Tagetes dombeyi (Asteraceae, Tageteae), a new species from the Central Andes first collected in the 18th century

Abstract

Tagetes dombeyi (Asteraceae, Tageteae), a new species from the Central Andes first collected in the 18th century. A new annual species of Tagetes from the Central Andes of Peru and Bolivia, T. dombeyi, is described and illustrated based on herbarium collections and photographs of the plants in their habitat. Tagetes dombeyi is closely related to Tagetes imbricata, Tagetes multiflora - both of which can occasionally be found mixed with the former on the same herbarium sheet - and Tagetes iltisiana. However, they can be distinguished by diagnostic characters of leaf, corolla, and pappus. A morphological description is provided along with an illustration, a range map, and a key to differentiating the Tagetes species that inhabit Peru and Bolivia.

Key words:
Bolivia; Compositae; herbarium collections; Peru; taxonomy

Resumo

Tagetes dombeyi (Asteraceae, Tageteae), una especie nueva de los Andes Centrales coleccionada por primera vez en el Siglo XVIII. Una especie anual de Tagetes de los Andes Centrales de Perú y Bolivia, T. dombeyi, es descrita e ilustrada por primera vez a partir de colecciones de herbario y fotografías de las plantas en su hábitat. Tagetes dombeyi se asemeja a Tagetes imbricata, Tagetes multiflora - siendo éstas dos ocasionalmente halladas montadas en la misma cartulina de herbario junto con la primera - y Tagetes iltisiana. Sin embargo, estas especies estrechamente relacionadas pueden ser distinguidas a partir de caracteres diagnóstico de hoja, corola y papus. Se provee una descripción morfológica de la nueva especie junto con una ilustración, un mapa de distribución geográfica y una clave para diferenciar las especies de Tagetes que habitan en Perú y Bolivia.

Palavras-chave:
Bolivia; Compositae; colecciones de herbario; Perú; taxonomía

Introduction

Tagetes L. is a genus of 45–55 species with a native distribution from the southwestern United States to central Chile and central Argentina, primarily in xeric highlands and montane regions (Strother 1977; Soule 1993; Schiavinato et al. 2017). Historically, the greatest richness of Tagetes species was recorded in Mexico with ca. 30 species (Soule 1993; Turner 1996; Schiavinato et al. 2021). However, the second high diversity area is the Central Andes (mainly western and northwestern Argentina, Bolivia, Ecuador, and Peru) where 15–20 species occur (Robinson 1999; Robinson & Soule 2006; Robinson 2014; Gutiérrez & Stampacchio 2015; Schiavinato et al. 2017). Furthermore, some species (e.g., Tagetes erecta Linnaeus [1753: 887], Tagetes lemmonii Gray [1883: 40], Tagetes minuta Linnaeus [1753: 887]) have been introduced around the world for horticultural purposes, becoming naturalized and invasive due to their weedy behavior (Soule 1996; Schiavinato et al. 2021, GBIF.org 2023).

Tagetes includes annual or perennial herbs, subshrubs, and shrubs, strongly aromatic due to the presence of secretory cavities in leaves and phyllaries; leaves opposite below, most of the upper ones alternate, with usually pinnately dissected blades; capitula radiate or subradiate, with phyllaries fused in one series; and a pappus of few scales in one or - more rarely - two series, each scale truncated or ending in a single long awn (rarely 3–5-awned) at the apex (Robinson 1973; Soule 1993; Schiavinato & Bartoli 2018).

As part of our integral taxonomic revision of Tagetes, in recent years we have been working in depth on a complex of South American species that are similar in appearance as they have an annual growth habit, their capitula are arranged in lax corymbiform capitulescences, and the involucres of phyllaries are partially purplish. Characters such as shape and color of leaf blades, number of phyllaries, color of corollas, and shape and size of pappus scales have proven useful for differentiating species, especially when working with early and/or depauperate herbarium specimens. An exhaustive morphological study of these diagnostic characters has allowed us to recircumscribe some very little-known species (Schiavinato & Bartoli 2018, 2019a) and to describe a new species (Schiavinato & Bartoli 2019b). Continuing with our work in this complex, we have recently detected several herbarium specimens from the Central Andes of Peru and Bolivia that show a combination of the aforementioned diagnostic characters that does not match any of the known species of the genus. This evidence, supported by photographs of the plants in the wild, allows us to describe a species new to science.

