CC BY
23
УДК 582.683.2 (571)
D.A. German Д.А. Герман
TYPIFICATION OF SELECTED NAMES OF CRUCIFERAE TAXA FROM SIBERIA AND
SOME NEIGHBORING REGIONS
ТИПИФИКАЦИЯ НЕКОТОРЫХ НАЗВАНИЙ ТАКСОНОВ КРЕСТОЦВЕТНЫХ (CRUCIFERAE) СИБИРИ И РЯДА СМЕЖНЫХ РЕГИОНОВ
Summary. The detailed data on type specimens of 25 Cruciferae taxa distributed predominantly in Siberia and to less degree in neighboring regions (Kazakhstan, Middle and Central Asia) are reported. Mostly taxa of P.S. Pallas, C.F. Stephan, C.L. Willdenow, C.F. Ledebour, and N.S. Turczaninow are treated. In two cases, holotypes are recognized, otherwise the names are lectotypified (incl. 2 second-step lectotypes).
Key words: Cruciferae, typification, Siberia.
Аннотация. Приведена подробная информация о типовых образцах 25 таксонов крестоцветных (Cruciferae), распространённых в основном в Сибири, а также в некоторых соседних (Казахстан, Средняя и Центральная Азия) регионах. Рассмотрены преимущественно таксоны П.С. Палласа, Х.Ф. Стефана, К.Л. Вильденова, К.Ф. Ледебура и Н.С. Турчанинова. Все названия, кроме двух, имеющих голотип, лектотипифицированы (для двух таксонов выбор лектотипа уточнён).
Ключевые слова: крестоцветные, типификация, Сибирь.
While preparing the treatment of Cruciferae for the “Flora of Altai” and “Flora of Tuva” projects, the need of typification of numerous names has arose. Partly such work has been performed during last years (German, 2005; German et al., 2006; German & Cherneva, 2008). In continuation of this work, some other names of relevant Cruciferae taxa are typified herein. In the present study, the material of AA, B, BP, BRNU, HAL, KW, LE, M, MHA, MW, P, PRC, TK, and W was used, and JSTOR plant project (http://plants.jstor.org) was also consulted for specimens from BM and K. For each taxon, detailed data on all available parts of original material are reported and commented when needed.
Alyssum fedtschenkoanum N. Busch, 1923, Notul. Syst. Herb. Hort. Bot. Petrop., 4, 19-20 : 145. - Odontarrhena fedtschenkoana (N. Busch)
D. German, 2009, Komarovia, 6, 2 : 85.
Described from the eastern part of Zaissan depression: “Prov. Semipalatinsk, a Bogdanow receptum. Fedtschenko! Distr. Saissan, in arenis Ak-kum ad ripam fluvii Alkabek prope pag. Terek Inferiorem. 11/24. VII. 1908. fl. fr. imm. Ssedelnikow! Soongaria chinensis, Alkabek, in arenis contra Alexeewskoje. 6/19. VIII. 08. ster. Fedtschenko! Altai merid., inter Nikolajewka et
Uspenka. 6. VIII. 1914. fr. fere omnib. apertis. Saposhnikow!”.
Lectotype (hic designatus): “Semipalatinsk prov., Zaissan district, South Altai. Nikolaevka -Uspenka, 6 Aug. 1914. V. Sapozhnikov” (LE!, iso -BRNU!, LE! (3), TK!).
Syntypes: “Zaissan district, sands Ak-Kum, on the bank ofAlkabek near Nizh. Terek.[ty]. 11 VII 1908. A.N. Sedelnikov” (2); “Received from A.N. Bogdanov from Semipalatinsk (?) prov. 16 I 1913. B. Fedtschenko” (2 samples, only one labeled); “Soongaria Chinensis, Alkabek, sands on the opposite ofAlexeewskoe. 6 VIII 1908. J№ 2321. B.A. Fedtschenko”; “A.N. Sedelnikow: Plantae terr. Semipalatinsk, Zaissan district [fl., fr.]” (3) (all - LE!).
The latter three specimens have no indication on the collection place and date but they all are identified by N.A. Busch and apparently represent the cited above gathering of Sedelnikov; thus they are also treated as syntypes.
Alyssum spathulatum Steph. ex Willd.
1800, Sp. Pl. 3 : 465. - Galitzkya spathulata (Steph. ex Willd.) V. Bocz. 1979, Bot. Zhurn. 64, 10 : 1442.
Described from NE Kazakhstan: “in mon-tibus Altaicis Sibiriae”.
<X>000<XX><XXX)0<XX><XXXX><X>000<XX><XXX)0<XXX>0<XX><X>000<XX><XXX)0<X>000<XX><XXX)0<XX><XXXX><X>000<XX><XXX)0<XX><XXXX><X>000<XX><XXX)0<X>000<XX><XXX)0<XX><X>0<X>000000000000000000000000000000<>
Алтайский государственный университет, пр-т Ленина, 61; 656049, Барнаул, Россия; e-mail: d_german@inbox.ru Altai State University, Lenina st., 61; 656049, Barnaul, Russia
Поступило в редакцию 10.12.2010 г.
Submitted 10.12.2010
Lectotype (Dudley et Cullen, 1965, Feddes Repert. 71, 1-3 : 226; second-step lectotype hic designatus): “Alyssum spathulatum mihi [Stephan]. Montes altaici” (B-W 11903.4!).
Other original material: “Mussin-Puschkin [A.A. missit] W.” (B-W 11903.1-3!); “Alyssum spathulatum e Sibiria Willdenow dedit” (HAL!).
Possible original material: “Alyssum
spathulatum Willd. Sp. Pl. Cor. pallide flava. Hab. in montosis Altaicis. Ibidem lectum Dn. de Lindenthal misit 1789. Pott” (LE!).
Original material can represent any of the collections of either P.I. Schangin, or J. Sievers, or their mixture as both collectors gathered the species and even invalidly named it as Clypeola altaica Schangin and C. shanginii Sievers (Ledebour, 1841 : 135). While Sievers collected the species during his trip to Tarbagatai in 1793 (Sievers, 1796), the origin of Schangin’s collection is unclear because the only mentioning of “schöne graue Clypeola” in the description of his trip in 1786 (Schangin, 1793: 76) refers to any plant collected in Yabagan (“Jabagan”) where G. spathulata does not occur. According to Litwinow (1909 : 344), Schangin sent seeds (and probably specimens) to Pallas prior to that trip and G. spathulata could be among them. Otherwise, the locus is given incorrectly which sometimes happened in that work (Litwinow, l.c.). Unfortunately, the present author had no opportunity to check Shangin’s letters to Pallas where the name Clypeola altaica first appeared.
