Search

For a long time, the systematics of Atriplex was based solely on morphological characters and leaf anatomy. The latest worldwide phylogenetic study of Atriplex significantly improved our knowledge about the relationships within the genus, but a new classification has not been put forward thus far. Here we re-evaluate the taxonomy of C4-species of Atriplex that are native to Russia. Seven species are classified into two sections, A. sect. Obione (incl. A. sect. Sclerocalymma, syn. nov.) (A. altaica, A. centralasiatica, A. rosea, A. sibirica, and A. sphaeromorpha), and A. sect. Obionopsis (incl. A. sect. Psammophila, syn. nov.) (A. fominii and A. tatarica). Although the majority of Eurasian C4-species have similar morphology, leafy inflorescence is a typical character for A. sect. Obione. The members of A. sect. Obionopsis are characterised mostly by aphyllous inflorescences, but some species (A. laciniata, A. pratovii, and A. tornabenei) have leafy inflorescences. Geographically, almost all members of A. sect. Obione are confined to Central Asia, although A. rosea is a typical Mediterranean element and A. argentea occurs in North America. The representatives of A. sect. Obionopsis are distributed mostly in the Mediterranean and the Irano-Turanian floristic region. The alien status of A. rosea, A. sibirica and A. tatarica is discussed. Atriplex flabellum, a desert species from the Irano-Turanian region, is reported for the first time from Russia (Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous District, North Siberia) as a casual alien. This species occupies a phylogenetic position distant from both aforementioned sections. An identification key to all C4-species of the genus growing in Russia is given, and a sectional checklist with updated nomenclature and revised synonymy is provided.

A new species of spikemoss, Selaginella densiciliata in S. subg. Heterostachys sect. Tetragonostachyae, China, is described from southeastern Xizang, based on morphological and molecular phylogenetic data. Morphologically, S. densiciliata is similar to S. repanda, S. subvaginata and S. vaginata, but the new species can be easily distinguished from them by having sterile leaves margins densely ciliate, symmetrical axillary leaves oblong ovate to ovate-triangular, and ovate dorsal leaves obviously carinate. Molecular phylogenetic analysis resolves S. densiciliata as sister to the clade comprised with S. vaginata and S. xipholepis, which confirms the recognition of the new species.

3. Chenopodium berlandieri Moquin-Tandon (1840: 23). Lectotype (designated here):― Circa Mexico, Sep. 1828, Berlandier 1906 (G00176930 [image!], image available at http://www.ville-ge.ch/ musinfo/bd/cjb/chg/adetail.php?id=178855&base=img&lang=en); isolectotypes: P00606417 [image!], image available at http:// coldb.mnhn.fr/catalognumber/mnhn/p/p00606417, P00606418 [image!], image available at http://coldb.mnhn.fr/catalognumber/ mnhn/p/p00606418, G00206050 [image!] image available at https://plants.jstor.org/stable/10.5555/al.ap.specimen.g00206050, GH00037169 [image!] image available at https://kiki.huh.harvard.edu/databases/specimen_search.php?mode=details&id=12807, NY324308 [image!] image available at https://sweetgum.nybg.org/science/vh/specimen-details/?irn=290056) Note on the type of Chenopodium berlandieri :―There are at least six duplicates of this collection deposited in four different herbaria, i.e. at P, G, GH, and NY-.All this material correspond to syntypes (Art. 9.6 of ICN). In fact, Moquin-Tandon (1840: 23) reported “v.s. [vidi sicco] in herb. Moricand” and Moricand’s herbarium is currently deposited at G, with duplicate elsewhere (see HUH-Index of Botanists 2023). The specimen G00176930 is here designated as lectotype since it is in better condition and shows flowers and fruits (which features are important in the identification of Chenopodium taxa). There is another specimen of C. berlandieri collected by Berlandier with the number 1906 deposited in G (barcode G00206050), probably a fragment from G00176930 or other duplicate. P, GH, and NY specimens are isolectotypes. Note that in the protologue it is reported “circa Mexico ”, but on the sintypes the locality of collection is Bejar, probably Béjar (now Bexar) Texas, not far from the Mexican border., Published as part of Sandoval-Ortega, Manuel Higinio & Zumaya-Mendoza, Silvia, 2023, Types of some Mexican names in Amaranthaceae s. l. (Caryophyllales), pp. 8-14 in Phytotaxa 597 (1) on page 11, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.597.1.2, http://zenodo.org/record/7918754, {"references":["Moquin-Tandon, A. (1840) Chenopodearum monographica enumeratio. P. - J. Loss Bibliopolam, Parisiis, 182 pp.","HUH-Index of Botanists (2023) Harvard University Herbaria & Libraries, Index of Botanist. Available from: https: // kiki. huh. harvard. edu / databases / botanist _ index. html (accessed 1 May 2023)."]}