Material and Methods

The description of the new species was based on 29 herbarium specimens housed at LIL, LP, MA, NY, P, and US (Thiers, continuously updated), which were cross-checked against the type specimens of all accepted species of Tagetes. When physical specimens were unavailable, digital images were obtained from GBIF.org (2023), JSTOR (2023), or requested from the curators. The morphological study was complemented with photographic records of the new species available at iNaturalist (Lindqvist 2018).

General terminology for morphological and anatomical structures follows Beentje (2010). Terminology for leaf architecture follows Ellis et al. (2009), and for pappus morphology, it follows Roque & Bautista (2008) and Beentje (2010). When comparing the new species with its congeners, leaf blade measurements were taken in all cases from leaves located in the middle zone of the stems, excluding the reduced or bractiform upper ones to avoid distortions. The flowering and fruiting period of T. dombeyi was determined by cross-checking the phenological stages of the plants against the information available on the labels, considering only those specimens in which the reported collection date corresponds to a period of no more than two months.

The range map of the new species was made with QGIS.

Results and Discussion

Tagetes dombeyi Schiavinato, D.G.Gut. & Adr. Bartoli, sp. nov. Figs. 12345

1
Holotype sheet of Tagetes dombeyi (P 02140932).

Figure 2
Detail of cypselae and pappus of Tagetes dombeyi (from holotype sheet, P 02140932). Scale bar = 5 mm.

Figure 3
a-i. Tagetes dombeyi – a-b. habit; c. leaf; d. capitulum; e. corolla of ray floret; f. corolla of disc floret; g. stamen; h. cypsela and pappus; i. pappus scale. Drawn by María Alejandra Migoya based on paratype E. Cerrate 1690 (LP 083578).

Figure 4
a-d. Tagetes dombeyi in the wild (Peru, Department of Lima, Huarochirí Province) – a. habit; b-c. capitula; d. habitat (plants of T. dombeyi growing along the edge of the road [marked with an arrow]). Scale bars = 1 cm. All photographs by Annika Lindqvist.

Figure 5
Range map of Tagetes dombeyi (stars). Created using the Free and Open Source QGIS.

TYPE: PERU. Without locality, without date [between years 1778-1781], J. Dombey (holotype P 02140932! [Figs. 1, 2]; isotype P 02140933!). Fig. 3.

Tagetes dombeyi is morphologically close to Tagetes multiflora Kunth in Humboldt, Bonpland & Kunth (1818: 154), from which it differs in having discolorous leaves, darker on the adaxial surface (vs. concolorous leaves in T. multiflora); leaf blades pinnately dissected in broader segments, 2.5–5.5 mm wide (vs. leaf blades pinnately dissected in narrower segments, 1–2 mm wide), and scale pappus subulate - i.e., the widest part at the base of the scale and ending in a long, sharp point - and barbellate - i.e., bearing lateral projections much shorter than the width of the scale base - (vs. scale pappus oblanceolate or ensiform [i.e., the widest part in the distal two-fifths of the scale and ending in a triangulate apex] and plumose [i.e., bearing lateral projections longer than the width of the scale base]). Tagetes dombeyi also resembles Tagetes iltisiana Robinson (1973: 378) and Tagetes imbricata Schiavinato & Bartoli (2019b: 277), from which it differs in having limb of ray florets orange-yellow (vs. white-yellowish in both T. iltisiana and T. imbricata), and pappus equal to or longer than the cypsela - pappus/cypsela ratio 1 to 1.25 - (vs. pappus shorter than the cypsela [pappus/cypsela ratio 0.25 to 0.75]).