Dudley and Cullen (l.c. : 226) cited the type as follows: “Siberia. In montibus altaicis sibiriae, Stephan, B!” without specification among
4 specimens in B-W which necessitated the second step of typification (McNeill et al., 2006, Art. 9.15 ICBN). Boczantzeva (1979 : 1441) mentioned “type in B and isotype in LE” but there is no specimen in LE marked as such. Obviously, she ment the specimen from Pott’s herbarium which most likely represents Shangin’s gathering.
Alyssum tenuifolium Steph. ex Willd. 1800, Sp. Pl. 3 : 460. - Ptilotrichum tenuifolium (Steph. ex Willd.) C.A. Mey. 1831, in Ledeb. Fl. Alt. 3 : 67. -Stevenia tenuifolia (Steph. ex Willd.) D. German, 2009, Komarovia, 6, 2 : 84.
Described from SE Siberia (Baikal region): “in Sibiria”.
Lectotype (hic designatus): “Habitat in Sibiria. Saxosis ad Selengam et Baikal” (B-W 11889.4!).
Other original material: B-W 11889.2!; “Alyssum tenuifolium. E Sibiria. Willdenow dedit” (HAL!).
There are five specimens in Willdenow herbarium under the common label cited above. Only two of them taxonomically correspond to the generally accepted concept of this taxon. The rest of specimens are: Alyssum lenense Adams (11889.1), Ptilotrichum dahuricum Peschkova (11889.3), and a mixture of A. lenense and Stevenia cheiranthiodes DC. s. str. (11889.5).
Brassica polymorpha Murr. 1776, Novi Comment. Gotting. 7 : 35, tab. VI. - Sisymbrium po-lymorphum (Murr.) Roth, 1830, Mant. Bot. 2 : 946.
Described based on the material grown in Hortus Gottingensis from seeds of E Siberian (most likely, Baikal) origin obtained from Pallas: “... Si-biricis plantis destinavi”.
Lectotype (German et Berkutenko, hic designatus): fig. (Novi Comment. Gotting. 7 : tab. VI).
Other original material: “Brassica polymorpha Murr. H.[ortus] Gott.[ingensis]”; “Arabis nova. Pro Brassica nova Murray descripsit in Nov. Com. Goet.” (LE!).
No authentic material has been found in LINN, K, and GOET (Berkutenko, 1983 : 24) but the two cited specimens in LE (both with labels by Pallas) apparently represent the plants grown by Murray. However, both specimens are quite poor (these are only upper parts of stem with buds and few incompletely opened flowers); therefore, the picture in the validating publication better illustrating the species morphology is designated as the lectotype as not cited specimens do not have priority over the cited figure under the Art. 9.10 (McNeill et al., 2006).
Braya siliquosa Bunge, 1839, Del. Sem. Hort. Dorpat. : 7.
Described from South-East Altai: “in alpinis ad Tschujam crescens”.
Lectotype (hic designatus): “Braya siliquosa m. Tschuja; in lapidosis alpium ad fl. Tobogosch. Politow 1839 [fr.; det. Bunge]” (P!).
Isolectotype: «Herbar. Bung. Flor. orient. altaica. 1839. Braya siliquosa» (LE!).
Lectotype consists of seven plants with ripe fruits mounted in the upper portion of the herbarium sheet. Two plants which just started flowering mounted in the right lower corner of the sheet and labeled “Platypetalum. Braya siliquosa mihi. H[ortus] D[orpatensis]. 1841. [Bunge]” do not belong to the original material.
It is almost undoubtedly that the following two specimens: “Braya siliquosa Bge. Altai» (two upper plants) and «Braya siliquosa Bunge. Altai, leg. Bunge. Herb. J. Klinge” (both LE!) also represent isolectotypes; habitually, the plants are very similar to those constituting the lectotype. Mentioning Bunge’s name does not point him as a collector and should be only attributed to the origin of these specimens from Bunge’s private herbarium: the species was first collected not earlier than in 1837 while Bunge conducted field studies in Altai himself for the last time in 1832.
Cardamine macrophylla Willd. 1800, Sp. Pl. 3 : 484.
Described from East and probably West Siberia: “in Sibiria”.
Lectotype (Khatri, 1990, Folia Geobot. Phytotax., 25, 2 : 208, “holotype”; second-step lectotype hic designatus): B-W 11970.1!
Other original material: B-W 11970.24!; “Cardamine macrophylla. E Sibiriae. Pallas” (HAL!); fig. [Sisymbrium foliis pinnatis, pinnis ovatis serratis] (Gmelin, 1768, Fl. Sib. : tab. 62).
Khatri (l.c. : 208) cited the type as follows: “Hab. in Sibiriae, 1772, Pallas (B-W, holotype, examined)”. However, he did not specify which of four specimens was meant, and it is barely possible to associate certain specimen with the separately attached labels: “Cardamine chelidonium [added by Willdenow] figura Gmelinii bona”; Cardamine chelidonia Linn., ad fontes. Lect. Junio 1772 (Hb. Pall.) [by Georgi except the species epithet by Pallas]”; “In boreal. Ad Jeniseam [et] circa Baikalem (Pallas) [manus Pallasii]”; “In Kumeskie [?] goltzy along rivers and in moist places in pine forests [in Russian - N. Sokolov?] (Herb. Pallas)”; “[From Sievers?] Stephan. W.”.
Possible original material: “Cardamine macrophylla. 799. Sievers. Sibir[ia] (Hb. Stephan)” (LE!).
Cardamine nivalis Pall. 1773, Reise, 2 : 740, ahn. 113, tab. U. - Macropodium nivale (Pall.) W.T. Aiton, 1812, Hort. Kew. ed. 2, 4 : 108.
Described from SW Siberia (Altai): “circa nives in summis montium Altaicorum”.
Lectotype (hic designatus): “Cleome altaica. Cardamine nivalis Pall. it. II. [late July 1771, Pallas] Herb. Pallas [manus Pallasii]” (BM, right plant).
Other original material: fig. “Cardamine nivalis” (Pall. 1773, Reise, 2 : tab. U).
Among three plants on the lectotype sheet, only the right one (with mature fruits) represents
the collection of 1771 fully corresponding both the description and the figure. The other two plants being in full bloom and with first immature fruits were not used by Pallas while preparing the description as he only mentioned few withering flowers at the top of the stem (Pallas, 1773 : 740) which apparently fell down soon, and mature fruits. The central and the left plants pictured (along with the right one) in the unpublished Pallas’s “Plantae selectae Rossicae” under the name Catharinea sublimis Pall. (nom. nud.) (Sytin, 1997 : 220) were grown later in St. Petersburg from seeds obtained by Pallas from I.P. Shangin (Sytin, l.c. : 219). As follows from the letter of Pallas to Shangin from 10 XII 1793, it was the first opportunity for Pallas to study flowers of this species enabled him concluding that it cannot belong to Cardamine L. and should appear in Flora Rossica as Schanginia alpina Pall. (nom. nud.) (modified from: Sytin, l.c. : 324). Thus, it is obvious that the original material is restricted to the fruiting plant and its picture.
