Swarupanandan et al. 1989), however also Heterostemma fimbriatum King & Gamble (1908: 558) from Peninsular Malaysia has urceolate corollas and may belong to the section. Dittoceras Hooker (1883a: 17, t. 1422) is a genus of three species, which was still accepted by Endress & Bruyns (2000), but has since been considered congeneric with Heterostemma (Meve & Liede 2002, 2004, Endress et al. 2014). Dittoceras was separated from Heterostemma based on its ‘singular follicles’ (much thicker than the follicles of other Heterostemma species known in 1883) and larger seeds (Hooker 1883a). Other characters commonly associated with Dittoceras are the vigorous growth, dense pilose indumentum, large and fleshy corolla pubescent outside, and Accepted by Zhi-Qiang Zhang: 25 Apr. 2016; published: 27 May 2016 Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0 1 pubescent ovary (Kerr 1939). Meve & Liede (2004) in considering Dittoceras conspecific with Heterostemma noted that Heterostemma herbertii Elmer (1919: 3074), with its large leaves, flowers and seeds is Dittoceras-like, despite lacking the dense indumentum. Another species, Heterostemma menghaiense M.G.Gilbert & P.T.Li in Gilbert et al. (1995: 9) is even more Dittoceras-like as it is pubescent throughout, excluding the inside of the corolla and the corona. Seeds of Heterostemma alatum Wight (1834: 42) and H. samoense Forster (1992: 78) are also larger than those of most Heterostemma species. Since Dittoceras is generally considered conspecific with Heterostemma new combinations for three species of Dittoceras are published. A fourth species, Dittoceras stellaris (Ridley) Bullock (1957: 513) is not combined in Heterostemma because upon examination of the type it is clear that the taxon belongs to Dregea Meyer (1838: 199) and the correct name is Dregea stellaris (Ridley) Ridely (1923: 387). The present paper is a precursor to a revision of Heterostemma. Its aim is to present an annotated checklist of Heterostemma, clarify type citations, select lectotypes when necessary and provide an extensive list of isotypes and syntypes. Materials and Methods This paper is based on the critical review of the protologues of all Heterostemma names and their synonyms and on the search for types at the following herbaria: B, BK, BKF, BM, BO, BR, CAL, CGE, G, HITBC, HN, IBSC, K, KIEL, KUN, L, LIV, OXF, P, SAN, SAR, SING, TI, US, VNM and Z, and online on the Chinese Virtual Herbarium portal (http://www.cvh.ac.cn accessed on 15 April 2016) and on Jstor Global Plants (https://plants.jstor.org/ accessed on 15 April 2016). A lectotype, if a suitable specimen was available, has been selected for taxa whose protologue did not explicitly mention a single type specimen with a direct reference to the institution it was deposited in, strictly applying Art 9.1 & 9.2 of the ICN (McNeill et al. 2012). References to single specimens indicated as ‘type’ or ‘holotype’ in treatments is considered effective lectotypification under Art. 9.9 of the ICN (McNeill et al. 2012). In the absence of original material, a neotype is not selected (excluding Stapelia quadrangula Blanco [1837: 202]) as this is best effected once the genus is revised. Noltie (2006) clarified the type citations of taxa published by Wight. These usually bear a Wallich Catalogue number, a Wight Catalogue number or a Wallich Asclepiadaceae number (Noltie 2006). Different sheets may bear all three identifiers, only one or any combination of the three. All these variants are here listed as possible isotypes. Examination of specimens at K however resulted in finding numerous specimens from Wight’s personal working herbarium, often bearing extensive annotations by Wight himself (Fig. 1). These specimens are here preferred over other duplicates in the selection of a lectotype. Synonymies are only indicated if previously published and a reference to the place of synonymisation is provided. Publication dates have been verified using the online version of Stafleu & Cowan (1976–) (http://www.sil.si.edu/ digitalcollections/tl-2/index.cfm) and when available indicated in square brackets after the publication year. The checklist Heterostemma Wight & Arn. in Wight (1834: 42) [Dec 1834] =Dittoceras Hook.f. syn nov. =Glossostelma nom. nud. (Hooker 1883: 47) =Oianthus Benth. =Phyllastemma nom. nud. Blume mss on sheet [L2720373] =Symphysicarpus Hassk. (Boerlage 1899: 438) Type: Heterostemma tanjorense Wight & Arn. Heterostemma sect. Oianthus Swarupan. & Sasidh. in Swarupanandan et al. (1989: 253) ≡Oianthus Bentham (1876: 79, t. 1191) [Apr 1876] Type: Heterostemma urceolatum Dalzell 2 • Phytotaxa 263 (1) © 2016 Magnolia Press RODDA FIGURE 1. Photograph of possible isolectotype of Heterostemma tanjorense from Wight’s personal working herbarium (K). The sheet bears an Herb. R. Wight propr. label in the lower right corner, is pencilled [Wight cat. n.] 1527 in the lower left corner and has extensive notes about the taxon in Wight’s hand. A pencilled note by C.B. Clarke reads ‘found in Wight’s bundle of Heterostemma’. Reproduced with the consent of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. CHECKLIST AND TYPIFICATION OF HETEROSTEMMA Phytotaxa 263 (1) © 2016 Magnolia Press • 3 Heterostemma acuminatum Decaisne (1838: 268) TYPE:—INDONESIA. Java, ‘Goudo-san’, s.d., J.B.L.T. Leschenault 228 (lectotype P [P00607325], here designated) =Heterostemma papuanum Schlechter (1905: 369) [November 1905] (synonymised by Forster 1992) TYPE:—PAPUA NEW GUINEA, Madang Province, Ramu, January 1902, R. Schlechter 14110 (lectotype BO, designated by Forster & Liddle (1994)) =Tylophora calcarata Bentham (1869: 335) (synonymised by Forster 1992) TYPE:—AUSTRALIA, Queensland, Rockhampton, 1868, A. Thozet s.n. (lectotype K [K000894685] designated by Forster & Liddle (1994), possible isotype at MEL [MEL113588]) Notes:—The only original material cited in the protologue of H. acuminatum is a specimen collected by Leschenault in Java bearing the common name ‘Goudo-san’, ‘Hab. in insula Javae (Leschenault) vulgo Goudo-san’. Forster (1992) mentioned the holotype of H. acuminatum as Leschenault s.n.. I have not found that specimen but instead Leschenault 228 in P is annotated with ‘Goudo-san’ and is therefore selected as lectotype for H. acuminatum. Two syntypes are mentioned in the protologue of H. papuanum (Schlechter 1905: 369), Schlechter 14110 and Schlechter 18877. Schlechter 14110 (BO) was designated as lectotype by Forster & Liddle (1994). Duplicates of Schlechter 18877 are present at K [K000894689] and P [P03899067]. Forster (1992) indicated the holotype of T. calcarata as Thozet 501 (K), with a duplicate in MEL. This would be an effective lectotypification under Art. 9.9 of the ICN (McNeill et al. 2012). However upon examination of specimens at K I could not locate Thozet 501 but only Thozet s.n. [K000894685]. The lectotype citation