identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
03CA87B2FFE7F501CBEC871A94B10EDA.text	03CA87B2FFE7F501CBEC871A94B10EDA.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Commelina agraria var. repens Seubert 1855	<div><p>1. Commelina agraria var. repens Seubert (1855: 261)</p><p>Lectotype (designated here): — BRAZIL. Amazonas: C. F. P. von Martius s.n. (M-0274950! [Fig. 1]).</p><p>= Commelina diffusa Burman (1768: 18, tab. 7[2]), syn. nov.</p><p>Lectotype (designated by Hunt 1994: 172):— INDIA. Coromandel, D. Outgaerden s.n. (G-00360106!).</p><p>Notes: —The protologue of C. agraria var. repens provides the following information: “statura depressa, caule repente, foliis parvis subcordato-ovatis” and “ in pratis udiusculis ad oppidulum Ega prov. Rio Negro [...] Mart. [Martius]”. I was able to trace three sheets at M (M-0274950, M-0274951 and M-0274956) that contain original specimens for this name. I here designate one of them, M-0274950 (Fig. 1) as the lectotype of C. agraria var. repens . The study of the type confirms that this name is a synonym of C. diffusa .</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03CA87B2FFE7F501CBEC871A94B10EDA	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Hassemer, Gustavo	Hassemer, Gustavo (2017): Taxonomic and nomenclatural notes on neotropical Commelina (Commelinaceae), and an identification key for Brazil, Guyana, Paraguay, Suriname and Uruguay. Phytotaxa 303 (2): 101-117, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.303.2.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.303.2.1
03CA87B2FFE7F501CBEC86BB92D808E7.text	03CA87B2FFE7F501CBEC86BB92D808E7.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Commelina guyanensis Klotzsch ex Seubert 1855	<div><p>2. Commelina guyanensis Klotzsch ex Seubert (1855: 262), nomem dubium</p><p>– Commelina guianensis Klotzsch ex Schomburgk (1849: 1064), nom. inval. (Art. 38.1; see also Art. 38.3)</p><p>Notes: —This name was first published in Schomburgk (1849: 1064) as “ C. guianensis Kl. ”, but this is an invalid name since no diagnosis or description was provided (Art. 38.1; see also Art. 38.3). Later, Seubert (1855) validly published this name with a slightly different spelling; “ Commelina guyanensis ”. The type of this name, which was collected by R.H. Schomburgk in Guyana, was most probably destroyed in 1943 when B was bombed. No extant specimens that could be considered as original material for this name could be located at B (Robert Vogt, pers. comm.), nor at any other herbaria consulted, and no illustrations were cited in the protologue. The option for designating a neotype for this name appears undesirable, since the very brief description provided by Seubert (1855: 262) is too incomplete and does not permit to unequivocally link this name to any accepted species of Commelina .</p><p>Since C. guyanensis does not appear to threaten any currently accepted name, Art. 56.1 does not apply and therefore this name could not be proposed for rejection. Since it is not possible to lectotypify C. guyanensis, there is no basis to neotypify it, and no reason to reject it, this name is here listed as nomem dubium.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03CA87B2FFE7F501CBEC86BB92D808E7	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Hassemer, Gustavo	Hassemer, Gustavo (2017): Taxonomic and nomenclatural notes on neotropical Commelina (Commelinaceae), and an identification key for Brazil, Guyana, Paraguay, Suriname and Uruguay. Phytotaxa 303 (2): 101-117, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.303.2.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.303.2.1
03CA87B2FFE7F502CBEC837297D70DC2.text	03CA87B2FFE7F502CBEC837297D70DC2.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Commelina martiana Seubert 1855	<div><p>3. Commelina martiana Seubert (1855: 265, tab. 37[I])</p><p>Lectotype (designated here): — BRAZIL. Bahia: “ in silvis udis ad Caitete ”, C. F. P. von Martius s.n. (M-0243589! [Fig. 2]; isolectotype M-0243590!).</p><p>= Commelina erecta Linnaeus (1753: 41)</p><p>Lectotype (designated by Clarke 1881: 181):—[illustration] tab. 77 in Dillen (1732).