Draba eriopoda Turcz. ex Ledeb. 1841, Fl. Ross. 1, 1 : 154.
Described from SE Siberia (E Sayan and Transbaicalia): “in subalpinis baikalensibus ad tor-rentem Urgudei et ad rivulum Korolla in subalpinis Davuricae! (Turcz.)”.
Lectotype (German et Dorofeyev, hic designatus): “Draba eriopoda Turcz. In glareosis humidis Dahuriae 1832 (Herb. Ledeb. 70.39.)” (LE!)
Isolectotypes: “Draba eriopoda Turcz. In glareosis humidis Dahuriae, 1832” (B!); “Draba eriopoda Turcz. In glareosisDahuriae, 1832”; “Draba eriopoda Turcz. Dahuria, 1832”; “Draba eriopoda Turcz. In subalpinis Dahuriae ad rivulum Korolla”; “Draba eriopoda Turcz. In glareosis Dahuriae” (KW!); “Draba eriopoda m. In humidis lapidosis ad fl. Korolla. Dahuria 1832. Turcz.[aninow] (Ex herb. Turcz.)”; “Draba eriopoda Turcz. Dahuria leg. 1832”; “Draba eriopoda Turcz. Dahuria. Exi. Fischer. [misit] 1839”; “Draba eriopoda Tcz. Dahuria. Hb. Bagd. [misit] 1840”; “Draba eriopoda Turcz. In glareosis humidis Dahuriae 1832. Mis.
D. Turczaninow 1833 (Hb. Meyer)”; “Draba eriopoda Turcz. In glareosis humidis Dahuriae 1832”; “Draba eriopoda Turcz. Dahuria 1832. Ded. Turczan. 1838 (Herb. Trautv.)”; “Draba eriopoda m. Ad rivulum Korolla, Dahuriae 1832”; “Draba eriopoda Turcz. In glareosis humidis Dahuriae 1832” (LE!); “Draba eriopoda Turcz. Dahuria 1832. Turczaninow” (M!); “Draba eriopoda Turcz. In glareosis Dahuriae 1832” (MW); “Draba eriopoda Turcz. Dahuria,
leg. Turcz.”; “Draba eriopoda T. In humidis Dahur. (Hb. Bunge)”; “Draba eriopoda Turcz. Dahuria. 1832 (Hb. Bunge)”; “Draba eriopoda Turcz. Ad rivulum Korolla, Dahur. (Hb. Fischer)”; “Draba eriopoda Turcz. In subalpinis Dahuriae. Turcz.”; “Draba eriopoda Turcz. Dah.[uria] (Hb. Fischer)”; “Draba eriopoda Turcz. In Dahuria. Coll. et examin. N. Turcz. Ed. R.F. Hohenacker. 1844” (P!); “Draba eriopoda Turcz. Dahuria”; “Draba eriopoda Turcz. Dahuria 1832 [mis.] Turczaninow 1839” (PRC!); “Draba eriopoda Turcz. Dahuria 1832 leg. celeberr. Turczaninow” (TK!); “Draba eriopoda Turcz. Dahuria. leg. Turcz.”; “Draba eriopoda Turcz. Dahuria. [misit Turcz.] XI 1837”; “Draba eriopoda Dahuria. Turczaninow” (W!).
Syntypes: “Draba eriopoda mihi. Ad pedem alpis Urgudei 1830 (Ex herb. Turcz.)”; “Draba eriopoda mihi. Distincte a D. lute[a]e pediccelisque pubescentibus Ad pedem alpis Urgudei 1830 Turcz.” (LE!).
The single specimen from Ledebour’s private collection which is the only one definitely studied by him prior to the species name validation, is chosen as the lectotype. Specimens representing the third Turczaninow’s collection from Hovsgol lake (“Draba eriopoda Turcz. In glareosis ad lacum Kossogol. 1836” (KW!, LE!, W!); Turczaninow, 1842 : 261) seem to be unknown to C.F. Ledebour and thus are not a part of the original material.
Draba mongolica Turcz. 1842, Bull. Soc. Nat. Mosc. 15, 2 : 256.
Described from SE Siberia (E Sayan) and adjacent Mongolia: “In alpe Nuchu-Daban, nec non in glareosis ad lacum Kossogol in confini Mongolia Chinensi”.
Lectotype (Buzunova, in sched.; German et Buzunova, hic designatus): “Draba mongolica m. In alpe Nuchu-Daban legit celeb. Kirilof 1836 [defl., fr.]” (LE!)
Syntypes: “Draba mongolica Turcz. Ad lacum Kossogol [added later:] et in alpe Nuchudaban. 1836 [fl., fr.]” (LE! (3), P!, PRC!).
Some specimens from Nuchu-Daban were reported as isosyntypes (Buzunova, 2000 : 69) but because the species name was validated by Turczaninow himself all of them are syntypes. Two syntypes in LE are represented by plants in fruits, similar to the lectotype specimen, and probably can be treated as isolectotypes.
Draba pygmaea Turcz. ex N. Busch 1918, Bull. Acad. Sci. Russ., 6 ser., 12, 2 : 1633, 1635, 1639.
Described from SE Siberia (E Sayan and Transbaikalia): “D. pygmaea Turcz. Cat. 1838, No 136, nomen nudum, D. lapponica Turcz. Fl. Baic-Dah. I 1842, p. 135, non Willd., D. Wahlenbergii ß heterotricha Led. Fl. Ross. I 1842, p. 150 part.). Transbaik.!”
Lectotype (hic designatus): “Draba
pygmaea ß. In alpe Nuchu-Daban legit Kuznetsoff 1834 / In alpe Nuchu-Daban 1834” (LE!).
Isolectotypes: “Draba pygmaea Turcz.: ß. In alpe Nuchu-Daban 1834” (K); “Draba lapponica ß (Draba pygmaea Turcz.). In alpibus occident. Baicalensibus”; “Drabapygmaea Turcz.: ß. In alpe Nuchu-Daban 1834” (2); “D. Wahlenbergii Hartm. Draba pygmaea Turcz. In alpe Nuchu-Daban” (KW!); “Drabapygmaea Turcz.: ß. In alpe Nuchu-Daban 1834” (2, one from herb. Meyer); “Draba pygmaea. Nuchu-Daban” (LE!); “Draba lapponica W. Draba pygmaea Turcz. ß. In alpe Nuchu-Daban 1834” (MW!).