Slender annual herbs with a slender, unthickened taproot, (12–)20–40(–50) cm tall, marigold-like scent. Stems erect or decumbent, leafy except towards base, striate, glabrescent. Leaves herbaceous, green, discolorous, the adaxial surface slightly darker than the abaxial, opposite below, most of the upper ones alternate, shortly petiolate or subsessile, abaxial surface glabrous, adaxial surface glabrous or with few short and scattered trichomes; leaf blades at the mid-stem elliptic to oblong, 2–4 cm long, 1–2.5 cm wide, pinnately dissected into 5–11 segments, reducing in size and division until becoming bractiform towards the apex of the plant; leaf segments obovate-elliptic, 7–15 mm long, 2.5–5.5 mm wide, the largest in the distal part of the blade, pinnately lobed; lobes 0.6–1.5(–1.7) mm long, margin entire or 1–2-toothed on the largest lobes; veins 0.2–0.4 mm wide, white; glands ovate-circular, 0.17–0.25 mm long, 0.15–0.2 mm wide, pellucid, one at the base of each lobe and the rest irregularly arranged along the laminar tissue. Capitula radiate, heterogamous, 2–3 in lax terminal corymbiform capitulescences, exceptionally solitary in early specimens, peduncles 1–2.5(–4) cm long. Receptacles flat or slightly convex, naked, smooth or slightly alveolate. Involucres cylindrical or slightly urceolate, (9.5–)11–12.5(–17) mm long, (3–)3.5–4.5(–5) mm wide, the upper half partially or completely purplish, the lower half greenish. Phyllaries 5, in one series, connate except the apex, oblong, glabrous, irregularly streaked with elliptic to linear glands, (0.3–)0.4–0.5(–0.6) mm long, 0.1–0.15 mm wide, apex of phyllaries triangular, 0.5–0.8 mm long, 1–1.7 mm wide, obtuse, mutic or mucronate, often with a subapical circular gland. Ray florets 5, pistillate; corolla orange-yellow, exceeding the involucre, tube 4–5.5 mm long, 0.3–0.4 mm wide, papillose, with an apical notch, 0.3–0.5 mm long, ligule oblate, 0.6–1.3 mm long, 1.2–1.4 mm wide, entire or 2–3(–4)-lobate, glabrous; style branches linear, 0.4–0.5 mm long, apex obtuse, papillose. Disc florets 10–11, bisexual, corolla orange-yellow, tubular, 5-dentate, tube 3.8–4.7 mm long, 0.3–0.5 mm wide, papillose, lobes 0.25–0.4 mm long, 0.25–0.35 mm wide, triangular, papillose on inner surface; anthers 5, 0.4–0.7 mm long, 0.15–0.2 mm wide, rounded at the base, apical appendage 0.2–0.25 mm long, 0.06–0.1 mm wide, ovate-triangular, apex obtuse, filament collar ca. 0.5 mm long, 0.05 mm wide, cylindrical; style branches very short, ca. 0.1 mm long, apex obtuse, papillose. Cypselae (5–)5.3–6(–6.5) mm long, (0.6–)0.8–1.2 mm wide, fusiform, 4–5-ribbed, pubescent, black at maturity. Pappus of (3–)4–5 scales in one series, equal to or longer than the cypselae, (5–)5.5–6(–7) mm long, 1-awned, subulate, barbellate, lateral projections 0.1–0.15 mm, occasionally interspersed with (3–)4–5 very reduced scales, 0.15–0.35 mm long, with apex obtuse, erose or fimbriate.