1. Iresine ajuscana Suessenguth & Beyerle (in Suessenguth 1935: 10) ≡ Iresine ajuscana f. longiflora Suessenguth & Beyerle (in Suessenguth 1935: 10). Lectotype [designated by Borsch et al. (2018: 963–964) as “ holotype ”, here corrected to lectotype (Art. 9.19 of ICN)]: ― MEXICO, Thal von Ajusco, 1870, Hahn 35 (B 100177104 [image!] Image available at http://herbarium.bgbm.org/object/ B 100177104). = Iresine ajuscana f. minutiflora Suessenguth & Beyerle (in Suessenguth 1935: 11). Lectotype (designated by Borsch et al. 2018: 964):― MEXICO. Sallo de aqua, December 1905, Purpus 1807 (B100715445 [image!] image available at https://herbarium.bgbm.org/object/B100715445). = Iresine grandis var. glabrata Suessenguth (in Suessenguth & Merxmüller 1952: 108). Lectotype (here designated):― MEXICO. Oaxaca: Ayutla, Cañon Rio Tlahuitoltepec, 19–27 February 1937, Camp 2720 (NY01259979 [image!] image available at https://sweetgum.nybg.org/science/vh/specimen-details/?irn=1489059; isolectotype: NY01259978 [image!] image available at https://sweetgum.nybg.org/science/vh/specimen-details/?irn=1489058). Notes on the type of Iresine ajuscana:― The protologue of I. ajuscana consists of a detailed morphological description; no mention of a type specimen or citation of a locality and/or a collector there is. Just after the morphological description of I. ajuscana, Suessength & Beyerle (in Suessenguth 1935: 11) describes two forms for this species, distinguishable each other by the size of the tepals: I. ajuscana f. longiflora Suessength & Beyerle (in Suessenguth 1935: 11) and I. ajuscana f. minutiflora Suessength & Beyerle (in Suessenguth 1935: 11). For each one of these forms, locality, collectors and collection numbers are reported (“ Mexico, Staat Mexico, Tal von Ajusco, [leg. L. Hahn, no. 35, anno 1870]; Mexico, Staat Mexico, Sallo de aqua, [leg. C.A. Purpus no. 1803 und 1807]; Amecameca, Sacro Monte 2300 m [Leg. H. Fröderström et E. Hultén no. 1207 und 1208 ― Herb. Stockholm]”). Borsch et al. (2018) designated lectotypes for Iresine ajuscana f. longiflora and I. ajuscana f. minutiflora and proposed both names as synonyms (heterotypic) of I. ajuscana s.s. However, they also mentioned that the holotype of I. ajuscana was the same specimen as the one designated as lectotype of I. ajuscana f. longiflora. However, this cannot be possible according to Art. 9.1 of ICN, because no holotype was indicated in the protologue and the material cited are syntypes (Art. 9.6. if ICN). According to the Art. 9.10 of ICN, Borsh et al.’s indication as holotype (barcode B100177104) is treated as an error to be here corrected as lectotype. I. ajuscana and I. ajuscana f. longiflora are homotypic synonyms. Note on the type of Iresine grandis var. glabrata: ―The protologue of I. grandis var. glabrata consists of a short description; a locality (Gebiet von Ayutla, Hoch-paβ zwischen Ayutla und Tumazulapa, canon des Rio Tlahuitoltepec.- Exp. New York Bot. Garden 1937), a collector (W.H. Camp), a collection number (2720), and the herbaria where the material was deposited (“Herb. Bot. Garden New York ”, referred to the Herbarium NY) are given. We traced two specimens at NY, one of which was reported by Borsch et al. (2018) as the holotype of I. grandis var. glabrata (the other specimen indicated as isotype). According to Art. 9.6 of ICN, these two specimens (barcodes NY01259978 and NY01259979) are syntypes, and a lectotypification is necessary. NY01259979 is here designated as lectotype, since it is a more complete specimen, matches with the protologue, and the current concept in Iresine (Calderón de Rzedowski 2005). NY01259978 is the