Syntypes: “Draba pygmaea Turcz.: y. In alpibus ad fl. Tessa 1834” (3, one with “legit Kuznetsoff’); “D. Wahlenbergii Hartm. In alpibus ad fl. Tessa 1834”; “Draba Wahlenbergii Hartm. In alpibus ad fl. Tessa legit Kuznetsoff 1834 (Herb. Ledeb. 70.25. ß)”; “Draba stellata Jacq. In alpe ad fl. Oka legit Kuznetsoff 1834”; “Draba pygmaea Turcz.: а. In alpe Tsagan-Gol. 1834” (4, one from herb. Meyer); “Draba pygmaea m.: а In alpe Tsagan-Gol legit Kuznetsoff. 1834”; “Draba pygmaea Turcz. а In alpibus Tsahan-gol. 1834. Ded. Turcz. 1838 (Herb. Trautv.)”; “Drabapygmaea а In alpibus Zagan-gol. 1834. Ded. Turcz. 1838 (Herb. Trautv.)”; “Draba pygmaea Tcz. Alp. Tschagan-Gol. (Hb. Bo[n]g[ar]d. 1840)”; “Draba lapponica W. Fl. Dah. Baic. I, p. 135 [manus Turczaninowii]”; “Draba glacialis Adams у Raddeana Regel. In Dahuriae alpibus. Legit Radde” (2); “Draba glacialis Adams у Raddeana Regel. ... Munku Sardyk bei 8000’ legit Radde”; “Draba glacialis Adams у Raddeana Regel. In monte Munku-Sardyk. 1859. G. Radde”; “Alpe Munku-Sardyk. 14 Aug. 1871. № 102. A. Czekanovsky”; “Mt. Munku-Sardyk, south slope, between stones rather common; on goltzy. 14. VI 1912. Meyer” (LE!)
Isosyntypes: “Draba pygmaea Turcz.:
а. In alpe Tsagan-Gol. 1834”; “Draba pygmaea Turcz.: y. In alpibus ad fl. Tessa 1834” (K); “Draba pygmaea Turcz. In alpe Tsahangol. 1836”; “Draba pygmaea Turcz.: y. In alpibus ad fl. Tessa 1834”; “Draba pygmaea Turcz.: а In alpibus Zagan-hol. 1834”; “Draba pygmaea Turcz.: а In alpe Tsagan-Gol. 1834” (KW!); “Drabapygmaea Turcz.
Alpes Baicalenses [misit] Kareline 1840”; “Draba pygmaea Turcz. Alpes Baicalenses” (PRC!); “Draba pygmaea Turcz. Alpes Baicalenses [misit Turcz.] XI 1837” (W!).
As the work of Busch (1918) represent the shortened version of his treatment of Draba L. for the “Flora Sibiriae et Orientis Extrimi” (Busch, 1919), which was totally ready by that time (Busch, 1918 : 1631), the complete citation of the original material can be presented as: “Irk.[utsk province] Mt. Munku-Sardyk, sources of Irkut. 8000’. R[adde]! Alps of Munku-Sardyk 14 VIII [1871]. Opened fruits. Czek.[anovsky]; Ibid., south slope, between stones. 14. VI. [19]12. fl. Meyer! Alps of the Nuchu-Daban pass. Kuzn.[etzov]! Alps along Tess (Tissa). T[urczaninow]! Alps along Oka. Kuzn. [etzov]! Transbaik[alia]. Alps of Dahuria. R[adde]! Alps of Tsagan-gol. Kuzn.[etzov]!” (Busch, 1919 : 340). Therefore, the type material is not confined to just Turczaninow’s gatherings but also includes other specimens cited above.
Turczaninow’s initial division onto three varieties was not followed by Busch and they stood unnamed.
Erysimum altaicum C.A. Mey. var. baicalense M. Pop., 1955, Herb. Fl. URSS 13: 18.
Lectotype (German, hic designatus): “[Exicc. №] 3820. Lac. Baical, ripa austro-occidentalis, prope pag. B. Koty, in abruptis lapidosis ad lac. Baical. Leg. E. Sabutite et S. Popova. 24 VIII 1952” (LE!; isolectotypes - AA!, BP!, KW!, LE!, MHA!, MW!).
The specimens also represent the isotypes of E. baicalense Polatschek (2008, Ann. Naturhist. Mus. Wien, B, 109 : 154; type - W!). Here, only duplicates not mentioned by Polatschek (l.c.) are enumerated.
Erysimum czernjajevii N. Busch, 1939, Fl. USSR, 8 : 115. - E. divaricatum Czern. ex Turcz. 1855 (“1854”), Bull. Soc. Nat. Mosc. 27, 4 : 304, non Wallr., 1840. - E. virgatum auct non Roth, p. p., quoad var. “?”: Kar. et Kir. 1842, Bull. Soc. Nat. Mosc. 15, 1 : 155.
Described from E Kazakhstan: “Cheiropsis
E. virgatum Kar. et Kir. enum. var.? [In arenosis Songoriae ad radicem montium Arganaty. Karelin et Kirilow, 1841]”.
Holotype: “1243 [1244]. Erysimum virgatum Roth var. ? [Erysimum] divaricatum Czern. In arenosis Songoriae ad radicem montium Arganaty
medio Junio 1841. Kar[elin] et Kir[iloff] (Ex herbario Scegleewi) [Ex herb. Turcz.]” (KW!).
Isotypes: “Erysimum virgatum Roth var.? Habitu sat distinctus et stigmate brevissima. Altai. Kar. et Kir. N 1244 (Ex herb. Turcz.)”; “Kar. et Kir. Altai № 1244 (Ex herb. Turcz.)” (2); “Erys. virg. K. K. 1244 (Herb. Fisch.)” (LE!); “№ 1244. leg. Karelin et Kiriloff a. 1841” (MW!).
The name was validated based on the specimen from Turczaninow’s herbarium (Turczaninow, 1855). At the moment, there is no specimen(s) of E. czernjajevii in Turczaninow’s herbarium but only the empty folder with handwriting “Erysimum divaricatum Czern.” by Turczaninow. The single specimen of Karelin and Kirilow in KW, cited above, was found in the department “Flora of USSR”. Because similar situation is observed with other species collected by Karelin and Kirilow, it is likely that they were first taken from Turczaninow’s private herbarium by S. Stschegleew during his treatment of Karelin’s collections and later were incorporated into the herbarium of flora of USSR. Therefore, it is clear that the cited specimen was the single one of E. czernjajevii in Turczaninow’s herbarium on which the name could be validated and thus represents the holotype.