is therefore amended. The MEL isotype cited by Forster (1992) [MEL113588] is instead Thozet 501 and its isotype status is therefore uncertain. Heterostemma alatum Wight (1834: 42) [Dec 1834] (as ‘alata’) TYPE:—NEPAL, Chundragherry?, Herb. R. Wight. propr., Wight Asclep 136 [=Wall. Cat. 8180] (lectotype K [K000895032], here designated, isotypes, E [E00179594], K, ex parte [as Wall. Cat. 8180, K000974160]) =Hoya alata nom. nud. on sheet [K000974160] =Heterostemma dentatum W. T Wang nom. nud. on sheet [KUN0267852 and numerous other specimens in KUN] Notes:—The materials mentioned in the protologue of H. alatum were clarified by Noltie (2006) as ‘Nepal, Wallich, Wall Asclep 136 [=Wall. Cat. 8180]. Massooree, [J.F.] Royle’. Kambale et al. (2015), selected sheet [K000974160] as the lectotype of H. alatum. This sheet however contains two gatherings, the first from Naglerquhn, bearing date July 1821, the other from Chundragherry?. It is impossible to separate which part of the specimen belongs to which collection and therefore select part of the sheet as lectotype of H. alatum. In Linn Soc. MS SP 1284 the entry under under No. 136 is ‘Hoya alata Wall, 1 sh. Nepalia’. This means that only a single sheet from Wallich herbarium was in Wight’s hand when describing H. alatum. This can be identified as [K000895032], a well-preserved specimen with an attached description of the species and a sketch of a dissected flower in Wight’s hand. This sheet is instead here selected as lectotype for H. alatum. If this was the only specimen mentioned in the protologue it would be a holotype following Noltie (2006: 134). Another specimen at LIV was collected by Royle in Massooree and bears a note in Wight’s hand and it is a syntype [acc. no. LIV1952.121.4425]. Heterostemma andersonii (Hook.f.) Rodda comb. nov. ≡Dittoceras andersonii Hooker (1883a: 18, t. 1422) [Mar 1883] (as ‘andersoni’) TYPE:—INDIA, Sikkim, Tanlioke?, 25 June 1862, T. Anderson 838 (Lectotype K [K000894723], here designated, isotypes M [M0175244], photo at E [E00288726]) Notes:—Syntypes for D. andersonii are mentioned by Hooker (1883a: 18) as ‘Sikkim Himalaya, in the tropical region alt. 2–4000 feet, J. D. H (Hooker)., T. Anderson’. At Kew duplicates of both specimens are present and the Anderson duplicate is selected as lectotype for D. andersonii. Hooker’s syntypes are labelled ‘Heterostemma (6)’, and are available at CGE, 3 duplicates, K [K000894724, K000894725, one not barcoded], L [L2727218], M [M0175245], photo at E [E00288724, E00288725]. Heterostemma angustilobum Schlechter (1915: 565) TYPE:—PHILIPPINES, Davao, Mindanao, Mt Apo, June 1909, A.D.E. Elmer 10814 (lectotype GH [GH00076406], here designated, isotypes BM [BM001125305], G, 2 duplicates, NY [NY00546772], K, L [L2720403], US [US00111076]) Notes:—The only specimen mentioned by Schlechter (1915: 565) in the protologue of H. angustilobum is Elmer 10814. 4 • Phytotaxa 263 (1) © 2016 Magnolia Press RODDA Schlechter likely based his description on a B duplicate that is now lost (Hiepko 1978, Nicholas 1992). Eight duplicates of Elmer 10814 have been located. Among these, the GH specimen is selected as lectotype of H. angustilobum as it is a fertile and well-preserved specimen. Heterostemma balansae Costantin (1912: 120) TYPE:—VIETNAM, Hanoi, 1 May 1886, ‘dans les haies’ B. Balansa 2110 (lectotype P [P00645985], here designated, isotype P [P03899022]) Notes:—The only specimen of H. balansae is indicated by Costantin (1912: 120) as ‘Tonkin: Hanoi; dans les haies (Balansa)’. In P there are two Heterostemma specimens collected by Balansa in Hanoi both annotated ‘dans les haies’. The first, Balansa 2111 [P00645984] is a fruiting specimen and may not belong to H. balansae. The second, Balansa 2110 is a well-preserved fertile specimen and is therefore selected as lectotype for H. balansae. Heterostemma beddomei (Hooker) Swarupan. & Mangaly in Swarupanandan et al. (1989: 254) ≡Oianthus beddomei Hooker (1883b: 49) [Jun 1883] TYPE:—INDIA, Karnataka, Mysore, Beigoor forests, 4 August 1862, Wynaad, ex Beddome s.n. (drawing, K, lectotype here designated) (Fig. 2) FIGURE 2. Lectotype (Iconotype) of Heterostemma beddomei (K). This is just a drawing as the original specimen was lost before the taxon was described (Hooker 1883b: 49). Reproduced with the consent of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. Notes:—Hooker (1883: 49) indicated that O. beddomei was described based on a drawing, as the original specimen collected by Beddome was lost. Swarupanandan et al. (1989) indicated the type as ‘A drawing by Beddome (K, not seen)’. Jagtap & Singh (1999) indicated the type as Plate 1466 in Hooker’s Icones Plantarum (Hooker 1884) [September 1884]. The plate was published one year after the description of O. beddomei and cannot be safely considered original CHECKLIST AND TYPIFICATION OF HETEROSTEMMA Phytotaxa 263 (1) © 2016 Magnolia Press • 5 material. A preparatory drawing for the illustration published as plate 1466 of Hooker’s Icones Plantarum was found in the H. beddomei folder at K. The original drawing by Beddome (or after Beddome) (Fig. 2) was found in the K Archives and is here selected as lectotype for H. beddomei. Heterostemma brownii Hayata (1911: 199) (as ‘browni’) TYPE:—TAIWAN, Shintiku, Taitoga. June 1905, T. Kawakumi & U. Mori 1373 (syntypes not found); TAIWAN, Taiko, August 1908, B. Hayata & U. Mori 41 (syntype not found). Notes:—Two specimens, Kawakumi & Mori 1373, Hayata & Mori 41 were indicated in the protologue of H. brownii (Hayata 1911: 199). No duplicates of the two syntypes have been found at TI or in Taiwanese herbaria (Tetsuo OhiToma pers. comm.). Collection Kawakami & Mori 1347 (TI) is the only material collected by Hayata of H. brownii before the publication of the taxon, however it is sterile and a neotype of H. brownii should be carefully selected among more recent fertile collections once the genus is revised. Heterostemma chrysanthum (Hasskarl) Boerlage (1899: 438) [Jan 1899] ≡Symphysicarpus chrysanthus Hasskarl (1857: 102) TYPE:—INDONESIA, Java, Banjuwangi, 1854, J.E. Teysmann (not found) Notes:—Hasskarl (1857: 438) indicated that Symphysicarpus was based on a specimen from Java collected by Teysmann in 1854. No suitable specimen has been found and a neotype will have to be selected when Heterostemma is revised. Heterostemma collinum Schlechter (1913: 156) [15 Apr 1913] TYPE:—PAPUA NEW GUINEA, ‘zwischen Gebüsch an Waldrändern bei der Kaulo-Etappe’, February 1908, R. Schlechter 17272 (B, destroyed); Schlechter (1913: 157), Fig. 11 A–K (lectotype here designated) (Fig. 3) Notes. Heterostemma collinum was described based on specimen ’Nordöstl Neu-Guinea: zwischen Gebüsch anWaldrändern bei der Kaulo-Etappe, ca. 180 m ü. M. (Schlechter n. 17272.