isolectotype. Notes on the identity of Iresine rubella Suessength (in Suessength & Merxmüller 1952: 109):― Suessenguth & Merxmüller (1952: 109) mentioned in the protologue that the type material of Iresine rubella is deposited at BM (“Herb.Brit.Mus.”). However, after a digital search, no original material was found by us in this or other herbaria. Further, after contacting the BM staff, we verified that no material of I. rubella collected before 1890 is currently deposited at the Herbarium (we also asked for specimen identified as I. ajuscana). So, we reached to the conclusion that the specimen is probably lost. Iresine rubella has been considered a synonym of I. ajuscana by Borsh et al. (2018), and so reported also in TROPICOS (2023) and POWO (2023). However, since the type is lost, the only information available to identify I. rubella is the collection locality (Mexico-Valle, Monte de la Parada) and the morphological description provided in the protologue, where it is mentioned that this species has glabrous pseudostaminodia, bisexual flowers and reddish tepals (Suessength & Merxmüller 1952: 109). I. ajuscana has unisexual flowers and pubescent pseudostaminodia, feature not described in the protologue (Suessenguth 1935: 10) but that can be observed in the type material (B100177104, S05-5664), so it is unlikely that I. rubella is a synonym of I. ajuscana. The species of Iresine reported to the Valley of Mexico are I. ajuscana, I. schaffneri Watson (1886: 437), I. cassiniformis Schauer (in Nees ab Esenbeck & Schauer 1847: 709), I. latifolia (Martens & Galeotti 1843: 349) Bentham & Hooker (1880: 42), and I. interrupta Bentham (1844: 156) (see Calderón de Rzedowski 2005), but no one of these taxa matches with the morphological description in the protologue of I. rubella. Since the identity of I. rubella could not be confirmed, this name was not here considered as synonym of I. ajuscana. Syntypes of Iresine ajuscana:― MEXICO, Sallo de aqua, December 1905, Purpus 1803 (B100715444 [image!] image available at https://herbarium.bgbm.org/object/B100715444); Amecameca, Sacro Monte, 3 March 1932, Fröderström & Hultén 1207 (S05-5665 [image!] image available at https://herbarium.nrm.se/specimens/S05-5665); Amecameca, Sacro Monte, 3 March 1932, Fröderström & Hultén 1208 [image!] image available at https://herbarium. nrm.se/specimens/S05-5664).

1. Iresine ajuscana Suessenguth & Beyerle (in Suessenguth 1935: 10) ≡ Iresine ajuscana f. longiflora Suessenguth & Beyerle (in Suessenguth 1935: 10). Lectotype [designated by Borsch et al. (2018: 963–964) as “ holotype ”, here corrected to lectotype (Art. 9.19 of ICN)]: ― MEXICO, Thal von Ajusco, 1870, Hahn 35 (B 100177104 [image!] Image available at http://herbarium.bgbm.org/object/ B 100177104). = Iresine ajuscana f. minutiflora Suessenguth & Beyerle (in Suessenguth 1935: 11). Lectotype (designated by Borsch et al. 2018: 964):― MEXICO. Sallo de aqua, December 1905, Purpus 1807 (B100715445 [image!] image available at https://herbarium.bgbm.org/object/B100715445). = Iresine grandis var. glabrata Suessenguth (in Suessenguth & Merxmüller 1952: 108). Lectotype (here designated):― MEXICO. Oaxaca: Ayutla, Cañon Rio Tlahuitoltepec, 19–27 February 1937, Camp 2720 (NY01259979 [image!] image available at https://sweetgum.nybg.org/science/vh/specimen-details/?irn=1489059; isolectotype: NY01259978 [image!] image available at https://sweetgum.nybg.org/science/vh/specimen-details/?irn=1489058). Notes on the type of Iresine ajuscana:― The protologue of I. ajuscana consists of a detailed morphological description; no mention of a type specimen or citation of a locality and/or a collector there is. Just after the morphological description of I. ajuscana, Suessength & Beyerle (in Suessenguth 1935: 11) describes two forms for this species, distinguishable each other by the size of the tepals: I. ajuscana f. longiflora Suessength & Beyerle (in Suessenguth 1935: 11) and I. ajuscana f. minutiflora Suessength & Beyerle (in Suessenguth 1935: 11). For each one of these forms, locality, collectors and collection numbers are reported (“ Mexico, Staat Mexico, Tal von Ajusco, [leg. L. Hahn, no. 35, anno 1870]; Mexico, Staat Mexico, Sallo de aqua, [leg. C.A. Purpus no. 1803 und 1807]; Amecameca, Sacro Monte 2300 m [Leg. H. Fröderström