</p><p>Notes: —The protologue of C. martiana (Seubert 1855: 265) provides the following information on the type: “ Crescit in silvis udis ad Caitete prov. Bahiensis: M. [Martius] Floret Octobri ”. There are two sheets kept at M (M-0243589 and M-0243590) that can be considered original material for this name; the specimens on these two sheets evidently belong to the same species. These two sheets have labels with different numbers (59 and 60, respectively), which at first would suggest that they are not part of the same gathering. However, these labels are not Martius’ collector numbers and they were added much later by Adolph Toepffer as part of an effort to organise the collections housed at M (Hans-Joachim Esser, pers. comm.). I here designate one of these sheets (M-0243589; Fig. 2), which has information on the label that matches exactly that provided in the protologue, as the lectotype of C. martiana .</p><p>Commelina martiana has been accepted as a synonym of C. erecta in Barreto (1997) and Fernández &amp; Cayola</p><p>(2014), to which I agree.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03CA87B2FFE7F502CBEC837297D70DC2	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Hassemer, Gustavo	Hassemer, Gustavo (2017): Taxonomic and nomenclatural notes on neotropical Commelina (Commelinaceae), and an identification key for Brazil, Guyana, Paraguay, Suriname and Uruguay. Phytotaxa 303 (2): 101-117, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.303.2.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.303.2.1
03CA87B2FFE2F504CBEC85F5932B0B0E.text	03CA87B2FFE2F504CBEC85F5932B0B0E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Commelina platyphylla Klotzsch ex Seubert 1855	<div><p>4. Commelina platyphylla Klotzsch ex Seubert (1855: 262)</p><p>Lectotype (designated here): — GUYANA. R. H. Schomburgk 1531 (B-100247303! [Fig. 3]; isolectotype K-000363253!).</p><p>– Commelina platyphylla Klotzsch ex Schomburgk (1849: 897), nom. inval. (Art. 38.1; see also Art. 38.3)</p><p>= Commelina platyphylla var. balansae Clarke (1881: 177)</p><p>≡ Commelina balansae (C.B.Clarke) Herter (1940: 148)</p><p>Lectotype (designated here): — PARAGUAY. L’assomption, dans les champs en friche, April 1875, B. Balansa 593 (K-000363250! [Fig. 4]; isolectotypes G-00038182!, G-00489279!, P-01639104!, P-01742735!).</p><p>Distribution: —Eastern tropical and subtropical South America: northeastern Argentina, eastern Bolivia, Brazil, Guyana (where the type originated from), Paraguay, and Uruguay, in altitudes ranging from sea level to 1000 m (Barreto 1997, Zuloaga et al. 2008, Fernández &amp; Cayola 2014).</p><p>Habitat: —Open areas, such as cerrado grasslands.</p><p>Conservation status: —Least Concern (LC). This species has a wide distribution and is fairly common through its range.</p><p>Notes: — Commelina platyphylla was first published by Schomburgk (1849: 897) for Guyana; however, the name was not validly published since it lacked a diagnosis and description (Art. 38.1; see also Art. 38.3). This name was later validly published by Seubert (1855: 262), who indicated the material was collected by “[R. H.] Schomburgk in Guyana anglica”, and cited it could also occur in northern Brazil. No further information was given on the type specimen. Since Johann Friedrich Klotzsch was in Berlin when both Schomburgk’s and Seubert’s names were published it is likely his specimens were there too. Therefore I designate here the specimen on a sheet kept at B (B-100247303; Fig. 3) as lectotype for C. platyphylla; a duplicate (isolectotype) is kept at K (K-000363253) .</p><p>The authorship of C. platyphylla has been erroneously presented in recent literature such as Fernández &amp; Cayola (2014) and Hassemer et al. (2016b), and the databases IPNI (http://www.ipni.org) and Tropicos (http://tropicos.org).</p><p>The name C. platyphylla var. balansae was published by Clarke (1881: 177), originally spelled “ Balansai ”, based on plants collected in Paraguay, Bolivia and Uruguay. He described this variety as differing from C. platyphylla by “foliis obtusis; seminibus oblongis”. Later, Herter (1940) raised this entity to species rank, without any explanation regarding this change. The protologue (Clarke 1881: 177) provided the following information concerning the type: “ Paraguay (Balansa n. 593, floribus albis); Asuncion (Gilbert). Bolivia; in Andibus prope Chiquitos (D’Orbigny n. 942). Uruguay (Aug. de St-Hilaire n. 2566 partim, et n. 2567 partim; Lorentz n. 603 partim)”; all these gatherings are to be regarded as syntypes (Art. 9.5). As the first element mentioned, and being clearly in accordance with the description in the protologue, I chose a lectotype from the Balansa 593 specimens. Considering that Charles Baron Clarke worked for many years in Kew, I designate here a sheet kept at K (K-000363250; Fig. 4) as lectotype for C. platyphylla var. balansae .