Additional specimens examined: BOLIVIA. COCHABAMBA: Tunari, 3,000 m, IV-V.1892, fl., O. Kuntze (NY 03227914). LA PAZ: Larecaja Province, vicinity of Sorata, “in ruderatis” [on waste ground], 2,697 m, fl. and fr., G. Mandon 69 (P 02686602); “in ruderatis ad sepes”, [on waste ground near fences] 2,700-2,800 m, IV-V.1859, fl. and fr., G. Mandon 65 (NY 03227920, P 02509419, P 02686601); “Lancha de Cochipata, ad radicem montis Illampii” [Cochipata, at the base of the Nevado de Illampu], 3,100-3,200 m, IV.1859, fl., G. Mandon 66 (NY 03227918, P 02686593, P 02686594, P 02686603, P 04286312 [only the second plant from the left]); “via ad Chulaya” [along the road from Sorata to Chulaya], 2,600-3,200 m, IX.1859-VI.1860, fr., G. Mandon 66 (NY 03227919, P 02686595 [only the second plant from the left], P 02686596 [only the second and third plants from the left]). PERU. ANCASH: Recuay Province, Pararin, 2,800 m, 25.V.1988, fl., A. Cano 1877 (US 01809067). AREQUIPA: Caylloma Province, Cabanaconde, Río Colca, 3,850 m, 7.IV.1966, fl. and fr., J. López Guillén 252 (LP 083579). CAJAMARCA: Contumazá Province, vicinity of Guzmango, 2,500 m, 30.IV.1990, fl. and fr., A. Sagástegui A. 14256 (NY 03227916); 2,600 m, 2.V.1981, fl. and fr., A. Sagástegui A. et al. 9775 (NY 03227915). JUNÍN: “ex Tarma”, fl. and fr., H. Ruíz & J. Pavón (MA 816617). LIMA: Huarochirí Province, Cuchicala, mountain N of Huarochirí, 3,560 m, 6.V.1953, fl. and fr., E. Cerrate 1690 (LP 083578); Matucana, 22.IV.1877, fl., L. Savatier 539 (P 02509422 [only the plant on the bottom left]); Escuela de Agricultura, 2,100 m, 6.IV.1953, fl. and fr., E. Petersen & J. P. Hjerting 1234 (LIL 410577); Picoy, above Surco, 3,200-3,300 m, 22.V.1949, fl., R. Ferreyra 6090 (US 01809081); Río Blanco, E of Lima, 3,500-3,600 m, 14.V.1959, fl. and fr., L. Diers 901 (LP 083538); Valley of Río Rímac, NW of Matucana, 5-6 km above San Mateo, ca. 3,400 m, 23.V.1979, fl. and fr., H. Teppner 79/76 (US 01808762). Lima Province, “habitat Lima juxta aquas” [Lima, near watercourses], fl., J. Dombey (P 00673391 [ex Herb. Jussieu 9021]); mountains near Chosica, 2,000-2,100 m, IV.1910, fl. and fr., A. Weberbauer 5358 (US 01808763). Yauyos Province, Atjsacki, mountain E of Tupe, 2,930 m, 4.I.1952, E. Cerrate & O. Tovar 1047 (LP 083626). MOQUEGUA: Mariscal Nieto Province, Torata, 2,200-2,300 m, 17-18. III.1925, fl., A. Weberbauer 7395 (US 01808760).

The specific epithet dombeyi honors Joseph Dombey (1742–1794), French naturalist and explorer of Brazil, Chile, and Peru (Stafleu & Cowan 1976) and collector of the holotype of the new species.

Flowering and/or fruiting specimens of Tagetes dombeyi were collected from March to May, at the end of summer and the first half of autumn in the Southern Hemisphere, coinciding with the other annual Tagetes that inhabit that area (Soule 1996). Paratype J. Dombey s.n. (P 00673391 [ex Herb. Jussieu 9021]) has a label annotation that reads “floret novembri” (flowering in November), which is probably a mistake; it may as well be a specimen cultivated in the Northern Hemisphere from Peruvian seeds collected by Dombey.

Tagetes dombeyi is widely distributed in the Central Andes of Peru (Departments of Ancash, Arequipa, Cajamarca, Junín, Lima, and Moquegua) and Bolivia (Departments of Cochabamba and La Paz). It inhabits hillsides, rocky soils, and roadsides between 1,900–3,850 m above sea level (Figs. 4; 5).

The vernacular names are “chalchallta”, “chilche”, according to labels on paratypes E. Cerrate & O. Tovar 1047 (LP 083626) and E. Cerrate 1690 (LP 083578), respectively.

Dried specimens of T. dombeyi might be easily confused with other annual Tagetes with lax terminal corymbiform capitulescences that occur in the Central Andes of Peru and Bolivia such as T. iltisiana, T. imbricata, and T. multiflora. The distinguishing character states of these taxa are summarized in Table 1. Tagetes dombeyi may be also confused with early specimens of Tagetes terniflora Kunth in Humboldt, Bonpland & Kunth (1818: 154), but they can be easily differentiated because T. terniflora is the only one in the genus having dimorphic capitula (i.e., multiflorous and uniflorous capitula arranged in the same capitulescence).

Table 1
Morphological differences between Tagetes dombeyi and related taxa.