et E. Hultén no. 1207 und 1208 ― Herb. Stockholm]”). Borsch et al. (2018) designated lectotypes for Iresine ajuscana f. longiflora and I. ajuscana f. minutiflora and proposed both names as synonyms (heterotypic) of I. ajuscana s.s. However, they also mentioned that the holotype of I. ajuscana was the same specimen as the one designated as lectotype of I. ajuscana f. longiflora. However, this cannot be possible according to Art. 9.1 of ICN, because no holotype was indicated in the protologue and the material cited are syntypes (Art. 9.6. if ICN). According to the Art. 9.10 of ICN, Borsh et al.’s indication as holotype (barcode B100177104) is treated as an error to be here corrected as lectotype. I. ajuscana and I. ajuscana f. longiflora are homotypic synonyms. Note on the type of Iresine grandis var. glabrata: ―The protologue of I. grandis var. glabrata consists of a short description; a locality (Gebiet von Ayutla, Hoch-paβ zwischen Ayutla und Tumazulapa, canon des Rio Tlahuitoltepec.- Exp. New York Bot. Garden 1937), a collector (W.H. Camp), a collection number (2720), and the herbaria where the material was deposited (“Herb. Bot. Garden New York ”, referred to the Herbarium NY) are given. We traced two specimens at NY, one of which was reported by Borsch et al. (2018) as the holotype of I. grandis var. glabrata (the other specimen indicated as isotype). According to Art. 9.6 of ICN, these two specimens (barcodes NY01259978 and NY01259979) are syntypes, and a lectotypification is necessary. NY01259979 is here designated as lectotype, since it is a more complete specimen, matches with the protologue, and the current concept in Iresine (Calderón de Rzedowski 2005). NY01259978 is the isolectotype. Notes on the identity of Iresine rubella Suessength (in Suessength & Merxmüller 1952: 109):― Suessenguth & Merxmüller (1952: 109) mentioned in the protologue that the type material of Iresine rubella is deposited at BM (“Herb.Brit.Mus.”). However, after a digital search, no original material was found by us in this or other herbaria. Further, after contacting the BM staff, we verified that no material of I. rubella collected before 1890 is currently deposited at the Herbarium (we also asked for specimen identified as I. ajuscana). So, we reached to the conclusion that the specimen is probably lost. Iresine rubella has been considered a synonym of I. ajuscana by Borsh et al. (2018), and so reported also in TROPICOS (2023) and POWO (2023). However, since the type is lost, the only information available to identify I. rubella is the collection locality (Mexico-Valle, Monte de la Parada) and the morphological description provided in the protologue, where it is mentioned that this species has glabrous pseudostaminodia, bisexual flowers and reddish tepals (Suessength & Merxmüller 1952: 109). I. ajuscana has unisexual flowers and pubescent pseudostaminodia, feature not described in the protologue (Suessenguth 1935: 10) but that can be observed in the type material (B100177104, S05-5664), so it is unlikely that I. rubella is a synonym of I. ajuscana. The species of Iresine reported to the Valley of Mexico are I. ajuscana, I. schaffneri Watson (1886: 437), I. cassiniformis Schauer (in Nees ab Esenbeck & Schauer 1847: 709), I. latifolia (Martens & Galeotti 1843: 349) Bentham & Hooker (1880: 42), and I. interrupta Bentham (1844: 156) (see Calderón de Rzedowski 2005), but no one of these taxa matches with the morphological description in the protologue of I. rubella. Since the identity of I. rubella could not be confirmed, this name was not here considered as synonym of I. ajuscana. Syntypes of Iresine ajuscana:― MEXICO, Sallo de aqua, December 1905, Purpus 1803 (B100715444 [image!] image available at https://herbarium.bgbm.org/object/B100715444); Amecameca, Sacro Monte, 3 March 1932, Fröderström & Hultén 1207 (S05-5665 [image!] image available at https://herbarium.nrm.se/specimens/S05-5665); Amecameca, Sacro Monte, 3 March 1932, Fröderström & Hultén 1208 [image!] image available at https://herbarium. nrm.se/specimens/S05-5664)., Published as part of Sandoval-Ortega, Manuel Higinio & Zumaya-Mendoza, Silvia, 2023, Types of some Mexican names in Amaranthaceae s. l. (Caryophyllales), pp. 8-14 in Phytotaxa 597 (1) on pages 