</p><p>Commelina platyphylla var. balansae has already been regarded as a synonym of C. platyphylla in taxonomic literature (Bacigalupo 1964) and check lists (Zuloaga et al. 2008, Fernández &amp; Cayola 2014); however, some authors have accepted it as a separate taxon (e.g., Barreto 1997). Having had the opportunity to compare the types, I found no characters that permit to separate these two and therefore I agree with its synonymisation under C. platyphylla .</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03CA87B2FFE2F504CBEC85F5932B0B0E	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Hassemer, Gustavo	Hassemer, Gustavo (2017): Taxonomic and nomenclatural notes on neotropical Commelina (Commelinaceae), and an identification key for Brazil, Guyana, Paraguay, Suriname and Uruguay. Phytotaxa 303 (2): 101-117, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.303.2.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.303.2.1
03CA87B2FFE2F504CBEC831597960516.text	03CA87B2FFE2F504CBEC831597960516.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Commelina pohliana Seubert 1855	<div><p>5. Commelina pohliana Seubert (1855: 265, tab. 36[II])</p><p>Lectotype (designated here): —[illustration] tab. 36(II) in Seubert (1855).</p><p>= Commelina erecta Linnaeus (1753: 41)</p><p>Lectotype (designated by Clarke 1881: 181):—[illustration] tab. 77 in Dillen (1732).</p><p>Notes: —The protologue of C. pohliana provides the following information about the type: “ Crescit prope Ponzo Allegre prov. Minarum Geraës: Pohl in Herb. Caes. Vindob. n. 891 ”. No extant specimens that could be considered original material for this name could be located at W (Armin Löckher, pers. comm.), nor at any other herbaria consulted. Therefore, the only extant material for typification is the illustration (tab. 36[II]) provided in Seubert (1855), which I designate here as lectotype of the name C. pohliana .</p><p>Commelina pohliana has been accepted as a synonym of C. erecta in Clarke (1881), Barreto (1997) and Zuloaga et al. (2008), to which I agree.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03CA87B2FFE2F504CBEC831597960516	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Hassemer, Gustavo	Hassemer, Gustavo (2017): Taxonomic and nomenclatural notes on neotropical Commelina (Commelinaceae), and an identification key for Brazil, Guyana, Paraguay, Suriname and Uruguay. Phytotaxa 303 (2): 101-117, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.303.2.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.303.2.1
03CA87B2FFE1F507CBEC85F5923D0A18.text	03CA87B2FFE1F507CBEC85F5923D0A18.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Commelina rufipes Seubert 1855	<div><p>6. Commelina rufipes Seubert (1855: 265–266)</p><p>≡ Phaeosphaerion persicariifolium var. rufipes (Seub.) Clarke (1881: 137)</p><p>≡ Athyrocarpus rufipes (Seub.) Standley in Standley &amp; Calderón (1925: 47)</p><p>≡ Phaeosphaerion rufipes (Seub.) Standley &amp; Steyermark (1952: 22)</p><p>≡ Commelinopsis rufipes (Seub.) Hunt (1981: 195)</p><p>Lectotype (designated here): — BRAZIL. São Paulo: 1817, C. F. P. von Martius s.n. (M-0210921! [Fig. 5]; isolectotype M-0210920!).</p><p>= Commelinopsis glabrata Hunt (1981: 195–197), syn. nov.</p><p>≡ Commelina rufipes var. glabrata (D.R.Hunt) Faden &amp; Hunt (1987: 122)</p><p>Holotype: — TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO. Trinidad, Irois Forest district under cacao trees in quantities, 25 January 1928, W. E. Broadway 6716 (K-000363259! [Fig. 6]).</p><p>Distribution: —Neotropical, occurring from southern Mexico to Paraguay and central Brazil, including Trinidad and possibly some other Caribbean islands (Hunt 1994).</p><p>Habitat: —Forest understorey.</p><p>Conservation status: —Least Concern (LC). This species has a wide distribution and is common through its range.</p><p>Notes: —The protologue of C. rufipes (Seubert 1855: 265–266) provides the following information on the type: “ Crescit in Brasiliae prov. St. Pauli: M. [Martius] in Herb. Reg. Monac. ”. There are two sheets kept at M (M-0210921 and M-0210920) that can be considered original material for this name; the specimens on these two sheets evidently belong to the same species. These two sheets have labels with different numbers (76 and 77, respectively), which at first would suggest that they are not part of the same gathering; however, these labels are not Martius’ collector numbers, as they were added much later by A. Toepffer as part of an effort to organise the collections housed at M (Hans-Joachim Esser, pers. comm.). Only one of these sheets contains information on the collection date (1817, on M-0210921). Here, I accept that these two sheets can be considered as belonging to the same gathering, and therefore, duplicates. One of these two sheets (M-0210921; Fig. 5) is annotated with Seubert’s handwriting: “ Commelyna ochreata rufipes mihi ”; therefore, I here designate this sheet as the lectotype of C. rufipes .