	Tagetes dombeyi, sp. nov.	Tagetes iltisiana	Tagetes imbricata	Tagetes multiflora
Leaf blade segments (width)	2.5–5.5 mm	2–4 mm	1–1.5 mm	1–2 mm
Leaf surfaces (color)	discolorous	discolorous	concolorous	concolorous
Ray florets limb (color)	orange-yellow	white-yellowish	white-yellowish	orange-yellow
Pappus (relative length)	equal to or longer than the cypsela (pappus/cypsela ratio 1–1.25)	shorter than the cypsela (pappus/cypsela ratio 0.25–0.75)	shorter than the cypsela (pappus/cypsela ratio 0.25–0.75)	equal to or longer than the cypsela (pappus/cypsela ratio 1–1.25)
Pappus scales (shape)	subulate, wider at the base	subulate, wider at the base	subulate, wider at the base	oblanceolate or ensiform, the widest part in the distal two-fifths
Pappus scales (margin)	barbellate, lateral projections much shorter than the width of the scale base	barbellate, lateral projections much shorter than the width of the scale base	barbellate, lateral projections much shorter than the width of the scale base	plumose, lateral projections longer than the width of the scale base

Unfortunately, one or more of the diagnostic characters of T. dombeyi cited in the diagnosis are not easily observable in most of the specimens studied for this work due to inadequate herborization. To avoid ambiguity, then, we believe that the most appropriate specimen to be selected as the holotype of the new species is J. Dombey s.n. (P 02140932), which is complete and well-preserved (even having been collected more than 200 years ago) and adequately fits the description of the new species. A duplicate of this specimen is also kept at P (P 02140933). Despite the fact that both specimens only show “Pérou” on labels, information about the geographical distribution, habitat, and phenology of T. dombeyi can be obtained from paratypes. The year of collection of the holotype and isotype may be around 1778–1781 according to the itinerary of the Botanical Expedition that Dombey was part of (Álvarez López 1957; González Bueno & Rodríguez Nozal 2003). Specimen J. Dombey s.n. (P 00673391 [ex Herb. Jussieu 9021]) shows a label with a different collection locality (“habitat Lima juxta aquas”). Therefore, it cannot be considered a duplicate of the holotype and is treated here as a paratype of T. dombeyi.

P 02140932 and P 02140933 were previously identified as Tagetes gracilis Candolle (1836: 645) by former P curator Edouard Spach (1801–1879) (Steinberg 1977; Stafleu & Cowan 1985) and show “Type” and “Isotype” labels, respectively. However, both specimens differ taxonomically from the holotype of T. gracilis, which is J. Dombey 29 (P02509420 [<http://coldb.mnhn.fr/catalognumber/mnhn/p/p02509420>], isotype G 00457009[<http://www.ville-ge.ch/musinfo/bd/cjb/chg/adetail.php?id=308526⟨=en>]) (Neher 1966; Soule 1993; Robinson & Soule 2006; Hind 2011), and should be excluded from the original material of this name. Tagetes gracilis was previously treated as a synonym of T. multiflora (Soule 1993; Robinson & Soule 2006; Hind 2011; Rodríguez Rodríguez et al. 2016), which we agree with after having examined the type specimens and protologues of both names.

Some collections from the 18th and 19th centuries have mixed materials. Specimen H. Ruiz & J. Pavón s.n. housed at MA shows one plant belonging to T. dombeyi (MA 816617) and the other three to T. multiflora (MA 816616) mounted on the same sheet. This mixture of material was opportunely detected by Rosario E. Delgado-Montaño in 1995, although she identified MA 816617 as T. gracilis. On the other hand, sheet P 02509422 of L. Savatier 539 shows only one plant belonging to T. dombeyi (mounted on the bottom left) and the rest to T. multiflora, but at least two other sheets of the same gathering (P 02509423 and P 02509424) have only T. multiflora material.

Schultz (1866) listed G. Mandon 66 as Tagetes pusilla Kunth in Humboldt, Bonpland & Kunth (1818: 152) - currently a synonym of Tagetes filifolia Lagasca y Segura (1816: 28) (Soule 1993; Schiavinato et al. 2017) - and G. Mandon 65 and G. Mandon 69 as T. multiflora, but they are recognized here (at least in part) as T. dombeyi. These gatherings are made up of a large number of sheets with plants collected from various sites near Sorata in Bolivia. All the plants mounted on the sheets of Mandon 65 and Mandon 69 examined for this work belong to T. dombeyi. On the other hand, many sheets of Mandon 66 (which come from two different sites, “Lancha de Cochipata” and “via ad Chulaya”) show a mixture between the new species and T. imbricata; furthermore, at least one sheet of Mandon 66 (P 04286316) with only T. imbricata and no T. dombeyi was found. Since Mandon’s collections come from the same area and the information on the labels is ambiguous, it would not be unexpected that unseen duplicates of Mandon 65 and/or Mandon 69 also show mixed material.