—Blühend im Februar 1908)’. The B duplicate is lost (Hiepko 1978, Nicholas 1992) and no duplicates have been located. The illustration that accompanied the publication of H. collinum (Schlechter 1913: 157 Fig. 11 A–K) is to be considered as original material and is here selected as lectotype. Heterostemma cuspidatum Decaisne. (1844: 630) [mid Mar 1844] TYPE:—PHILIPPINES, Batangas, Luzon, 1841, H. Cuming 1449 (lectotype P [P03899078], here designated, isotypes BM [BM001125304], CGE, 2 duplicates, G, 2 duplicates, K [K000894691, K000894692], OXF, P [P03899073]) =Stapelia quadrangula Blanco (1837: 202) nom. illeg. non Stapelia quadrangula Forssk. in Forsskål & Niebuhr (1775: 51), Ditto Glossostelma Hook., nom. nud., “non Glossostelma Schlechter (1895: 321)”. TYPE:—PHILIPPINES, Luzon, Batangas, February 1915, A.D. Merrill species Blancoanae 807 (neotype K, here designated, isotype L [L2720409], BM) Notes:—Heterostemma cuspidatum is based on Cuming 1449 in P (Decaisne 1844). P houses two duplicates of Cuming 1449 [P03899073, P03899078]. The best-preserved sheet, [P03899078] is selected as lectotype of H. cuspidatum. Blanco collected very few specimens and none are available for S. quadrangula (Merrill 1918). Merrill’s interpretation of S. quadrangula as a synonym of H. cuspidatum is accepted and Merrill’s specimen (Merrill species Blancoanae 807 (K)) is selected as neotype for S. quadrangula. Heterostemma dalzellii Hooker (1883b: 48) [Jun 1883] TYPE:—INDIA, Vingorla, July 1852, N.A. Dalzell s.n.. (lectotype K [K000895026], designated by Kambale et al. (2015)) Notes:—Heterostemma dalzellii was based on specimens ‘Heterostemma sp. 2, The Concan; at Vingorla and Malwan, Dalzell, Stocks’. Dalzell s.n. [K000895026] was selected as lectotype for the name by Kambale et al. (2015). A syntype of Stocks s.n. is present at P [P03899001]. Despite Hooker (1883b) cited the Stocks specimens as ‘Heterostemma sp. 2’ it is likely that Stocks s.n labelled as ‘Heterostemma (3)’ at CAL [CAL17963] and K [K000895027, one not barcoded] are syntypes of H. dalzellii as Hookers’ Heterostemma sheets appear to be misnumbered (see also H. stellatum). 6 • Phytotaxa 263 (1) © 2016 Magnolia Press RODDA FIGURE 3. Lectotype (Iconotype) of Heterostemma collinum adapted from Fig. 11 in Schlechter (1913: 157 A–K). Parts L–R, here shaded, represent instead H. montanum. Heterostemma deccanense (Talbot) Swarupanandan & Mangaly in Swarupanandan et al. (1989: 255) (as ‘decanense’) ≡Oianthus deccanensis Talbot (1911: 260) [1911] TYPE:—INDIA, Maharashtra, Deccan Ghats, 18 miles west of Poona, August, W.A. Talbot s.n. (not found) Notes:—No Talbot material was located at BLAT, BM or K by Swarupanandan et al. (1989) and I confirm that there is no suitable lectotype of H. deccanense at BM or K. A neotype for H. deccanense will have to be selected when Heterostemma is revised. Heterostemma disciflorum (Hooker) Swarupanandan & Mangaly in Swarupanandan et al. (1989: 256) ≡ Oianthus disciflorus Hooker (1883b: 49) TYPE:—INDIA, Karnataka, Concan; ‘Heterostemma (2)’ Stocks s.n. (lectotype K [K000895024], designated by Kambale et al. (2015), isotype K [K000895023]) CHECKLIST AND TYPIFICATION OF HETEROSTEMMA Phytotaxa 263 (1) © 2016 Magnolia Press • 7 Notes:—The description of H. disciflorum was based on a specimen cited as ‘Western Peninsula, the Concan? Herb. Law. and Stocks’. Swarupanandan et al. (1989) indicated the type of H. disciflorum as ‘Law & Stocks s.n. (K, photo seen), India, Karnataka, Concan and Mysore’. I have located two sheets at K both bearing two labels, one is a Herb. Ind. Or. Hook. fil. & Thomson printed label, bearing locality as Concan, and collector Stocks s.n., the other from Canara & Mysore Mr Law? s.n. Since the attribution of the specimens to Law is doubtful I refer to these as Stocks s.n. Both specimens are well preserved, fertile and bear a manuscript dissection of the flowers. The duplicate [K000895024] was selected by Kambale et al. (2015) as lectotype for H. disciflorum. Heterostemma esquirolii (Léveillé) Tsiang (1936: 189) ≡ Pentasachme esquirolii Léveillé (1914: 43) [1914] TYPE:—CHINA, Kouy-Tcheou, Trou du hoeu hay tse, 9 August 1909, J. Esquirol 716 (lectotype E [E00275187], here designated, isotype K [K000895034]) Notes:—The description of P. esquirolii was based on ‘Trou du Hoeu Hay Be, J. Esquirol 716. Can Chouen, J. Cavalerie 3973, Aout 1905.12’. The Esquirol 716 duplicate located at E is a complete and well-preserved specimen and is designated as lectotype for H. esquirolii. A syntype Cavalerie 3973 is present at E [E00275188] and P [P03899037]. Heterostemma fimbriatum King & Gamble (1908: 558) [20 Feb 1908] TYPE:—MALAYSIA, Perak, Gunung Ijub, B. Scortechini 1220 (lectotype CAL [CAL17964], here designated , isotype K) Notes:—Heterostemma fimbriatum was based on Scortechini 1220. The only complete duplicate I found is at CAL, while the K duplicate is only a dissection by Gamble. Heterostemma gracile Kerr (1939: 458) TYPE:—THAILAND, Chiang Mai, Doi Chiang Dao, 3 November 1922, A.F.G. Kerr 6535 (lectotype BM [BM001014266], here designated, isotype E, K [K000894702], BM [BM001014266], BK [BK257729], L [L2720412], P [P00645988]) Notes:—The only material indicated for H. gracile by Kerr (1939) was Kerr 6536. Among the various duplicates available the BM specimen [BM001014266] is fertile, well preserved and bears a drawing of dissected flowers of the plant in Kerr’s hand and is therefore selected as lectotype. Heterostemma garrettii (Kerr) Rodda comb. nov. ≡ Dittoceras garrettii Kerr (1939: 459) TYPE:—THAILAND, Doi Angka, 2 June 1928, H.B.G. Garrett 534 (lectotype K [K000894722], here designated, isotype P [P03876173], drawing at BM) Notes:—The only material indicated for D. garrettii by Kerr (1939) was Garrett 534. Among the various duplicates available the K specimen [K000894722] is fertile and well preserved and is therefore selected as lectotype. Heterostemma grandiflorum Costantin (1912: 122) TYPE:—VIETNAM, Kiên Khê, 20 April 1885, H.F. Bon 2886 (lectotype P [P00645986], here designated, isotype P [P00645987]) Notes:—Heterostemma grandiflorum was based on materials indicated as ‘Khien-khé, pres Ninh-binh (Bon)’. Two specimens collected by Bon in Kiên Khê and identified as H. grandiflorum in Costantin’s hand are present in P. The duplicate in P [P00645986] is a well-preserved fertile specimen and is selected as lectotype here. Heterostemma herbertii Elmer (1919: 3074) =Heterostemma lucbanensis Elmer nom. nud. (Elmer 1938) TYPE:—PHILIPPINES, Luzon, Los Baños (Mt Makiling), Province of Laguna, June 1917, A.D.E. Elmer 17661 (Lectotype BO, designated by Forster & Liddle (1994), isotypes, A [A00076410], BM [BM000547171], C [C10006709], GH [GH00076411], K [K000894687], L, [L2720404], NY [NY00546775], P [P03899071], S [S12-12330], U [U0094915], US [US00111077], Z [Z1657]) Notes:—The lectotype for H. herbertii was designated by Forster & Liddle (1994). A second syntype, Elmer 18247 was mentioned by Elmer (1919). Duplicates of Elmer 18247 are found at A [A00076409], BM [BM000547170], C [C10006708], G, GH [GH00076408], K [K000894688], L, [L2720405], NY, [NY00546773], P [P03899072] S [S12-12329], U [U0094916], US [US00516759]. 