Phytotaxa 397 (1): 117–120 https://www.mapress.com/j/pt/ Copyright © 2019 Magnolia Press Correspondence PHYTOTAXA ISSN 1179-3155 (print edition) ISSN 1179-3163 (online edition) Accepted by Gianniantonio Domina: 12 Jan. 2019; published: 14 Mar. 2019 https://doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.397.1.13 117 About the identity of Erythrina graefferi (Fabaceae) EMANUELE DEL GUACCHIO 1 *, PAOLO DE LUCA 1 & PAOLO CAPUTO 1,2 1 University of Naples Federico II, Botanical Garden, via Foria 223, 80139 Naples, Italy; e-mail: edelgua@email.it 2 University of Naples Federico II, Department of Biology, via Foria 223, 80139 Naples, Italy; *author for correspondence The pantropical genus Erythrina Linnaeus (1753: 706) (Fabaceae: Papilionidae) was introduced into the Kingdom of Naples (roughly corresponding to southern Italy) between the 18 th and the 19 th centuries (Graefer 1803, De Luca et al. 2018). In the same period, Coral Trees were cultivated in Naples (e.g., Tenore 1805) and Palermo (Domina & Raimondo 2011). Tineo (1827), employing on plants cultivated in Palermo, described E. graefferi Tineo (1827: 278). The protologue reports: “E. Viridi-glaucescens. Caule arboreo, rimoso, petiolisque inermibus; foliolis ovatis, vel ovato-oblongis, integerrimis, coriaceis; calyce truncato, subtrilobo, vexillo late-ovato-concavo” (transl.: “An E[rythrina with] green-glaucous [foliage]. Stem arboreal, fissured, with petioles lacking spines; with leaflets ovate or ovate-oblong, perfectly entire margins, coriaceous; with calyx truncate and sub-trilobate, standard broadly ovate and conduplicate”). The native range is provided but only with doubt: South America. Details about the flowering season (occurring in May–July in Sicily), and the life form (tree) were reported. Finally, Tineo added further morphological information: “Species pulcherrhima. Racemi longissimi 1.-3. pedales. Flores sesquipollicares, atropurpurei. Semina castanea. Petiolus, et costa media fol. rarissime aculeo notata” (transl.: “A very beautiful species. Pseudo-racemes very long, about 30–90 cm. Flowers about 3 cm long, deep red. Seeds brownish. Petiole and central vein of the leaf very rarely aculeate”. Finally, he informed that he received this plant from Caserta under the misapplied name “E. speciosa”, what definitively appears as the origin of a mistake. In fact, E. graefferi Tineo is nowadays regarded as a synonym of E. speciosa Andrews (1807: plate CCCCXLIII) (The Plant List 2013, ILDIS 2015), especially after the authoritative opinion by Krukoff (1939: 245). However, this latter author himself reported the synonymy only doubtfully, and without having examined any original material of the Tineo’s name. Actually, morphological features of E. speciosa do not match the protologue of E. graefferi (Tineo 1827). For example, E. speciosa normally has spiny stem and chartaceous leaves; its flowers have strictly elliptic standards (Krukoff 1939). A similar doubt was raised already by Terracciano (1899: 76–77). Dehnhardt (1832) warned that the plants labelled as “E. Gräfferi” in the Hortus Camaldulensis (Del Guacchio et al. 2016) came from the Royal Park of Caserta, and were not to be confused with E. speciosa Andrews. As said above, the same plants were sent from Caserta to Naples (Tenore 1819) and Palermo (Tineo 1827) with the name “Erythina speciosa”, i.e. “Beautiful Coral Tree”. In addition, De Luca et al. (2018) attributed the indication of E. graefferi by Dehnhardt (1832) to E. crista-galli, but without any explanation and mistakenly listing E. graefferi among the “nomina nuda”. In any case, the identification by De Luca et al. (2018) is fully based on five specimens at NAP. The first pertinent specimen at NAP (Gussone’s Collection) includes only leaves and bears three labels in Gussone’s handwriting: (1) “Erythrina speciosa H. R. Cas. [Royal Park of Caserta]”, (2) “Erythrina Graefferi Tineo Cat. H. Pan. \ E. speciosa Graefer H. Cas. non Andrews” \ Brasilia?”, (3) “Erythrina cristagalli! …” with morphological and taxonomical notes (difficult to read). Another specimen (Fig. 1) includes a flowering pseudo-raceme with leaves and the label in Gussone’s handwriting “Erythrina speciosa H. R. Cas. \ ex H. R. Cas.”. The third specimen, greatly damaged by insects, consists of a leafed branchlet and loose leaves, and bears another label by Gussone: “Erythtrina speciosa H. R. Cas. non Willd. [? Scarcely readable and partly erased] \ Coltivata”. A fourth specimen, greatly damaged as well, includes again only loose leaves and a pseudo-raceme without flowers. The label had been written by F. Dehnhardt: “Erythrina Graefferi Ten. \ H. Casert.”. A last specimen includes a terminal branchlet with mature pods and a label by Dehnhardt reporting “Erythrina Graefferi Ten. (?) \ (Culta) \ ?”. Even if none of these specimens can be evidently regarded as original material, they nevertheless suggest the following conclusions: (a) at that time the name Erythrina speciosa was misapplied to some Coral-trees cultivated in Campania; (b) the same taxon was named as E. graefferi by Tineo in Sicily, (c) which is in turn a mere synonym of E. crista-galli, as already supposed by Gussone (cf. also Terracciano 1899). In fact, the examined material shows the following combination of features, leading to E. crista-galli: woody branchlets, leaflets coriaceous, glabrous, somehow waxy, ovate-elliptic up to 4 x 9 cm wide, entire; inflorescence terminal, leafy, arching, calyx glabrous, campanulate, shallowly 2-lipped, corolla standard concave, fruit moniliform, up to 16 mm wide. Recently, E. crista-galli