Kuntze (1898) and Robinson (2014) reported Tagetes daucoides Schrader (1833: 5) from Bolivia based on specimen O. Kuntze (NY 03227914), but it differs taxonomically from the type material of this name and is here recognized as T. dombeyi. As was indicated by Soule (1993), T. daucoides is a dubious name that may refer to a cultivated taxon of hybrid origin and has never been found in the wild; there is no evidence of its presence in Bolivia (Soule 1993; Hind 2011).

Key to Tagetes species from Peru and Bolivia

• 1. Limb of ray florets 8–15 mm long 2

• 1’. Limb of ray florets 0.5–5 mm long 3

  • 2. Leaf blade segments linear-lanceolate, 1–3(–4) mm wide, margin sharply serrate Tagetes campanulata

  • 2’. Leaf blade segments elliptic-ovate, 5–10 mm wide, margin entire or very softly serrate Tagetes elliptica

    • 3. Involucres covered with punctiform glands, apex of phyllaries truncated, bearing a small tooth. Plants with anise-like odor Tagetes filifolia

    • 3’. Involucres covered with linear to elliptic glands, apex of phyllaries acute or obtuse but not truncated, mutic. Plants odorless or with marigold-like odor, not aniseed 4

      • 4. Most of pappus scales 3–5-awned at the apex (few not divided, 1-awned scales often present) Tagetes praetermissa

      • 4’. All pappus scales truncated or ending in a single long awn at the apex, never divided into 3–5 awns 5

        • 5. Capitulescence with few uniflorous and several multiflorous capitula Tagetes terniflora

        • 5’. Capitulescence with all multiflorous capitula 6

          • 6. Pappus equal to or longer than the cypsela (ratio pappus/cypsela 1–1.25) 7

          • 6’. Pappus shorter than the cypsela (ratio pappus/cypsela 0.25–0.75) 8

            • 7. Scale pappus subulate (the widest part at the base) and barbellate (lateral projections much shorter than the width of the scale base). Leaves discolorous, leaf blade segments 2.5–5.5 mm wide Tagetes dombeyi

            • 7’. Scale pappus oblanceolate to ensiform (the widest part at the distal two-fifths) and plumose (lateral projections equal to or longer than the width of the scale base). Leaves concolorous, leaf blade segments 1–2 mm wide Tagetes multiflora

              • 8. Capitula (10–)20–50(–60) arranged in dense capitulescences, peduncles 2–8 mm long 9

              • 8’. Capitula (1–)2–3(–8) arranged in lax capitulescences, peduncles 10–30(–40) mm long 10

                • 9. Ray florets 2-3, limb 0.5–1.5 mm long, white-yellowish. Disc florets 3–8 Tagetes minuta

                • 9’. Ray florets 5, limb 2–5 mm long, yellow. Disc florets 10–18. Tagetes mandonii

                  • 10. Phyllaries 3(–4). Leaves discolorous, leaf blade segments 2–4 mm wide Tagetes iltisiana

                  • 10’. Phyllaries 5–7. Leaves concolorous, leaf blade segments 1–1.5 mm wide Tagetes imbricata

Data availability statement

In accordance with Open Science communication practices, the authors inform that all data are available within the manuscript.

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge Florian Jabbour (P), for providing digital images of cypselae and pappus from the holotype of T. dombeyi (Fig. 2); Amy Weiss (NY), for clarifying dates and collection numbers from Mandon’s specimens; the curators of LIL, L P, N Y, and US, for facilitating access to the botanical collection; and the anonymous reviewers, for their suggestions for improving the manuscript. We would specially like to thank María Alejandra Migoya, for the illustration of T. dombeyi (Fig. 3); Annika Lindqvist, for the photographs of T. dombeyi in the wild (Fig. 4); and Milagros Anzuinelli, for her help in preparing the range map of T. dombeyi (Fig. 5). Digital images of the holotype of T. dombeyi (Figs. 1-2) are reproduced with the permission of the Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, Paris (France)-Collection: vascular plants (P). Photographs of T. dombeyi in the wild (Fig. 4) are reproduced with the permission of Annika Lindqvist.