The number 1243 (not 1244) is obviously a mistake by Stschegleew (the whole label is written by him) as soon as the species was collected in 1841 only in one locality (mts. Arganaty) and the gathering was not separated by collectors (Karelin, Kirilow, 1842); all other specimens collected that year have a number 1244.
The species was collected in mts. Arganaty again in 1842 by G.S. Karelin along (Stschegleew, 1854). That gathering is represented by two specimens in LE which are not a part of original material.
Erysimum quadricorne Steph. ex Willd. 1800, Sp. Pl. 3 : 514. - Tetracme quadricornis (Steph.) Bunge, 1836, Del. Sem. Horti Dorpat. : 8.
Described from NW shore of Caspian see: “in Sibiria inter Volgam et Kumam fluvium”.
Lectotype (hic designatus): “in Sibiria inter Volgam et Kumamum fluvium. Stephan” (B-W 12071.2!)”.
Other original material (probably isolectotypes): B-W 12071.1!; “795. Taur. et ad Kumam fl. (Herbarium Stephanianum)” (LE!).
Eutrema cordifolium Turcz. ex Ledeb. 1841, Fl. Ross. 1, 1 : 198.
Described from SE Siberia (E Sayan): “In subalpinis baikalensibus ad torrentem Zemczug! (Turcz.)”.
Holotype: “Cochlearia cordifolia m. Eut-rema [cordifolium] Turcz. In lapidosis umbrosis torrentem Zemczig 1830” / “Eutrema [cordifolium] Turcz. Herb. Ledeb. 95.3.” (LE!).
Isotypes: “Smelowskia cordifolia Turcz. In pratis montosis sylvaticis ad torrentem Zemczug 1830”; “Cochlearia cordifolia mihi. In sylvis ad torrentem Zemczig 1830” (KW!); “Cochlearia cordifolia mihi. In sylvis ad torrentem Zemczig 1830” (4; one specimen, in addition, bears Turczaninow’s note: “An genus proprium?”); “Cochlearia cordifolia mihi. In sylvis ... ad torrentem Zemczig 1830”; “Smelowskia cordifolia Turcz. In pratis montosis sylvaticis ad torrentem Zemczig 1830” (2, one from herb. Meyer); “In sylvis ad torrentem Zemczig 1830. Turczaninow” (2); “[In sylvis ad torrentem Zemczig 1830. Turczaninow]. Herb. Fischer” (3); “Eutrema cordifolia Turcz. Fl. Dah. Baical. 1. p. 165 [Turczaninow]” (LE!).
As soon as just one collection was cited and the single specimen from Ledebour’s private herbartium is available, it is obviously that the name is based on this specimen which should be recognized as holotype.
Eutrema intermedium Turcz. 1842, Bull. Soc. Nat. Mosc. 15, 2 : 283. - E. edwardsii R. Br. var. intermedium (Turcz.) A.L. Ebel, 2000, Turczaninowia, 3, 3 : 30.
Described from N Mongolia: “In glareosis ad lacum Kossogol”.
Lectotype (hic designatus): “Eutrema par-viflorum Turcz. var. foliis caulinis longioribus. In glar. ad lacum Kossogol 1836 [I. Kirilow] (Hb. Meyer)” (LE!).
Isolectotype: “Eutrema parviflorum Turcz. var. foliis caulinis longioribus. Ad lacum Kossogol 1836 ... specim. intermedia inter E. Edwardsii et parviflorum (Hb. Bunge)” / “Eutrema parviflora Turcz. Ad lacum Kossogol. Turcz.” (only left and right plants, not 3 Draba ochroleuca Bunge specimens in between) (P!).
Eutrema parviflorum Turcz. ex Ledeb. 1841, Fl. Ross. 1, 1 : 198. - E. edwardsii R. Br. f. parviflorum (Turcz. ex Ledeb.) N. Busch, 1913, Fl. Sib et Or. Extrim. 1 : 129.
Described from SE Siberia (E Sayan) and neighboring Mongolia: “In alpinis baikalensib. ad fl. [Maloi Irkut] Monda! et ad lacum Kossogol (Turcz.)”.
Lectotype (hic designatus): “Eutrema parviflorum Turcz. In alpe ad fl. Maloi Irkut 1834 [I. Kuznetsow] (Herb. Ledeb. 95.2.)” (LE!).
Isolectotypes: “Eutrema parviflorum m. In alpe ad fl. Maloi Ircut legit Kuznetsoff 1834 (2 -ex herb. Turcz. et Fisch.)”; “Eutrema parviflorum Turcz. In alpe ad fl. Maloi Irkut 1834 (Hb. Meyer)”; “Eutrema parviflorum Turcz. In alpe ad fl. [Maloi] Irkut 1834”; “Eutremaparviflorum Turcz. Sibiria, in alpe ad fl. Maloi Irkut” (LE); “Eutrema parviflorum Turcz. In alpe ad fl. Irkut 1834” (MW).
Syntypes: the above cited lecto- and isolectotypes of E. intermedium.
Apparently, Ledebour occasionally changed “Maloi Irkut” to “Monda”: the single specimen from his herbarium designated here as lectotype, originates from Maloi Irkut, which completely agrees with Turczaninow (1842 : 283) who mentioned “maloi Irkut” for E. parviflorum and Monda for
E. edwardsii R. Br. [s. str.].
There is a number of E. parviflorum specimens collected in Nuchu-Daban in 1834 and 1836 signed by Turczaninow (B!, KW!, LE!, M!, P!), but he did not mention them in his “Flora. ” (only E. edwardsii is reported from there; KW!, LE!), nor did Ledebour. For the latter reason, they are not treated as the original material on E. parviflorum.
Turczaninow had validated the name
E. intermedium under synonymy of E. parviflorum (=E. parviflorum var. ß), while Ledebour earlier validated E. parviflorum based on both collections. The present typification keeps the current understanding of both taxa.
Holargidium kuznetsowii Turcz. ex Ledeb. 1841, Fl. Ross. 1 : 156. - Draba kuznetsowii (Turcz. ex Ledeb.) Hayek, 1911, Beih. Bot. Centralbl. 27, 1 : 172.
Described from SE and SW Siberia (E Sayan and Altai): “in alp. altaicis (Bunge in litt., qui unicum specimen legit), in alpe Nuchu-Daban regionis baikalensis! (Turcz.)”.
Lectotype (German et Dorofeyev, hic designatus): “Holargidium kuznetsowii Turcz. Ad ripas (alpis) torrentium prope alpem Nuchu-Daban legit Kuznetsoff 1834 (Herb. Ledeb. 71.1.)” (LE!).