8 • Phytotaxa 263 (1) © 2016 Magnolia Press RODDA Heterostemma javanicum Hasskarl (1857: 101) TYPE:—INDONESIA, Java [sylvas montosas Salak ad 1000-1500 m. s. m. altitudinem] (not found) Notes:—No suitable lectotype has been found among the materials examined. A neotype will be selected once the genus is revised. Heterostemma kaniense Schlechter (1913: 158) [15 Apr 1913] TYPE:—PAPUA NEW GUINEA, Kani, 18 Jan 1908, R. Schlechter 17213 (P lectotype [P03899070], here designated, isotype P [P03899069]) Notes:—The type of H. kaniense was indicated by Schlechter (1913) as ‘Nordöstl. Neu-Guinea: Liane in den Wäldern des Kani-Gebirges, ca. 800 m ü. M. (Schlechter n. 17213.—Blühend im Januar 1908)’. The B sheet is lost (Hiepko 1978; Nicholas 1992) and the P duplicate [P03899070] is selected as lectotype. Heterostemma lobulatum Li & Konta in Li et al. (2002: 93) TYPE:—CHINA, Yunnan, Xishuangbanna, Mung La County, Meng Xing Ho Hoiwa, 11 October 1988, Y.H. Li, F. Konta, J. Kitagawa 40, (holotype KUN [KUN0833170], isotypes KUN [KUN0833171, KUN0833172]) Heterostemma luteum Costantin (1912: 123) TYPE:—VIETNAM, Kien-khé in rupib. Dông Bâu, 19 May 1884, R.P. Bon 2602, (lectotype P [P00476452], here designated, isotype P [P00507826]) Notes:—Heterostemma luteum was described based on ‘Tonkin: Kien-khé, rochers de Dòng-bàú (Bon); Hanoi, haies (en fruit) (Balansa)’. Two duplicates of Bon 2602 from Kien-khé and annotated in Costantin’s handwriting as H. luteum and ‘in rupibus Dông Bâu’ are present in P herbarium and [P00476452] is here selected as lectotype for the name. Heterostemma luteum Costantin var. nigro-punctatum Costantin (1912: 124) (as ‘nigropunctata’) TYPE:—VIETNAM, Kien-khé, 14 May 1883, R.P. Bon 2153, (lectotype P [P00476453], here designated, isotype P [P00507827]) Notes:—The specimens mentioned by Costantin (1912) as H. luteum var. nigro-punctatum were indicated as ‘Tonkin: Kien-khé (Bon); Hanoi (Balansa)’. Two duplicates of Bon 2153 from Kien-khé and annotated in Costantin’s handwriting as H. luteum var. nigro-punctatum are present in P herbarium and [P00476453] is here selected as lectotype for the name. Heterostemma maculatum (Kerr) Rodda comb. nov. ≡ Dittoceras maculatum Kerr (1939: 459) TYPE:—THAILAND, Dan Sai, Pu Lom Lo. A.F.G Kerr 5776 (lectotype BM [BM00101426], here designated, isotypes BK [BK257726], E, K [K000894720, K000894721], L [L2727223], P [P03876171]) Notes:—The only material indicated for H. maculatum by Kerr (1939) was Kerr 5776. Among the various duplicates available the BM specimen [BM00101426] is fertile, well preserved and bears a drawing of dissected flowers of the plant in Kerr’s hand and is therefore selected as lectotype. Heterostemma magnificum Forster (1992: 73) TYPE:—AUSTRALIA, Northern Territory, SE Mt Howship, 18 February 1984, C.R. Dunlop 6642 & J. Russell-Smith (holotype DNA [DNA-D0023024], isotypes AD, BRI [BRI-AQ0412254], CANB, NSW) Heterostemma manillense Schauer in Walpers (1843: 365) TYPE:—PHILIPPINES, [In insula Luçon circa praedium Hali-Hali, Septembri] (not found) Notes:—The plants described in Walpers (1843) were collected by Meyen during his Voyage in the Prinzess Louis (1830-32). The first set of botanical collections was deposited in B (now destroyed), and duplicates from the Philippines were deposited at the Herbarium of the University of Kiel (KIEL; van Steenis-Kruseman 1950), where no Meyen material of Heterostemma has been found. A neotype will be selected once the genus is revised. CHECKLIST AND TYPIFICATION OF HETEROSTEMMA Phytotaxa 263 (1) © 2016 Magnolia Press • 9 Heterostemma membranifolium (Lauterbach & Schumann) Schlechter (1913: 158) [15 Apr 1913] ≡Gongronema membranifolium Lauterbach & Schumann in Schumann (1898: 140) TYPE:—PAPUA NEW GUINEA, [Bismarck-Archipel: Neu-Pommern, im Waldtale bei Ralum auf der Gazelle-Halbinsel (F. Dahl, blühend im Januar 1897)] (not found) Notes:—The type of H. membranifolium in B is lost (Hiepko 1978; Nicholas 1992) and no duplicates have been found. A neotype will be selected once the genus is revised. Heterostemma menghaiense (Zhu & Wang) Gilbert & Li in Gilbert et al. (1995: 9) [27 March 1995] ≡Heterostemma villosum var. menghaiense Zhu & Wang (1994: 27) TYPE:—CHINA, Yunnan, Xishuangbanna, Menghai, Mengsong, 1000 m, 6 May 1989, H. Zhu & H. Wang 2443 (lectotype HITBC [HITBC62875], here designated, isotypes HITBC [HITBC62876, HITBC62877, HITBC62878]) =Heterostemma ferrugineum C.Y.Wu nom. nud. (Name annotated by C. Y. Wu on numerous specimens in KUN) =Heterostemma ferruginevillosa H.Chu & H.Wang nom. nud. (Name annotated on type collections of Heterostemma menghaiense in HITBC) Notes:—Gilbert et al. (1995) mentioned the holotype of Heterostemma menghaiense as Zhu & Wang 2443 (HITBC) collected on 14 May 1989. Upon examination of materials at HITBC I have found four duplicates of Zhu & Wang 2443, collected on 6 May 1989. Therefore the collection date needs to be corrected and a lectotype must be selected. The duplicate [HITBC62875] is a well-preserved fertile specimen with a drawing of the pollinia and is here selected as lectotype for H. menghaiense. Heterostemma montanum Schlechter (1913: 158) [15 Apr 1913] TYPE:—PAPUA NEW GUINEA, Finisterre Range, 13 January 1909, R. Schlechter 19057 (lectotype K [K000894690], here designated, isotype BR [BR0000005211401], P [P03899068]) Notes:—The original material of H. montanum was indicated by Schlechter (1913) as ‘Nordöstl. Neu-Guinea: Liane in Nebelwäldern des Finisterre-Gebirges, ca. 1300 m ü. M. (Schlechter n. 19057 blühend im Januar 1907)’. The B material is lost (Hiepko 1978, Nicholas 1992) but duplicates are found at BR, K and P. Specimen [K000894690] is fertile and well-preserved and is therefore selected as lectotype of H. montanum. Heterostemma oblongifolium Costantin (1912: 120) TYPE:—LAOS, Phon Thane, s.d., C.J Spire 31 (lectotype P [P00645990], here designated, isotype P [P00645989]) =Heterostemma venosum C.Y.Wu nom. nud. (name annotated on specimen KUN0267875 and others) Notes:—Specimens of H. oblongifolium were indicated by Costantin (1912) as ‘Laos: Phon-thane (Spire) Nom Vulg. Mak bouek pha’. In P there are two specimen collected by Spire in Laos labelled as H. oblongifolium by Costantin. They are both fruiting. The first, [P00645989], does not bear any collection locality, while the second, [P00645990], was collected in Phon Thane and is annotated with the common name ‘Mak bouek pha’ This second specimen is matching the protologue and is therefore selected as lectotype of H. oblongifolium. A careful selection of a flowering epitype will be necessary for the correct application of the name. Heterostemma pingtaoi He & Lin in Lin et al. (2010: 60) [18 Mar 2010] TYPE:—CHINA, Hainan, Jianfengling, 27 July 2006, S.Y. He et al. 607271 (holotype, CANT, n.v.) Heterostemma piperifolium King & Gamble (1908: 557) [20 Feb 1908] TYPE:—MALAYSIA, Perak, open jungle near B. P. River, August 1885, King’s Collector 7973 (lectotype K [K000894706], here designated, isotypes CAL [CAL17965], CGE, K [K000894708], P [P03899027]) Notes:—The materials for H. piperifolium were cited as ‘Perak, at Kwala Dipang, Ridley 9619; at Larut, 200 to 500 ft., King’s Collector 2338, 7973, at Ijuk, Scortechini 1097, 1150’. King’s Collector 7973 (K) is a well-preserved fertile specimen bearing a dissection and drawings of flower parts in Gamble’s hand and is therefore selected as lectotype for H. piperifolium. The following syntypes have been localised: King’s Collector 2338 [K000894705]; Ridley 9619 [K000894709]; Scortechini 1097 [K000894703]; Scortechini 1150 [K000894704]. 