This work was supported in Argentina by Universidad de Buenos Aires (grant UBACyT 20020190100176BA, D.J.S. and A.B.), Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET fellowship of D.J.S, and grant PUE22920160100098CO, D.G.G), Agencia Nacional de Promoción Científica y Tecnológica (ANPCyT grants PICT-2019-2019-02319 and PICT-2019-2019-03011, D.G.G.), and Universidad Nacional de La Plata (UNLP grant N929, D.G.G).

References

• Álvarez López E (1957) Dombey y la Expedición al Perú y Chile. Anales del Instituto Botánico A.J. Cavanilles 14: 31-129.
• Beentje H (2010) The Kew Plant Glossary, an illustrated dictionary of plant terms. Kew Publishing, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. 164p. <https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8339.2010.01099.x>.
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8339.2010.01099.x
• Candolle AP de (1836) Prodromus Systematis Naturalis Regni Vegetabilis. Vol. 5. Treuttel & Würtz, Paris. 706p.
• Ellis B, Daly DC, Hickey LJ, Johnson KR, Mitchell JD, Wilf P & Wing SL (2009) Manual of leaf architecture. Cornell University Press, Ithaca. 200p.
• GBIF.org (2023) GBIF Occurrence Download. Available at <https://doi.org/10.15468/dl.nfv9ts>. Access on 13 January 2023.
  » https://doi.org/10.15468/dl.nfv9ts
• González Bueno A & Rodríguez Nozal R (2003) Crónica de la Expedición. In: Muñoz Garmendía F (ed.) La botánica al servicio de la corona: la expedición de Ruiz, Pavón y Dombey al virreinato del Perú (1777-1831). CSIC-Lunwerg, Madrid. Pp. 51-99.
• Gray A (1883) Contributions to North American Botany. I. Characters of New Compositae, with revisions of certain genera, and critical notes. Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 19: 1-73. <https://doi.org/10.2307/25138721>.
  » https://doi.org/10.2307/25138721
• Gutiérrez DG & Stampacchio ML (2015) Tagetes. In: Zuloaga FO, Belgrano MJ & Anton AM (eds.) Flora Argentina: Flora Vascular de la República Argentina 7(2). Estudio Sigma SRL, Buenos Aires. Pp. 118-129.
• Hind DJN (2011) An annotated preliminary checklist of the Compositae of Bolivia (version 2). Available at <https://www.kew.org/sites/default/files/2019-01/Bolivian%20compositae%20checklist.pdf>. Access on 6 July 2022.
  » https://www.kew.org/sites/default/files/2019-01/Bolivian%20compositae%20checklist.pdf
• Humboldt FWHA, Bonpland AJA & Kunth KS (1818) Nova genera et species plantarum quas in peregrinatione ad plagam aequinoctialem orbis novi collegerunt, descripserunt, partim adumbraverunt (folio ed.). Vol. 4. Apud N. Maze, Bibliopolam, Paris. 247p. + 111pls.
• JSTOR (2023) Global Plants. Available at <http://plants.jstor.org/>. Access on 13 January 2023.
  » http://plants.jstor.org/
• Kuntze O (1898) Revisio Generum Plantarum. Vol 3. Arthur Felix, Leipzig. 576p.
• Lagasca y Segura M (1816) Genera et species plantarum, quae aut novae sunt aut nondum recte cognoscuntur. Typographia Regia, Madrid. 35p.
• Lindqvist A (2018) iNaturalist observations. Available at <https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/11414725>; <https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/11414735>. Access on 13 January 2023.
  » https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/11414725» https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/11414735
• Linnaeus C von (1753) Species Plantarum. Laurentii Salvii, Stockholm. 1200p.
• Neher RT (1966) Monograph of the genus Tagetes. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. Indiana University, Bloomington. 306p.
• Robinson H (1973) Additions to the genus Tagetes (Helenieae, Asteraceae). Phytologia 26: 378-380.
• Robinson H (1999) Tagetes. In: Jørgensen PM & León-Yáñez S (eds.) Catalogue of the Vascular Plants of Ecuador. Monographs in Systematic Botany from the Mssouri Botanical Garden 75. Missouri Botanical Garden Press, St. Louis. Pp. 310-311.
• Robinson H (2014) Tagetes. In: Jørgensen PM, Nee MH & Beck SG (eds.) Catálogo de las plantas vasculares de Bolivia. Monographs in Systematic Botany from the Missouri Botanical Garden 127. Missouri Botanical Garden Press, St. Louis. Pp. 290-382.