Isolectotypes: “Holargidium kuznetsowii Gen. et sp. Turcz. Circa alpem Nuchu-Daban. 1834” (KW!); “Holargidium kuznetsowii m. Ad ripis torrentem pr. alpem Nuchu-Daban legit Kuznetsoff 1834” (4; in two cases “Turcz. instead of “m.”); “Holargidium kuznetsowii Turcz. Circa alpis Nuchu-Daban 1834” (LE!); “Holargidium kuznetsowii G. et sp. Turcz. Circa alpem Nuchu-Daban. 1834” (M!);
“Holargidium kuznetsowii m. Genus 4 valvae, 4 loculare, septis completis. In alpe Nuchu-Daban detexit Kuznetsoff 1834”; “Holargidium kuznetsowii Turcz. Ad ripis torrentem pr. alpem Nuchu-Daban [legit Kuznetsoff 1834] mis. Fischer 1836” (P!).
Syntype: “Holargidium kuznetsowii Turcz. In alpis ad Tschujam, leg. Politow unicum hoc specimen inter specimini Parryae exsc.[apae]” (P!).
Probable isolectotypes: “In subalpinis Bai-calensibus” (GOET); “Holargidium kuznetsowii Turcz. In alpe Nuchu-Daban” (KW!); “Baicalia. Turcz. legit” (LE!); “Holargidium kuznetsowii Turcz. In alpe Nuchudaban coll ex examin. N. Turcz. Ed. R.F. Hohenacker. 1844” (2); (P!); “Holargidium kuznetsowii Turcz. Regio Baicalensis occid.”; “Holargidium kuznetsowii Turcz.! In subalpinis Bai-calensibus [mis.] Kareline 1840” (PRC!); “Holargidium kuznetsowii Turcz. In subalpinis Bai-calensibus”; “Holargidium kuznetsowii Turcz. Regio Baicalensis occid. [mis.] XI 1837” (W!).
Ledebour did not cite other collections (“Kossogol, . Tessa et in aliis locis vicinis”) mentioned by Turczaninow (1842 : 266) thus excluding them from the original material. Among two collections from Nuchu-Daban, only the first (1834) was used by Ledebour; therefore, specimens representing the second collection (1836 - LE!) are also not treated as syntypes. Because both gatherings can hardily be separated from each other habitually, the status of collections from Nuchu-Daban without date is determined as possible isolectotypes along with specimens with unspecified locality which can also represent the first Nuchu-Daban collection.
As previously mentioned, the specimen collected in Altai was not found in LE (German, 2005) but is deposited in P as a part of Bunge’s private herbarium (mounted on one sheet with an isolectotype). Similarly, another taxon from Altai, Braya limosella Bunge, is represented by the single authentic specimen: “Platypetalum limoselloides m. alp. Ad Tschujam” (holotype, P!).
Hutschinsia bifurcata Turcz. ex Ledeb. 1841, Fl. Ross. 1, 1 : 201. - Smelowskia bifurcata (Turcz. ex Ledeb.) Botsch. 1968, Novit. Syst. Pl. Vasc. 5 : 140.
Described from SE Siberia (E Sayan): “in alp. baical. Nuchu-Daban! (Turcz.)”.
Lectotype (Botschantzev, in sched., “typus”; hic designatus [also for Smelowskia asplenifolia Turcz., see below]): “Smelowskia asplenifolia Turcz. In alpe Nuchu-Daban ad torrentem Dschochoi legit Kuznetsoff. 1834. Turcz.” (LE!).
Isolectotypes: “Smelowskia bifurcata Turcz. In alpe Nuchu-Daban ad torrentem Dschochoi legit Kuznetsoff. 1834” (KW! (2), LE! (6), M!, PRC!). Some labels are shortened to “In alpe Nuchu-Daban. 1834”; one specimen in KW holds both names: “Smelowskia bifurcata m. / Smelowskia asplenifolia m.” (Turczaninow’s hand).
Like in the above case of Eutrema cor-difolium, the specimen cited by Ledebour should have been treated as holotype. However, no specimen from Ledebour’s collection was found, and a lectotype is proposed following Botschantzev’s choice (on the label).
As Turczaninow’s intention to apply both names (bifurcata and asplenifolia) to exactly the same taxon (known to him from the single gathering) is explicitly clear, the same specimen is also chosen as the lectotype for Smelowskia asplenifolia to keep both names attached to the same specimen.
Lepidium calycinum Steph. ex Willd. 1800, Sp. Pl. 3 : 433. - Smelowskia calycina (Steph.)
C.A. Mey. 1831, in Ledeb. Fl. Alt. 3 : 170.
Described from W Siberia (Altai): “in alpibus Altaicis Sibiriae”.
Lectotype (hic designatus): “[Altai. Sa-lesow?]” B-W 11809.1!
Other original material: “in alpibus cor-gonensiby[s] [manus Pallasii?]”; “in monte Ser-basiere Sabandie” [Shangin?]” (B-W 11809.2-3!); “Lepidium calycinum. 804. Sales[ow]. Sibi.[iria] (Herbarium Stephanianum)”; “Bunias altaica Schangin. Salesow. Altai”; “Lepidium calycinum. Ex Sibiria. Salesow. Remitt. M. Bieb.” (LE!).
Possible original material: “Lepidium ca-lycinum Willd. Sp. Pl. Hab. in alpibus Altaicis. Ibidem lectum [P.I. Schangin, 1786?] Dn. de Lindenthal misit 1787. Pott” (LE!)
Original material is suspected to include several gatherings. Among the two specimens from herbarium of Pallas in B-W, at least the first collection (and most likely the second as well) is that of P.I. Shangin (elder) who’s material Pallas has at his disposition (Borodin, 1908 : 139; Litwinow, 1909 : 344). The specimen from Pott’s herbarium most likely has the same origin. It is marked as “isotypus” but cannot be accepted as isolectotype according to the present choice because it definitely could not be gathered by Zalesov (Salesow) who conducted collections in Altai after 1794 (Borodin, 1908 : 39) and from whom the rest of material originates. Although it is difficult to associate any of three labels in B-W with the certain specimen,
it is assumed that the first one designated as the lectotype is a part of Zalesov’s collection because of considerable habitual similarity with at least two specimens in LE (the third Zalesow’s specimen in LE [returned by Bieberstein] is too much damaged for the sound comparison). If this assumption is correct, relevant samples in LE should be treated as isolectotypes. The specimen from Stephan’s herbarium was marked by Botschantzev as “typus” (in sched.), but material in B-W should have priority as being treated by the validating author. The plant 11809.4 represent L. coronopifolium Fisch. (correctly re-identified by Ledebour).
Lepidium ceratocarpum Pall. 1773, Reise, 2 : 740, ahn. 112, tab. U. - Thlaspi ceratocarpum (Pall.) Murr. 1774, Novi Comment. Götting. 5 : 26.