10 • Phytotaxa 263 (1) © 2016 Magnolia Press RODDA Heterostemma piperifolium var. cordatum King & Gamble (1908: 558) [20 Feb 1908] TYPE:—MALAYSIA, Perak, s.d., B. Scortechini s.n. (lectotype K [K000894704], here designated) Notes:—The only material listed for this subspecies was ‘Perak, Scortechini’. Only one Scortechini s.n. specimen at K is annotated as H. piperifolium var. cordatum in possibly King’s hand and is here selected as lectotype for the name. Heterostemma renchangii Tsiang (1936: 187) TYPE:—CHINA, Kwangsi, 15 li S. of Nee Bai, border of Kweichow, 29 June 1928, R.C. Ching 6310 (holotype SYS, n.v., isotypes IBK [IBK00191445], NY [NY00546774], PE [PE00029513]) Notes:—Tsiang (1936: 122) noted that the types for the new species by him described are deposited at the herbarium of the Botanical Institute, Sun Yatsen University (SYS) unless otherwise indicated. I have not been able to locate the holotype of H. renchangii at SYS, and in case it is missing the PE duplicate [PE00029513] is to be intended as a lectotype, here designated under Art. 9.9 of the ICN (McNeill et al. 2012). Heterostemma samoense (Gray) Forster (1992: 78) TYPE:—SAMOA, Savaii, 1838-1842, U.S. Expl. Exped. B.C. Seemann s.n. (lectotype US [US00112405], designated by Smith (1988), isotype NY [NY00318818]) ≡Tylophora samoensis Gray (1862: 334) =Tylophora samoensis Schlechter (1908: 4), nom. illeg. ≡ Tylophora powellii Hochreutiner (1936: 476) [January 1936] [nom. nov. for T. samoensis Schltr.] (synonymised by Forster 1992) TYPE:—SAMOA, T. Powell 33g (lectotype K [K000894686], here designated, isotype K) Notes:—According to Smith (1988: 113) and Forster (1992) the holotype of H. samoense is US sheet no. US62244 [US00112405]. The specimen is not a holotype as Gray (1862) did not provide any type information and only mentioned the collection locality as ‘Savaii, one of the Samoan islands’. However Smith (1988) counts as an effective lectotypification under Art. 9.9 of the ICN (McNeill et al. 2012). Schlechter (1908) indicated two syntypes for T. samoense, Betche 38 and Powell 33g. A fertile well-preserved duplicate of Powell 33g is present at K and is here selected as lectotype. Heterostemma siamicum Craib (1911: 418) TYPE:—THAILAND, Chiang Mai, 14 August 1910, A.F.G. Kerr 1324 (lectotype BM [awaiting digitisation], here designated, isotypes K [K000894700, K000894701]) Notes:—The only material indicated for H. siamicum by Kerr (1939) was Kerr 1324. Among the various duplicates available the BM specimen [awaiting digitisation] is fertile, well preserved and bears a drawing of dissected flowers of the plant in Kerr’s hand and is therefore selected as lectotype. Heterostemma sinicum Tsiang (1936: 190) TYPE:—CHINA, Hainan, Boting, 24 June 1935, F.C. How 72982 (holotype SYS, n.v., isotype A [A00016232], IBK [IBK00097647, IBK00097648]) Notes:—Tsiang (1936: 122) noted that the type specimens for the new species by him described are deposited at the herbarium of the Botanical Institute, Sun Yatsen University, (SYS) unless otherwise indicated. I have not been able to locate the holotype of H. sinicum at SYS, and in case it is missing [A00016232] is to be intended as a lectotype under Art. 9.9 of the ICN (McNeill et al. 2012). The two duplicates at IBK [IBK00097647, IBK00097648] are sterile and therefore not the preferred specimens for the selection of a lectotype. Heterostemma stellatum Hooker (1883b: 47) [Jun 1883] TYPE:—INDIA, Meghalaya, Khasia Mountains, Myrung, ‘Heterostemma (5)’, J.D. Hooker & J. Thomson s.n. (lectotype K [K000895031], here designated, isotype K, [K000895030]) Notes:—Hooker indicated H. stellatum as ‘Heterostemma 3’ collected in Khasia Mountains, Myrung. However specimens labelled as ‘Heterostemma 3’ at K belong to H. dalzellii, collected by Stocks in Concan. It is therefore likely that the numbering of the Heterostemma sheets do not match with the numbers indicated in the descriptions (see also H. dalzellii). CHECKLIST AND TYPIFICATION OF HETEROSTEMMA Phytotaxa 263 (1) © 2016 Magnolia Press • 11 Heterostemma suberosum Costantin (1912: 124) TYPE:—VIETNAM, ‘moï: Bú tac’, September 186(?)5, Pierre s.n. (lectotype P [P00645992], here designated) Notes:—The type of H. suberosum was indicated by Costantin (1912) as ‘Cochinchine: Song-lu (Pierre), Nom moï: Bú tac’. In P I have found two sheets, the first [P00645991] identified as H. suberosum in Costantin’s handwriting, collected by Pierre in Song Lu in March 1877. The other [P00645992] collected by Pierre in September 186(?)5 and is annotated ‘moï: Bú tac’. Both are suitable lectotypes, however, since [P00645991] is a leafless sterile specimen, [P00645992] is instead selected as lectotype as despite being sterile it has two complete leaves. An epitype will have to be selected to allow correct application of the name when Heterostemma is revised. Heterostemma succosum Kerr (1939: 458) TYPE:—THAILAND, Chiang Mai, South border Ban Tam Kaw, right border Me Lao Me Kok, 28 August 1924, H.B.G. Garrett 191 (lectotype K [K000894698], here designated, isotypes, K [K000894699], L [L0004311], P [P03899002]) Notes:—The only material indicated for H. succosum by Kerr (1939) was Garrett 191. Among the various duplicates available the K specimen [K000894698] is fertile, well preserved and bears a drawing of dissected flowers of the plant in Kerr’s hand and is therefore selected as lectotype Heterostemma tanjorense Wight & Arnott in Wight (1834: 42) [Dec 1834] (as ‘tanjorensis’) TYPE:—INDIA, Sandy places in Tanjore, Porto Novo, 22 November 1810, J. G. Klein, s.n., [Herb. R. Wight propr. 