• Robinson H & Soule JA (2006) Tagetes L. In: Harling G & Andersson L (eds.) Flora of Ecuador 77(2). University of Göteborg-Riksmuseum, Göteborg-Stockholm. Pp. 133-154.
• Rodríguez Rodríguez EF, Alvítez Izquierdo E, Pollack Velásquez L, Melgarejo Salas N & Sagástegui Alva A (2016) Catálogo de Asteraceae de la Región La Libertad, Perú. Sagasteguiana 4: 73-106.
• Roque N & Bautista H (2008) Asteraceae: Caracterização e Morfologia Floral. EDUFBA, Salvador. 71p.
• Schiavinato DJ & Bartoli A (2018) Una nueva cita para la Flora Argentina: Tagetes praetermissa (Asteraceae, Tageteae). Boletín de la Sociedad Argentina de Botánica 53: 465-468. <https://doi.org/10.31055/1851.2372.v53.n3.21319>.
  » https://doi.org/10.31055/1851.2372.v53.n3.21319
• Schiavinato DJ & Bartoli A (2019a) Clarificación y Epitipificación de Tagetes iltisiana (Asteraceae, Tageteae). Boletín de la Sociedad Argentina de Botánica 54: 589-598. <https://doi.org/10.31055/1851.2372.v54.n4.24954>.
  » https://doi.org/10.31055/1851.2372.v54.n4.24954
• Schiavinato DJ & Bartoli A (2019b) Tagetes imbricata (Asteraceae, Tageteae), a new species from northwestern Argentina and Bolivia. Phytotaxa 408: 276-282. <https://doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.408.4.4>.
  » https://doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.408.4.4
• Schiavinato DJ, Gutiérrez DG & Bartoli A (2017) Typifications and nomenclatural clarifications in South American Tagetes (Asteraceae, Tageteae). Phytotaxa 326: 175-188. <https://doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.326.3.2>.
  » https://doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.326.3.2
• Schiavinato DJ, Gutiérrez DG & Bartoli A (2021) Typifications and taxonomical rearrangements in North and Central American Tagetes (Asteraceae, Tageteae). Phytotaxa 507: 81-97. <https://doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.507.1.4>.
  » https://doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.507.1.4
• Schrader HA (1833) Index Seminum Horti Academici Gottingensis. Universität Göttingen, Göttingen. 6p.
• Schultz “Bipontinus” CH (1866) Enumeratio Cassiniacearum a cl. G. Mandon in Bolivia a. 1857-1861 lectarum. Linnaea 34: 527-536.
• Soule JA (1993) Systematics of Tagetes (Asteraceae, Tageteae). Ph.D. thesis. University of Texas, Austin. 780p.
• Soule JA (1996) Infrageneric systematics of Tagetes. In: Hind DJN & Beentje HJ (eds.) Compositae: systematics. Proceedings of the International Compositae Conference, Kew, 1994. Vol. 1. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. Pp. 435-443.
• Stafleu FA & Cowan RS (1976-1988) Taxonomic literature (2^nd edition). Bohn, Scheltema & Holkema, Utrecht. Available at <http://www.sil.si.edu/DigitalCollections/tl-2/>. Access on 30 June 2022.
  » http://www.sil.si.edu/DigitalCollections/tl-2/
• Steinberg CH (1977) The collectors and collections in the Herbarium Webb. Webbia 32: 1-49. <https://doi.org/10.1080/00837792.1977.10670081>.
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/00837792.1977.10670081
• Strother JL (1977) Tageteae - systematic review. In: Heywood VH, Harborne JB & Turner BL (eds.) The Biology and chemistry of the compositae. Vol. 2. Academic Press, London. Pp. 769-783.
• Thiers B (continuously updated) Index Herbariorum: a global directory of public herbaria and associated staff. New York Botanical Garden’s Virtual Herbarium. Available at <http://sweetgum.nybg.org/science/ih/>. Access on 6 July 2022.
  » http://sweetgum.nybg.org/science/ih/
• Turner BL (1996) The comps of Mexico: a systematic account of the family Asteraceae, vol. 6: Tageteae and Anthemideae. Phytologia Memoirs 10: i-ii, 1-22, 43-93.

Edited by

Area Editor: Dra. Maria Teresa Buril

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  30 Oct 2023
• Date of issue
  2023

History

• Received
  27 Feb 2023
• Accepted
  16 June 2023