Described from NE Kazakhstan: “in campis salsuginosis, inter stationem Belokamenskoi et fortalitium Septempalatiorum”.
Lectotype (hic designatus): “Thlaspi
ceratocarpum Nova species. [late June 1771, Pallas] Herb. Pallas” (BM, three plants in fruit).
Isolectotypes: “Sibiria. Pallas” (BM);
“Thlaspi ceratocarpum. Pallas” (LE!).
Other original material: fig. “Lepidium cera-tocarpon” (Pall. 1773, Reise, 2 : tab. U).
Meyer (2001, Haussknechtia, 8 : 24) has cited the “holotypus” as follows: “Thlaspi ceratocarpum Nova Species. Sibiria (BM)”, combining the labels of both specimens in BM.
The plants from the specimen “Lepidium Ceratocarpon. Ex hortulo krasnojarensi” / “Lepidium Ceratocarpon. Itinerar. Vol. II. Culta krasnojari in hortulo e seminibus, lectis ad Irtin 1771 [manus Pallasii]” (LE!) most likely were grown in summer 1772 and obtained by Pallas upon his second visit to Krasnoyarsk in winter 1772/73. If so, the specimen is not a part of the original material as the 2nd volume of “Reise ...” was completed by Pallas during his first stay in Krasnoyarsk one year before. Because one of four plants on the lectotype sheet sharply differ from others by being in bloom (like the grown plants), it might represent not the type collection and thus is not treated as a part of the lectotype. This suspicion agrees with the protologue: “Semina sub finem Junii maximam partem jam matura, flores paucissimi superstites” (Pallas, l.c. : 740).
Lepidium obtusum Basin. 1844, Bull. Acad. Sci. Petersb. 2 : 203.
Described from Middle Asia: “in locis argilloso-salsis terrae Chivensium”.
Lectotype (hic designatus) et 3 isolectotypes: “In locis argilloso-salsis terrae Chivensium leg. Ba-siner d. 9 Sptmbr. 1842” (LE!).
Raphanus strictus Fisch. ex Bieb. 1819, Fl. Taur.-Cauc. 3 : 452, in nota. - Diptychocarpus strictus (Fisch. ex Bieb.) Trautv. 1860, Bull. Soc. Nat. Mosc. 33, 1 : 108.
Described from NW Kazakhstan: “circa la-cum Inderiensem, Tauscher”.
Lectotype (hic designatus): “Raphanus strictus m. ad lac. Inderiensem [manus Fischeri] Chorispermum Aitonianum spectat. Remitte! [manus Biebersteinii]” (LE!).
Isolectotypes: “Raphanus strictus mihi. Inderskoie ozero” (KW!); “Lac. Inder. Tauscher”; “Tauscher. 20 ... [Apr.?] 1812”; “Inderskoe lake. Herb. Fisch.” (LE!); “Raphanus strictus mihi. Ad lac. sals. Inderiensem desertum kirghisorum” (P!).
Sisymbrium junceum (Willd.) Bieb. var. latifolium Korsh. 1898, Bull. Acad. Sci. Pétersb.
5 ser., 9, 5 : 412. - S. polymorphum (Murr.) Roth subsp. latifolium (Korsh.) D. German et Vesselova, 2009, Komarovia, 6, 2 : 82.
Described from Middle Asia: “Alaj: ad ostium fl. Katta-Karamuk, 25 Jun. (7 Jul.) 1895 fl.”.
Lectotype (hic designatus): “310. Sisymbrium junceum MB. v. latifolium m. Alai, Katta-Ka-ramuk mouth, weedy near the fields. 29/VI [18]95. Legit S. Korshinsky” (LE!, cum iso!).
Sisymbrium salsugineum Pall. 1773, Reise, 2 : 740, 466, ahn. 114, tab. V. - Thellungiella sal-suginea (Pall.) O.E. Schulz, 1924, in Engler, Pflanzenreich, 86 (4, 105) : 252. - Eutrema salsugineum (Pall.) Al-Shehbaz et S.I. Warwick, 2005, Harvard Pap. Bot. 10, 2 : 134.
Described from NE Kazakhstan (saline area along Irtysh): “circa lacus et lacunas sale praesertim amaro abundantes ad Irtin inter fortalitia Shelesenka et Jamyschewa”.
Lectotype (hic designatus): “Sisymbr. sal-suginosum. [Pallas, 29 May 1771]. Herb. Pallas. Herb. Fischer [manus Fischeri]” (LE!).
Other original material: fig. “Sisymbrium salsuginosum” (Pall. 1773, Reise, 2 : tab. V).
Since rather long time, it is considered that S. salsugineum is described “from saline lakeshores along Irtysh and from Baikal region” (Busch, 1939 : 76) which assumes that material collected not only by Pallas in 1771 but also by him or his co-travellerrs in 1772 was used for the description. Following this information, relevant gatherings from Baikal region
are often accepted as original material. For example, the specimen “in region Bargusinensis, Jul. 1772. Georgi and Lebedev” (MW) is being repeatedly cited as a syntype during last two decades (e. g., Al-Shehbaz & Warwick, 2005 : 134; Dorofeyev, 2002 : 111; German, 2002 : 36; Gubanov, 1993 : 61). However, the 2nd volume of “Reise ...” includes results of 1770-1771 years and not of East Siberian part of the trip (1772) which have been completed only in 1774 and published in 1776. Thus, East Siberian gatherings must be excluded from the original material on S. salsugineum.
Despite lacking the data on collection year/locality, the above specimen is chosen as the lectotype because it perfectly fits each detail of the figure (stems branched from the middle, distinctly acute leaves (including lower), stage of end of blooming/fruiting, etc.). Besides, both image and lectotype label bear epithet “salsuginosum” which apparently was the initial intention of Pallas soon changed to “salsugineum”. To be noted, no Pallas’s S. salsugineum specimens were found in BM (Al-Shehbaz, pers. comm.).
There is one more specimen: “Herb. Pallas. Herb. Fischer” (LE!) which also was suspected to be collected in 1771 but because of having predominantly rounded leaves (except uppermost) and stems branched from the base (like in plants collected around Baikal in 1772 - M!, MW!), it obviously does not represent the type collection. The latter
collection was first cited by Georgi (1775 : 224) as “Sisymbrium salsum Pall.”.
Smelowskia asplenifolia Turcz. 1842, Bull. Soc. Nat. Mosc. 15, 2 : 285.
Described from SE Siberia (E Sayan): “In alpe Nuchu-Daban ad torrentem Dschochoi satis rara”.