</p><p>One hundred and twenty-six years after the description of Commelina rufipes, Commelinopsis glabrata was described for Trinidad. Hunt (1981) noted this was a widespread species in tropical America which was hitherto erroneously identified as Commelinopsis persicariifolia (Redouté 1816: tab. 472) Pichon (1946: 227). He presents the new species as similar to Commelinopsis rufipes (≡ Commelina rufipes), but differing by the glabrous bracts, slightly larger leaves, and glabrous leaf sheets. In fact, he admits that “ C. rufipes and C. glabrata, when more fully studied, may prove to be conspecific”. Six years later, Faden &amp; Hunt (1987) place this taxon into the genus Commelina at varietal rank: C. rufipes var. glabrata . Since then, this taxon has been accepted in every work that included C. rufipes (e.g., Barreto 1997, 2005, Aona &amp; Leoni 2006, Espejo-Serna et al. 2009, Fernández &amp; Cayola 2014, Aona 2015, Aona &amp; do Amaral 2016). I must highlight here that Tropicos (http://tropicos.org) erroneously mentions that Fernández &amp; Cayola (2014) accept C. rufipes var. glabrata as a synonym of C. rufipes . A careful reading of Fernández &amp; Cayola (2014: 516–517) reveals that the authors confusingly list all infraspecific names under the species heading of C. rufipes, and later unambiguously cite C. rufipes var. glabrata as an accepted infraspecific taxon.</p><p>There appears to be no suitable character to distinguish between these two varieties, and hence I propose here the synonymisation of Commelinopsis glabrata under Commelina rufipes . With the revision of herbarium specimens from the entire range of C. rufipes I could observe that indumentum and leaf size vary greatly within this species, and this variation does not follow a geographic pattern. The indumentum of the leaf sheaths is today considered a distinguishing character between the two varieties (Barreto 1997, Aona &amp; Leoni 2006, Aona &amp; do Amaral 2016). The leaf sheaths of C. rufipes vary from being completely glabrous to completely covered in a dense red indumentum but intermediates linking these two extremes are common. Furthermore, I should highlight that the leaf sheaths of the type specimen of Commelinopsis glabrata (K-000363259; Fig. 6) are not completely glabrous.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03CA87B2FFE1F507CBEC85F5923D0A18	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Hassemer, Gustavo	Hassemer, Gustavo (2017): Taxonomic and nomenclatural notes on neotropical Commelina (Commelinaceae), and an identification key for Brazil, Guyana, Paraguay, Suriname and Uruguay. Phytotaxa 303 (2): 101-117, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.303.2.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.303.2.1
03CA87B2FFE1F50BCBEC8265972B0CE3.text	03CA87B2FFE1F50BCBEC8265972B0CE3.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Commelina schomburgkiana Klotzsch ex Seubert 1855	<div><p>7. Commelina schomburgkiana Klotzsch ex Seubert (1855: 262)</p><p>Holotype: — GUYANA. R. H. Schomburgk 490 (B-100247302! [Fig. 7]; isotype K-000363254!).</p><p>– Commelina schomburgkiana var. latifolia Klotzsch ex Schomburgk (1849: 1064), nom. inval. (Arts. 35.1 and 38.1; see also Art. 38.3)</p><p>Distribution: —Confirmed occurrences in Guyana (where the type originated from), Paraguay and southern Brazil. Habitat: —Open areas, particularly forest edges.</p><p>Conservation status: —Least Concern (LC). This species has a wide distribution in South America and does not seem to be threatened.</p><p>Notes: —The authorship of C. schomburgkiana has been erroneously presented in recent literature such as Barreto (1997), Zuloaga et al. (2008) and Hassemer et al. (2016b), and databases such as IPNI (http://www.ipni.org) and Tropicos (http://tropicos.org).</p><p>The taxonomic status of C. schomburgkiana, which is part of the C. diffusa group, has until now been confusing because the only reliable character to distinguish it from the latter species is leaf shape; linear-lanceolate in C. schomburgkiana, ovate to elliptic in C. diffusa . However, I discovered another taxonomically informative character. The flowers of C. schomburgkiana have three white and blue staminodes (Fig. 8), whereas those of C. diffusa have two yellow staminodes.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03CA87B2FFE1F50BCBEC8265972B0CE3	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Hassemer, Gustavo	Hassemer, Gustavo (2017): Taxonomic and nomenclatural notes on neotropical Commelina (Commelinaceae), and an identification key for Brazil, Guyana, Paraguay, Suriname and Uruguay. Phytotaxa 303 (2): 101-117, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.303.2.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.303.2.1