1527] [=Wall. Cat. 8178]. (lectotype K [K000895029], designated by Kambale et al. (2015), isotypes K [K000974157], LIV [sheet no. 1952.121.4426], possible isotypes A [A00076435], BM [BM001014269], BR [BR0000006962883], C [C10006711, C10006710], CGE (3 duplicates), E [E00179589, E00179590, E00179591, E00179592, E00775906, E00775907, E00775908], HAL [HAL0114443], K (3 duplicates), MPU [MPU019215], OXF, P [P03899125, P03899126, P03899131] =Heterostemma tanjorense Wight & Arnott var. zeylanicum Hooker (1883b: 48) [Jun 1883] (synonymised by Huber 1983) TYPE:—SRI LANKA, 1856, G.H.K Thwaites C.P. 1859 (lectotype K [K000895028], here designated, possible isotype P [P03899127]) =Stapelia involucrata nom. nud. (ex [K000895029], [E00179589]) =Stapelia volubilis nom. nud. (ex Herb. R. Wight. Prop., K) Notes:—The materials listed by Wight for H. tanjorense are clarified by Noltie (2006) as ‘[Porto Novo], herb. Madras, Wall. Asclep 112. [=Wall. Cat. 8178]. Sandy places in Tanjore, Wight, WC 1527’. Huber (1983) indicated the type of H. tanjorense as ‘Herb. Wight propr. 1527 (K)’. This would be an effective lectotypification under Art. 9.9 of the ICN (McNeill et al. 2012). However at K there are four specimens bearing HRWP 1527. Kambale et al. (2015) selected [K000895029] as lectotype for H. tanjorense, a specimen also labelled ‘Stapelia involucrata, Porto Novo, Novb. 22, 1810’. In LIV there is a specimen labelled ‘Stapelia involucrata, Dr. Klein, Porto Nov. Nov 22 1810’ pencilled ‘Heterostemma tanjorense Wall 8178’ in Wight’s hand. This is an isotype and the only one clarifying the name of the collector (J.G. Klein). Another K specimen (Fig. 1) bears a manuscript description of the taxon by Wight’s hand but does not bear any collection information. Noltie (2006: 169) indicated that ‘The Wight number (1527) seems to include Missionary material and more than one of his own collections’ therefore sheets that only bear Wight’s number and no further data are here considered as possible isotypes. Specimen [C10006712], labelled ‘1527’ does not belong to Heterostemma and can’t be considered an isotype. The type of H. tanjorense var. zeylanicum was indicated by Hooker (1883b) as ‘H. tanjorense, Thwaites Enum. 198.-Ceylon Central Province, ascending to 4000 ft’. Hooker & Thwaites (1864) mentioned C.P 1856 (1859) as H. tanjorense. One sheet of C.P. 1859, annotated Thwaites Enum. n. 198. is present at K and is here designated as lectotype for H. tanjorense var. zeylanicum. Heterostemma tsoongii Tsiang (1936: 192) TYPE:—CHINA, Guangdong, Ling-shan, 9 July 1908, K.K. Tsoong 1840 (lectotype Herb Tsoong, now in PE [PE00029445], here designated, isotype IBSC [IBSC0005671]) Notes:—Tsiang (1936) indicated the type of H. tsoongii as Tsoong 1840 in Tsoong’s personal herbarium. Specimen [PE00029445] is annotated by Tsiang as type for the name and it can be assumed that it originates from Tsoong’s herbarium. However it is impossible to establish if [PE00029445] was the only duplicate of Tsoong 1840 in Tsoong’s personal herbarium therefore it is here designated as lectotype. 12 • Phytotaxa 263 (1) © 2016 Magnolia Press RODDA Heterostemma urceolatum Dalzell (1852: 295) ≡Oianthus urceolatus (Dalzell) Bentham (1876: 12 t.1191) TYPE:—INDIA, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Belgaum, August, Dr. Ritchie 1112 (lectotype K [K000895025], here designated, isotype E) Notes:—Swarupanandan et al. (1989) indicated the type of H. urceolatum as ‘Dalzell s.n. India, Maharashtra, Belgaum Dt. Belgaum (K, photo seen)’ and Kambale et al. (2015) confirmed the lectotypification following Art. 9.9 of the ICN (McNeill et al. 2012). However, I could not find any specimen of H. urceolatum at K collected by Dalzell. Dalzell (1852) did not indicate any materials for H. urceolatum but stated that the species ‘Crescit rara in collibus prope Belagaum; fl. Julio’.This is likely a reference to Ritchie 1112 [K000895025] from Belgaum and the only specimen of the taxon at K. The sheet has numerous sketches of dissected flowers drawn on the sheet mounting paper itself. The specimen is here confirmed as lectotype for H. urceolatum. Heterostemma vasudevanii Swarupanandan & Mangaly in Swarupanandan et al. (1989: 257), (as ‘vasudevani’) TYPE:—INDIA, Kerala, Idukki distr., Sabrimala, 1976, K. Swarupanandan 13716 (holotype MH n.v., isotypes CALI n.v., CAL n.v., KFRI n.v., K [K000895022], LD n.v.) Notes:—The isotypes of Swarupanandan 13716 are denoted by a letter added to the collector number. (Starting from A for the holotype, to F for the LD duplicate) Heterostemma villosum Costantin (1912: 122) TYPE:—VIETNAM, ‘ad ripas fluminis Song Be’, November 1876, Pierre s.n. (lectotype P [P03899118], here designated, isotype P [P03899117]) Notes:—Numerous specimens are cited by Costantin (1912) in the protologue of H. villosum ‘Cambodge: (Godefroy, Harmand). Cochinchine: environs de Saigon; plaine des Tombeaux (Lefevre); chemins, bords de la riviere Songbe (Pierre, Thorel). Laos: (Massie)’. In P the available syntypes are Lefevre 52, Saigon, plaine des Tombeaux 1 September 1864, [P03899097], Massie s.n., ‘Plantes du Laos, entrees le 30 Avril 1895’ [P03899098], Harmand s.n. dubiously from Cambodia or from Saigon [P03899101], Harmand 957 [P03899099] and Pierre s.n. specimens collected near the Song Be river in November 1876 [P03899117 and P03899118]. All are identified as H. villosum in Costantin’s hand. The latter specimen [P03899118] is the best preserved and is selected as the lectotype for H. villosum. A possible syntype labelled ‘environs de Saigon; plaine des Tombeaux s. coll 4844’ is present in L [L2720438]. Heterostemma wallichii Wight (1834: 42) [Dec 1834] TYPE:—Nepal, Sheopore, Herb. R. Wight. Prop., Wallich Asclep. no. 154 [=Wall. Cat. 8179] (lectotype K [K000895033], here designated, isotypes CAL [CAL17966] (as Wall. Cat. 8179), E [E00179593], K (as Wall. Cat. 8179), [K000974159, K000974158] and four more duplicates) =Heterostemma yunnanense W.T.Wang nom. nud. (from specimen KUN0267903) Notes:—Wight (1832) mentioned ‘Wall. Asclep. n. 154 (absque nom.)—Sheopore; Wallich’ as the materials he based H. wallichii upon. Noltie (2006) clarified the type of H. wallichii as ‘Sheopore [Nepal], Wallich, Wall. Asclep. 