Lectotype (Botschantzev, in sched., “typus”; hic designatus [also for Hutschinsia bifurcata Turcz. ex Ledeb.]): “Smelowskia asplenifolia Turcz. In alpe Nuchu-Daban ad torrentem Dschochoi legit Kuznetsoff. 1834. Turcz.” (LE!).
The homotypic symonym of Hutschinsia bifurcata is lectotypified here by the same specimen as H. bifurcata (see above).
The kind help of G.M. Kudabaeva, P.V. Veselova, R. Vogt, Z. Barina, J. Danihelka, M.H. Hoffmann, E. Jäger, A.F. Ilyinskaya, S.L. Mosyakin, N.N. Shiyan, R.V. Kamelin, V.I. Dorofeyev,
D.V. Geltman, O.V. Cherneva, A.E. Grabovskaya-Borodina, H.J. Esser, M.S. Ignatov, S.A. Balandin, T.P. Balandina, A.P. Seregin, T. Deroin, B. Carré, J. Stepánek, J. Hadinec, I.I. Gureyeva, N.V. Kur-batskaya, A.L. Ebel, A.A. Kuznetsov, E. Vitek, I.A. Al-Shehbaz, and E.A. Davydov is highly appreciated. The author is especially grateful to A.N. Sennikov for reviewing and valuable advices on various nomenclatural items.
LITERATURE
Al-Shehbaz I.A., Warwick S.I. A sypopsis of Eutrema (Brassicaceae) // Harvard Papers in Botany, 2005. -Vol. 10, № 2. - P. 129-135.
Berkutenko A.N. Cruciferae of Kolyma upland. - Vladivostok, 1983. - 164 p (in Russian).
Boczantzeva V.V The new genus Galitzkya V. Boczantzeva // Bot. Zhurn., 1979. - T. 64, № 10. - P. 1440-1442 (in Russian).
Borodin I. Collectors and collections on the flora of Siberia. - St. Petersburg, 1908. - 245 p (in Russian).
Busch N.A. On the genus Draba in Siberia and Far East // Bull. Acad. Sci. Russ., 6 ser., 1918. - T. 12. Part 2. -P. 1631-1648 (in Russian).
Busch N.A. Flora Sibiriae et Orientis Extrimi. - Vol. 3. - Petrograd, 1919. - P. 273-392 (in Russian).
Busch N.A. Thellungiella O.E. Schulz // Flora of USSR. - Vol. 8. - Leningrad, 1939. - P. 75-76 (in Russian).
Buzunova I.O. Brassicaceae Burnett. (Cruciferae Juss.) // V.I. Grubov (edr.). Catalogue of the type specimens of Central Asian vascular plants in the Herbarium of the VL. Komarov Botanical Institute. - St. Petersburg, 2000. - P. 66-76.
German D.A. About the genus Thellungiella O.E. Schulz // Turczaninowia, 2002. - Vol. 5, № 2. - P. 32-41 (in Russian).
German D. A. Type specimens of Altai Cruciferae taxa described in 1829-1841 by C.A. Meyer, A.A. Bunge and C.F. Ledebour deposited in the Herbarium of the Komarov Botanical Institute (LE) // Novit. Syst. Plant. Vasc., 2005. - Vol. 37. - P. 233-267 (in Russian).
German D.A., Cherneva O.V., CarréB. Typification of Cruciferae taxa described by A.A. Bunge from the Middle Asia // Novit. Syst. Plant. Vasc., 2006. - Vol. 38. - P. 286-312 (in Russian).
GermanD.A., Cherneva O.V. Typification of Cruciferae taxa described by A.G. Schrenk // Novit. Syst. Plant. Vasc., 2008. - Vol. 40. - P. 287-314 (in Russian).
Georgi J.G. Bemerkungen einer Reise im Rußischen Reich in Jahren 1772-1774. - St. Petersburg, 1775. -Bd. 1. - 506 S.
Gubanov I.A. Catalogue of authentic specimens of vascular plants in Moscow State University Herbarium. -Moscow, 1993. - 160 p. (in Russian).
Dorofeyev V.I. Cruciferae of European Russia // Turczaninowia, 2002. - Vol. 5, № 3. - P. 5-114 (in Russian).
Dudley T.R., Cullen J. Studies in the Old World Alysseae Hayek // Feddes Repert., 1965. - Bd. 71. Hf. 1-3. -S. 218-228.
Karelin G., Kirilow J. Enumeratio plantarum in desertis Songoriae orientalis et in jugo summarum alpium Alatau anno 1841 collectarum // Bull. Soc. Nat. Mosc., 1842. - T. 15, № 3. - P. 503-542.
Ledebour C.F. Flora Rossica. - Stuttgartiae, 1841. - T. 1 (1). - S. 1-240.
Litwinow D.I. Bibliography of the flora of Siberia. - St. Petersburg, 1909. - 459 p (in Russian).
McNeill J., Barrie F.R., Burdet H.M., Demoulin V., Hawksworth D.L., Marhold K., Nicolson D.H., Prado J., Silva P. C., Skog J.E., Wersema J.H., Turland N.J. International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (Vienna Code). -Rugell: A.R.G. Gantner Verlag KG, 2006. - 568 p.
Meyer F.K. Kritische Revision der “Thlaspi”-Aretn Europas, Afrikas und Vorderasiens. Spezieller Teil. 1. Thlaspi L. // Haussknechtia, 2001. - Vol. 8. - P. 3-42.
Pallas P.S. Reise durch verschiedene Provinzen des Rußischen Reichs. - St. Petersburg, 1773. - T. 2. - 744 S.
Schangin P.I. Tagebuch eine Reise im hohen Altaischen Gebirge von 1786 // Pallas P.S. Neue Nordische Beyträge. - St. Petersburg - Leipzig, 1793. - Bd. б. - S. 27-118.
Sievers J. Briefe aus Sibirien // Pallas P.S. Neueste Nordische Beyträge. - St. Petersburg - Leipzig, 1796. -Bd. 3 [7]. - S. 149-340.
Stschegleew S. Nouveau supplément à la flore Altaïque // Bull. Soc. Nat. Mosc., 1854. - T. 27, № 1. - P. 145-211.
Sytin A.K. Peter Simon Pallas, a botanist. - St. Petersburg, 1997. - 338 p. (in Russian).
Turczaninow N. Flora Baicalensi-Dahurica seu description plantarum in regionibus Cis- et Transbaicalensibus atque in Dahuria sponte nascentium [pats 2] // Bull. Soc. Nat. Mosc., 1842. - T. 15, № 2. - P. 223-313.
Turczaninow N. Animadversiones ad primam partem herbaria Turczaninowiani, nunc Universitatis Caesareae Charkowiensis // Bull. Soc. Nat. Mosc., 1855 [sub a. 1854]. - T. 27, № 4. - P. 271-372.