03CA87B2FFEDF50BCBEC877E94620EB3.text	03CA87B2FFEDF50BCBEC877E94620EB3.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Commelina schomburgkiana var. brasiliensis Seubert 1855	<div><p>8. Commelina schomburgkiana var. brasiliensis Seubert (1855: 262)</p><p>Lectotype (designated here): — BRAZIL. Bahia: C. F. P. von Martius s.n. (M-0274948! [Fig. 9]).</p><p>= Commelina diffusa Burman (1768: 18, tab. 7[2]), syn. nov.</p><p>Lectotype (designated by Hunt 1994: 172):— INDIA. Coromandel, D. Outgaerden s.n. (G-00360106!).</p><p>Notes: —The protologue of C. schomburgkiana var. brasiliensis provides the following information: “pedicello interiore abortivo, exteriore 1–2-floro” and “ in interioribus prov. Bahiensis leg. Martius ”. I was able to trace one sheet at M that can be considered original material for this name. Therefore, I designate here the specimen on this sheet (M-0274948— Fig. 9) as lectotype of the name C. schomburgkiana var. brasiliensis . Study of the specimen confirms that this name is a synonym of C. diffusa .</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03CA87B2FFEDF50BCBEC877E94620EB3	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Hassemer, Gustavo	Hassemer, Gustavo (2017): Taxonomic and nomenclatural notes on neotropical Commelina (Commelinaceae), and an identification key for Brazil, Guyana, Paraguay, Suriname and Uruguay. Phytotaxa 303 (2): 101-117, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.303.2.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.303.2.1
03CA87B2FFEDF50BCBEC868E93D30ADF.text	03CA87B2FFEDF50BCBEC868E93D30ADF.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Commelina vestita Seubert 1855	<div><p>9. Commelina vestita Seubert (1855: 264–265)</p><p>≡ Commelina monticola var. vestita (Seub.) Clarke (1881: 162)</p><p>≡ Commelina robusta f. vestita (Seub.) Standley &amp; Steyermark (1944: 33)</p><p>= Commelina obliqua Vahl (1805: 172), syn. nov.</p><p>Lectotype (designated by Hunt 1994: 172):— FRANCE. Ex horto Celsii, Ventenat s.n. (C-10009563!).</p><p>Notes: —The protologue of C. vestita provides the following information about the type: “ Crescit in Brasilia meridionali: Sellow in Herb. Reg. Berol. ”. The type of this name, which was collected by Friedrich Sello in southern Brazil, was most probably destroyed in 1943 when B was bombed. No extant specimens that could be considered original material for this name could be located at B (Robert Vogt, pers. comm.), nor at any other herbaria consulted, and no illustrations were cited in the protologue.</p><p>The identity of C. vestita is not completely clear, because the description in the protologue is not informative enough: “foliis oblique ovato-lanceolatis supra scabris utrinque hirtis, vaginis hirtis ore ferrugineo-ciliatis”. Based on this description, C. vestita resemble any of the two South American red-haired Commelina species: C. obliqua and C. rufipes . Barreto (1997: 403) incorrectly regards C. vestita, along with C. monticola Seubert (1855: 264), a synonym of C. obliqua (see Hassemer et al. 2016b), as a synonym of C. villosa (Clarke 1881: 183) Clarke ex Chodat &amp; Hassler (1901: 438) . This is incorrect because C. villosa is part of the C. erecta complex, which is morphologically distinct from other red-haired species such as C. obliqua and C. rufipes . Unfortunately the protologue of C. vestita provides no information on the fruits and seeds (“Fructus et semina, quae in hocce Commelinae genere validissimos characteres specierum distinctioni inservientes praebere videntur adhuc ignota”), which could be useful for the application of this name.</p><p>Since both Clarke (1881: 162) (who must have seen the type at B) and Standley &amp; Steyermark (1944: 33) regarded C. vestita as an infraspecific taxon of species today considered synonyms of C. obliqua, I here choose to follow their judgement and consider C. vestita as a synonym of C. obliqua . As an additional support to this decision, C. rufipes is not recorded for southern Brazil. Neotypification of the name C. vestita is undesirable, because the area cited in the protologue (southern Brazil, with an area of 576,774.31 km 2) is too vast to permit the selection of an appropriate specimen to link to this name; furthermore, the name C. vestita does not appear to threaten any name in current use.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03CA87B2FFEDF50BCBEC868E93D30ADF	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Hassemer, Gustavo	Hassemer, Gustavo (2017): Taxonomic and nomenclatural notes on neotropical Commelina (Commelinaceae), and an identification key for Brazil, Guyana, Paraguay, Suriname and Uruguay. Phytotaxa 303 (2): 101-117, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.303.2.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.303.2.1