154 [=Wall. Cat. 8179]. Isotype at E annotated with the locality Sheopore and ‘Wall. Ascl. n. 154’. Specimen [K000895033] belonged to Wight’s personal working herbarium and is a well-preserved specimen with an attached description of the species and a sketch of a dissected flower in Wight’s hand. It is therefore selected as lectotype of H. wallichii. Heterostemma xuansonense Tran & Kim (2010: 367) [13 Sep 2010] TYPE:—VIETNAM. Phu Tho, Thanh Son, Xuan Son, 2 July 2003, V.X. Phuong 6360 (holotype MO n.v.; isotype, HN, n.v.) Dregea stellaris (Ridley) Ridley (1923: 387) ≡Marsdenia stellaris Ridley (1914: 40) ≡Dittoceras stellaris (Ridley) Bullock (1957: 513) [23 Feb 1957] TYPE:—MALAYSIA, Selangor, Gunong Mengkuang Lebah, Jan 1913, Dyak collectors s.n. (holotype K [K000894719]) Notes:—Marsdenia stellaris was described based on a single specimens collected on Gunong Mengkuang, Selangor, Malaysia and deposited at K. Specimen [K000894719] is annotated as ‘type’ in Ridley’s hand and is therefore the holotype for D. stellaris. The specimen has a label in Ridley’s hand that bears the name of N.C. Robinson. The specimen was not collected by Robinson but by local Dyak collector as indicated by Robinson himself (Ridley 1914: 28). The CHECKLIST AND TYPIFICATION OF HETEROSTEMMA Phytotaxa 263 (1) © 2016 Magnolia Press • 13 taxon is here treated because it was combined in Dittoceras by Bullock (1957: 513), however a new combination in Heterostemma is not needed because the correct name is Dregea stellaris (Ridley) Ridley. Index to the names Dittoceras andersonii Hook.f. ≡Heterostemma andersonii (Hook.f) Rodda Dittoceras garrettii Kerr ≡Heterostemma garrettii (Kerr) Rodda Dittoceras maculatum Kerr ≡Heterostemma maculatum (Kerr) Rodda Dittoceras stellaris (Ridl.) Bullock ≡Dregea stellaris (Ridl.) Ridl. Dregea stellaris (Ridl.) Ridl. Gongronema membranifolium Lauterb. & K.Schum. ≡Heterostemma membranifolium Schltr. Heterostemma acuminatum Decne Heterostemma alatum Wight Heterostemma andersonii (Hook.f.) Rodda Heterostemma angustilobum Schltr. Heterostemma balansae Cost. Heterostemma beddomei (Hook.f.) Swarupan. & Mangaly Heterostemma brownii Hayata Heterostemma chrysanthum (Hassk.) Boerl. Heterostemma collinum Schltr. Heterostemma cuspidatum Decne Heterostemma dalzellii Hook.f. Heterostemma deccanense (Talbot) Swarupan. & Mangaly Heterostemma disciflorum (Hook.f.) Swarupan. & Mangaly Heterostemma esquirolii (H.Lév.) Tsiang Heterostemma fimbriatum King & Gamble Heterostemma gracile Kerr Heterostemma grandiflorum Cost. Heterostemma garrettii (Kerr) Rodda Heterostemma herbertii Elmer Heterostemma javanicum Hassk. Heterostemma kaniense Schltr. Heterostemma lobulatum Y.H.Li & Konta Heterostemma luteum Cost. Heterostemma luteum Cost. var. nigro-punctatum Cost. Heterostemma maculatum (Kerr) Rodda Heterostemma magnificum P.I.Forst. Heterostemma manillense Schauer Heterostemma membranifolium (Lauterb. & K.Schum.) Schltr. Heterostemma menghaiense (H.Zhu & H.Wang) M.G.Gilbert & P.T.Li Heterostemma montanum Schltr. Heterostemma oblongifolium Cost. Heterostemma papuanum Schltr. =Heterostemma acuminatum Decne Heterostemma pingtaoi S.Y.He & J.Y.Lin Heterostemma piperifolium King & Gamble Heterostemma piperifolium var. cordatum King & Gamble Heterostemma renchangii Tsiang Heterostemma samoense (A.Gray) P.I.Forst. (1992: 78) Heterostemma siamicum Craib Heterostemma sinicum Tsiang Heterostemma stellatum Hook.f. Heterostemma suberosum Cost. 14 • Phytotaxa 263 (1) © 2016 Magnolia Press RODDA Heterostemma succosum Kerr Heterostemma tanjorense Wight & Arn. Heterostemma tanjorense Wight & Arn. var. zeylanicum Hook.f. =Heterostemma tanjorense Wight & Arn. Heterostemma tsoongii Tsiang Heterostemma urceolatum Dalzell Heterostemma vasudevanii Swarupan. & Mangaly Heterostemma villosum Cost. Heterostemma villosum var. menghaiense H.Zhu & H.Wang ≡Heterostemma menghaiense (H.Zhu & H.Wang) M.G.Gilbert & P.T.Li Heterostemma wallichii Wight Heterostemma xuansonense T.B.Tran & J.Hw.Kim Marsdenia stellaris Ridl. (1914: 40) ≡Dregea stellaris (Ridl.) Ridl. Oianthus beddomei Hook.f. ≡Heterostemma beddomei (Hook.f.) Swarupan. & Mangaly Oianthus deccanensis Talbot ≡Heterostemma deccanense (Talbot) Swarupan. & Mangaly Oianthus disciflorus Hook.f. ≡Heterostemma disciflorum (Hook.f.) Swarupan. & Mangaly Oianthus urceolatus (Dalzell) Benth. ≡Heterostemma urceolatum Dalzell Pentasachme esquirolii H.Lév. ≡Heterostemma esquirolii (H.Lév.) Tsiang Stapelia quadrangula Blanco =Heterostemma cuspidatum Decne Symphysicarpus chrysanthus Hassk. ≡Heterostemma chrysanthum Boerl. Tylophora calcarata Benth. =Heterostemma acuminatum Decne Tylophora samoensis A.Gray ≡Heterostemma samoense (A.Gray) P.I.Forst. Tylophora samoensis Schltr. =Heterostemma samoense (A.Gray) P.I.Forst. Tylophora powellii Hochr. =Heterostemma samoense (A.Gray) P.I.Forst. Acknowledgements This study is part of an on-going research project on the systematics of Asian Apocynaceae. Financial support was received from the National Parks Board (Singapore) that sponsored numerous herbarium study trips to Asian and European institutions. I would like to thank the curators of B, BK, BKF, BM, BO, BR, CAL, CGE, G, HITBC, HN, IBSC, K, KIEL, KUN, L, LIV, OXF, P, SAN, SAR, SING, TI, US, VNM and Z herbaria for allowing access and/or for providing high quality images of herbarium specimens. Henry Noltie is thanked for his help with nomenclature and for sharing with me his knowledge on early collectors in India. Finally I would like to thank two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments on the manuscript. References Backer, C.A. & Bakhuizen van den Brink, R.C. (1965) Asclepiadaceae. In: Backer, C.A. & Bakhuizen van den Brink, R.C. (Eds.) Flora of Java. 2. N.V.P. Noordhoff, Groningen, pp. 244–274. Bentham, G. (1869) Tylophora. In: Bentham, G. & Mueller, F. von (Eds.) Flora Australiensis. 4. L. Reeve, London, pp. 333–336. Bentham, G. (1876) Oianthus. In: Hooker, J.D. (Ed.) Icones plantarum 12: 79–80. Blanco, F.M. (1837) Flora de Filipinas. Sto. Thomas, Manila, 887 pp. Boerlage, J.G. (1899) Asclepiadaceae In: Boerlage, J.G. (Ed.) Handleiding tot de Kennis der Flora van Nederlandsch Indië. 3. E.J. Brill, Leiden, pp. 401–442. Bullock. A.A. (1957) Notes on African Asclepiadaceae VIII. Kew Bulletin 11: 503–522. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/4109137 Costantin, J. (1912) Heterostemma. In: Lecomte, P.H. (Ed.) Flore Générale de l’Indo-Chine 4 Masson & Co., Paris, pp. 119–125. Craib, W.G. (1911) Contributions to the Flora of Siam LIII(II) Bulletin of Miscellaneous Information Kew 1911: 385–474. Dalzell, N.A. (1852) Contributions to the Botany of Western India. Hooker’s Journal of Botany and Kew Garden Miscellany 4: 289–295. Decaisne, J. (1838) Etudes sur quelques genres et especes de la famille des Asclepiadees. Annales des Sciences Naturelles; Botanique 9: 257–348. Decaisne, J. (1844) Heterostemma In: Candolle, A.L.P.P. de (Ed.) Prodromus Systematis Naturalis Regni Vegetabilis 8 Fortin, Masson et CHECKLIST AND TYPIFICATION OF HETEROSTEMMA Phytotaxa 263 (1) © 2016 Magnolia Press • 15 sociorum, Paris, p. 630. Elmer, A.D.E. (1919) New woody plants from Mount Maquiling. Leaflets of Philippine Botany 8: 3069–3105. Elmer, A.D.E. (1938) Notes on Asclepiadaceae. Leaflets of Philippine Botany 10: 3543–3599. Endress, M.E. & Bruyns, P.V. (2000) A revised classification of the Apocynaceae s.l. The Botanical Review 66: 1–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf02857781 Endress, M.E., Liede-Schumann, S. & Meve, U. (2014) An updated classification for Apocynaceae. Phytotaxa 159 (3): 175–194. http://doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.159.3.2 Forster, P.I. (1992) A taxonomic revision of Heterostemma Wight & Arn. (Asclepiadaceae: Stapelieae) in Australia and the Western Pacific. Australian Systematic Botany 5: 71–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/SB9920071 Forster, P.I. & Liddle, D.J. (1994) Type Collections of Asclepiadaceae at Herbarium Bogoriense (BO). Australian Systematic Botany 7: 507–519. http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/SB9940507 Forsskål, P. & Niebuhr, C. (1775) Flora Aegyptiaco-Arabica. officina Mölleri, Copenhagen, 220 pp. Gilbert, M.G., Stevens, W.D., & Li, P.T. (1995) Notes on the Asclepiadaceae of China. Novon 5: 1–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3391820 Gray, A. (1862) Notes upon a Portion of Dr. Seemann’s recent Collection of dried Plants Gathered in the Feejee Islands. Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 5: 314–352. Hasskarl, J.K. (1857) Plantarum nonnullarum Javanicarum e familiis Asclepiadearum et Apocynearum adumbrationes. Flora 40: 97– 106. Hayata, B. (1911) Materials for a Flora of Formosa. Journal of the College of Science, Imperial University of Tokyo 30: 1–47.1 Hiepko, P. (1978) Die erhaltenen Teile der Sammlungen des Botanischen Museums Berlin-Dahlem (B) aus der Zeit vor 1943. Willdenowia. 8: 389–400. Hochreutiner, B.P.G. (1936) Plantae Hochreutineranae. Candollea 6: 354–488. Hooker, J.D. (1883a) Dittoceras. In: Hooker, J.D. (Ed.) Icones plantarum 5: 17–18, t. 1422. Hooker, J.D. (1883b) Asclepiadeae In: Hooker, J.D. (Ed.) The Flora of British India 4. L. Reeve, London, pp. 1–78. Hooker, J.D. (1884) Oianthus beddomei. In: Hooker, J.D. (Ed.) Icones plantarum 15: 52–53, t. 1466. Huber, H. (1983) Heterostemma. In: Dassanayake, M.D. & Fosberg F.R. (Eds.) A revised handbook to the flora of Ceylon 4. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, pp. 106–107. Jagtap, A.P. & Singh, N.P. (1999) Asclepiadaceae. In: Fascicles of Flora of India 24. Botanical Survey of India, pp. 1–284. Kambale, S.S., Kamble, M.Y. & Yadav, S.R. (2015) Heterostemmas of the Northern Western Ghats, India and their typifications. Asklepios 121: 3–10. Kerr, A.F.G. (1939) Contributions to the Flora of Siam. Additamentum LII. Kew Bulletin 1939: 556–465. King, G. & Gamble, J.S. (1908) Heterostemma In: Materials for a Flora of the Malayan Peninsula. The journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal 74: 556–558. Léveillé, H. (1914) Flore du Kouy Tcheou. H. Léveillé. Le Mans, 535 pp. Li, P.T., Gilbert, M.G. & Stevens, W.D. (1995). Heterostemma. In: Wu, Z.Y. & Raven, P.H. (Eds.) Flora of China 16. Science Press, Beijing, and Missouri Botanical Garden Press, St. Louis. pp. 263–265. Li, Y.H., Konta, F. & Kitagawa, J. (2002) A new species of Heterostemma lobulatum in the family Asclepiadaceae. Bulletin of the National Science Museum. Series B, Botany 28: 93–98. Lin, J., He, S., Li, M. & Lin, G. (2010). Heterostemma pingtaoi (Apocynaceae, Asclepiadoideae), a New Species from Hainan, China. Novon 20: 60–62. http://doi.org/10.3417/2008024 McNeill, J., Buck, W.R., Demoulin, V., Greuter, W., Hawkworth, D.L., Herendeen, P.S., Knapp, S., Marhold, K., Prado, J., Prud’homme van Reine, W.F., Smith, G.F., Wiersema, J.H. & Turland, N.J. (2012) International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (Melbourne Code). Regnum Vegetabile 154. Koeltz Scientific Books, Königstein, 205 pp. Merrill, E.D. (1918a) Species Blancoanae. Manila Bureau of Printing, Manila, 423 pp. Meve, U. & Liede, S. (2002) A molecular phylogeny and generic rearrangement of the stapelioid Ceropegieae (ApocynaceaeAsclepiadoideae). Plant Systematics and Evolution 234: 171–209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00606-002-0220-2 Meve, U., & Liede, S. (2004). Subtribal division of Ceropegieae (Apocynaceae-Asclepiadoideae). Taxon 53: 61–72. Meyer, E.H.F. (1838) Commentariorum de Plantis Africae Australioris 199. Leipzig, Leopoldum Voss, 326 pp. Nicholas, A. (1992) The Asclepiadaceous works of Rudolf F. Schlechter (1872–1925). Willdenowia. 22: 215–264. Noltie, H.J. (2006) The Botany of Robert Wight. Regnum Vegetabile 145. A.R.G. Gantner, Ruggell, 579 pp. 16 • Phytotaxa 263 (1) © 2016 Magnolia Press RODDA Ridley, H.N. (1914) On a collection of plants from Guning Mengkuang Lebah, Selangor. Journal of the Federated Malay States Museums. Kuala Lumpur 5: 28–50. Ridley, H.N. (1923) The Flora of the Malay Peninsula vol. 2. London, Reeve & Co. 672 pp. Schlechter, R. (1895) Two new genera of Asclepiadeae. Journal of botany, British and foreign 33: 321–322. Schlechter, R. (1905) Heterostemma. In: Schumann, K. & Lauterbach, K. (Eds.) Nachträge zur Flora der deutschen Schutzgebiete in der Südsee. Gebrüder Borntraeger, Leipzig. 446 pp. Schlechter, R. (1908) Beiträge zur Kenntnis der Asclepiadaceen des Monsum-Gebietes. Botanische Jahrbücher für Systematik, Pflanzengeschichte und Pflanzengeographie 40 (Beibl. 92): 1–45. Schlechter, R. (1913) Die Asclepiadaceen von Deutsch-Neu-Guinea. Botanische Jahrbücher für Systematik, Pflanzengeschichte und Pflanzengeographie 50: 81–164. Schlechter, R. (1915) Asclepiadaceae Philippinenses II. Repertorium Specierum Novarum Regni Vegetabilis 13: 554–566. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/fedr.19150133604 Schumann, K., (1898) Die Flora von Neu-Pommern. Notizblatt des Königl. Botanischen Gartens und Museums zu Berlin 13: 1–158. Smith, A.C. (1988) Flora Vitiensis Nova 4. SB Printers Inc. Honolulu, 377 pp. Stafleu, F.A. & Cowan, R. (1976–) Taxonomic Literature: A selective guide to botanical publications and collections with dates, commentaries and types. Bohn, Scheltema & Holkema, Utrecht. Available from:http://www.sil.si.edu/digitalcollections/tl-2/index. cfm van Steenis-Kruseman, M.J. (1950) Flora Malesiana 1. Noordhoff-Kolff N.V. Jakarta, 639 pp. Swarupanandan, K., Sasidharan, N. & Mangaly, J.K. (1989) A reconsideration of the generic circumscription of Heterostemma Wight & Arn. (Asclepiadaceae) and a new species from India. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 101: 249–259. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8339.1989.tb00158.x Talbot, W.A. (1911) Forest Flora of the Bombay Presidency, 2. Govt. at the Photozincographic Dept. Poona. Tran, T.B. & Kim, J.H, (2010) A New Species of Heterostemma (Apocynaceae, Asclepiadoideae) from Vietnam. Novon: A Journal for Botanical Nomenclature 20: 367–370. http://doi.org/10.3417/2009002 Tsiang, Y. (1936) Notes on the Asiatic Apocynales III. Sunyatsenia 3: 121–239. Walpers, G. (1843) Cruciferas, Capparideas, Calycereas et Compositas quas Meyenius in orbis circumnavigatione collegit, enumerat novasque describit. Nova acta physico-medica Academiae Caesareae Leopoldino-Carolinae Naturae Curiosum 19 (Suppl. 1): 247– 296. Wight, R. (1834) Contributions to the Botany of India. Parbury, Allen & Co., London, 136 pp. Zhu, H. & Wang, H. (1994) Contributions to the Flora of Xishuangbanna (2). Acta Botanica Yunnanica 16: 25–28. CHECKLIST AND TYPIFICATION OF HETEROSTEMMA Phytotaxa 263 (1) © 2016 Magnolia Press • 17