03CA87B2FFE8F50ECBEC85CA93E10E7C.text	03CA87B2FFE8F50ECBEC85CA93E10E7C.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Commelina Linnaeus 1753	<div><p>Key to the species of Commelina in Brazil, Guyana, Paraguay, Suriname and Uruguay</p><p>Notes: species’ distributions in these four countries are presented inside brackets. Non-native species in the area are marked with an asterisk. Abbreviations: BR: Brazil; GY: Guyana; PY: Paraguay; SR: Suriname; UY: Uruguay.</p><p>1. Plants with reddish trichomes on the leaf sheath or at the base of the leaf lamina (sometimes not very conspicuous) .................. 2</p><p>– Plants without reddish trichomes ...................................................................................................................................................... 4</p><p>2. Leaves ovate. Leaf lamina symmetric or only very slightly asymmetric at the base. Presence of subterraneous cleistogamic flowers [BR, GY, PY, SR, UY] ....................................................................................................................................... * C. benghalensis L.</p><p>– Leaves elliptic to lanceolate. Leaf lamina conspicuously asymmetric at the base. Absence of subterraneous flowers ................... 3</p><p>3. Spathes with margins free to the base. Fruit whitish, indehiscent [BR, GY, PY, SR] ............................................. C. rufipes Seub.</p><p>– Spathes with margins fused basally. Fruit brownish, dehiscent [BR, GY, PY, SR, UY] .......................................... C. obliqua Vahl</p><p>4. Spathes with margins free to the base .............................................................................................................................................. 5</p><p>– Spathes with margins fused basally .................................................................................................................................................. 7</p><p>5. Base of the leaf lamina cordate. Spathes completely glabrous. Flowers white, rarely bluish [BR, GY, PY, UY] .............................. ........................................................................................................................................................ C. platyphylla Klotzsch ex Seub.</p><p>– Base of the leaf lamina never cordate. Spathes ciliate, rarely glabrous. Flowers blue to purple ..................................................... 6</p><p>6. Leaves ovate to elliptic. Staminodes 2, yellow [BR, GY, PY, SR, UY] ............................................................... C. diffusa Burm.f.</p><p>– Leaves linear-lanceolate. Staminodes 3, white and blue [BR, GY, PY] .............................. C. schomburgkiana Klotzsch ex Seub.</p><p>7. Petals yellowish. Lateral stamens yellow [BR] ............................................................................. C. catharinensis Hassemer et al.</p><p>– Petals blue to purple, rarely white. Lateral stamens whitish to purple ............................................................................................. 8</p><p>8. Leaf sheath and both faces of blade densely covered with trichomes [BR, PY] ................................................................................. ..................................................................................................................... C. villosa (C.B.Clarke) C.B.Clarke ex Chodat &amp; Hassl.</p><p>– Leaf sheath and blade glabrous to moderately pilose [BR, GY, PY, SR, UY] ................................................................ C. erecta L.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03CA87B2FFE8F50ECBEC85CA93E10E7C	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Hassemer, Gustavo	Hassemer, Gustavo (2017): Taxonomic and nomenclatural notes on neotropical Commelina (Commelinaceae), and an identification key for Brazil, Guyana, Paraguay, Suriname and Uruguay. Phytotaxa 303 (2): 101-117, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.303.2.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.303.2.1