9-10, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.597.1.2, http://zenodo.org/record/7918754, {"references":["Borsch, T., Flores-Olvera, H., Zumaya, S. & Muller, K. (2018) Pollen characters and DNA sequence data converge on a monophyletic genus Iresine (Amaranthaceae, Caryophyllales) and help to elucidate its species diversity. Taxon 67 (5): 944 - 976. https: // doi. org / 10.12705 / 675.7","Suessenguth, K & Merxmuller, H. (1952) Species noave vel criticae. Mitteilungen der Botanischen Staatssammlung Munchen 1 (4): 99 - 114.","Calderon de Rzedowski, G. (2005) Amaranthaceae. In: Calderon de Rzedowski, G. & Rzedowski, J. (eds.) Flora fanerogamica del Valle de Mexico. Comision Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad and Instituto de Ecologia A. C., Mexico D. F., pp. 124 - 132.","TROPICOS (2023) Tropicos. org, Missouri Botanical Garden. Available from http: // www. tropicos. org / (accessed 11 April 2023).","POWO (2023) Plants of the World Online. Facilitated by the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. Available from: http: // www. plantsoftheworldonline. org / (accessed 17 April 2023).","Watson, S. (1886) Contributions to American Botany. Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 21: 414 - 468. https: // doi. org / 10.2307 / 25129831","Nees ab Esenbeck, C. G. & Schauer, S. (1847) Enumeratio et descriptiones generum novorum specierumque plantarum in terris Mexicanis crescentium, quas Ruhlandus, Coloniensis, de Berghes et Dr. Aschenborn collegerunt. Linnaea 19: 681 - 750.","Martens, M. & Galeotti, H. (1843) Enumeratio synoptica plantarum phanerogamicarum ab Henrico Galeotti in regionibus Mexicanis collectarum. Bulletin de l'Academie Royale des Sciences et Belles-lettres de Bruxelles 10 (1): 341 - 360.","Bentham, G. & Hooker, J. D. (1880) Genera plantarum: ad exemplaria imprimis in Herberiis Kewensibus servata definita, vol. III (I). L. Reeve & Co., London, 459 pp.","Bentham, G. (1844) The Botany of the Voyage of H. M. S. Sulphur. Smith Elder and Co., London, 195 pp."]}

4. Lagrezia monosperma (Rose) Standley (1915: 393) ≡ Celosia monosperma Rose (1895: 352). Lectotype (designated here): ― MEXICO, mountains near Manzanillo, 1 to 31 December 1891, Palmer 887 (US00106216 [Image!] image available at https://ids.si.edu/ids/media_view?id=ark:/65665/m317b2b7c70e8947b78aae12fd266b8d8c&defaultView=image _dynamic; isolectotypes: US 00106217 [Image!] image available at https://ids.si.edu/ids/media_view?id=ark:/65665/m3af872df42 6344cd9aa048d6a791b7f3a&defaultView=image_dynamic, US00893655 [Image!] image available at https://ids.si.edu/ids/media_ view?id=ark:/65665/m326c8f4d08ec04dc4983ea43324f7b6af&defaultView=image_dynamic, MO216357 [Image!] image available at http://legacy.tropicos.org/ Image /65277, GH00037042 [Image!] image available at https://s3.amazonaws.com/huhwebimages/ EC49A16F8CE3455/type/full/37042.jpg, NY324467 [Image!] image available at https://sweetgum.nybg.org/science/vh/specimen-details/?irn=459179, NY324468 [Image!] image available at https://sweetgum.nybg.org/science/vh/specimen-details/?irn=459180, BM000993089 [Image!] image available at https://plants.jstor.org/stable/10.5555/al.ap.specimen.bm000993089, RSA0000618 [Image!] image available at https://plants.jstor.org/stable/10.5555/al.ap.specimen.rsa0000618, UC116302 [Image!] image available at https://plants.jstor.org/stable/10.5555/al.ap.specimen.uc116302, K000582924 [Image!] image available at http://specimens.kew. org/herbarium/K000582924. Note on the type of Celosia monosperma: ―The protologue of Celosia monosperma consists of a detailed morphological description and the citation of a locality and a collector number. We found 11 specimens collected by Palmer and numbered with 887 that were collected in Manzanillo, Mexico, during December 1890 (herbaria BM, GH, K, MO, NY, RSA, UC and US). All this material are sintypes (Art. 9.6 of ICN). We here designate US 00106216 as the lectotype, since it is in good conditions, shows mature flowers and matches the protologue and the current concept in Lagrezia (see e.g., Standley 1917). The other specimens are isolectotypes., Published as part of Sandoval-Ortega, Manuel Higinio & Zumaya-Mendoza, Silvia, 2023, Types of some Mexican names in Amaranthaceae s. l. (Caryophyllales), pp. 8-14 in Phytotaxa 597 (1) on page 11, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.597.1.2, http://zenodo.org/record/7918754, {"references":["Standley, P. C. (1915) The North American tribes and genera of Amaranthaceae. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences 5 (11): 391 - 396.","Rose, J. N (1895) Report on a collection of plants made in the states of Sonora and Colima, Mexico, by Dr. Edward Palmer, in the years 1890 and 1891. Contributions from the United States National Herbarium 1: 293 - 366.","Standley, P. C. (1917) Amaranthaceae. In: Britton, Murrill & Barnhart (eds.) North American Flora, vol. 21 (2). The New York Botanical Garden, New York, pp. 95 - 169."]}

2. Iresine interrupta Bentham (1844: 156). Lectotype (designated here):― MEXICO. Tepic, Sinclair s.n. (K000195155 [image!] image available at http://apps.kew.org/herbcat/ getImage.do?imageBarcode=K000195155http://specimens.kew.org/herbarium/K000195155). = Iresine acuminata Moquin-Tandon (1849: 345). Holotype: ― MEXICO. Bates s.n. (P00438664 [image!] image available at http://coldb.mnhn.fr/catalognumber/mnhn/p/p00438664). Note on the type of Iresine interrupta: ― Bentham (1844: 156) provided a short morphological description for Iresine interrupta; no collector name or collection number are given, whereas two Mexican localities (“Tepic”, in the state of Nayarit; and “Acapulco” in the state of Guerrero) are reported. At K there are three specimens of I. interrupta, all bearing a label written by Bentham (barcodes K000195154, K000195155 and K000195156). The label on K000195155 reads “Tepic” and the name “Hooker” and the year 1845, one year after the publication of I. interrupta. However, this information does not correspond to the collector and year of collection since W. Hooker did not collected material from Acapulco and was not part of the H.M.S. (Her Majesty’s ship) Sulphur crew. The collector seems to be Sinclair, whose name is written on the label, just after “Tepic”. Raven (1964) explains why some Bentham’s labels have a date that does not correspond to the collection date, indicating that Bentham wrote the year in which he included the duplicates provided by Hooker in his own herbarium. The label on K000195156 reads “Acapulco” and the last name “Barclay”, who was the official collector sent out by the Royal Botanic Gardens Kew. Some of the material collected by Barclay came into the possession of Hooker, who became director of the Royal Botanic Gardens Kew in 1941, and who provided those specimens to Bentham (Raven 1964). Finally, on the sheet K000195154 reads “ Mexico ” and “Beechey”. W. Hooker sent to Bentham all the specimens collected by Hinds, Sinclair and Barclay and other members of the H.M.S. Sulphur crew. About this matter, Raven (1964) wrote: “It is important to note that all of this material was available to Bentham throughout the time he was conducting his studies, and hence all of it is equally important for purposes of typification”. Borsch et al. (2018) cited one of these specimens (K000195155) as the holotype. According to Art. 9.1 of ICN, that specimen cannot be the holotype, but it is a sintype (Art. 9.6 of ICN). K000195155 is designated as lectotype, matching the protologue and the current concept in Iresine (Calderón de Rzedowski 2005, Sandoval-Ortega 2020)., Published as part of Sandoval-Ortega, Manuel Higinio & Zumaya-Mendoza, Silvia, 2023, Types of some Mexican names in Amaranthaceae s. l. (Caryophyllales), pp. 8-14 in Phytotaxa 597 (1) on page 10, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.597.1.2, http://zenodo.org/record/7918754, {"references":["Bentham, G. (1844) The Botany of the Voyage of H. M. S. Sulphur. Smith Elder and Co., London, 195 pp.","Raven, P. H. (1964) George Barclay and the \" California \" Portion of the Botany of the Sulphur. Aliso 5 (4): 469 - 477. https: // doi. org / 10.5642 / aliso. 19640504.06","Borsch, T., Flores-Olvera, H., Zumaya, S. & Muller, K. (2018) Pollen characters and DNA sequence data converge on a monophyletic genus Iresine (Amaranthaceae, Caryophyllales) and help to elucidate its species diversity. Taxon 67 (5): 944 - 976. https: // doi. org / 10.12705 / 675.7","Calderon de Rzedowski, G. (2005) Amaranthaceae. In: Calderon de Rzedowski, G. & Rzedowski, J. (eds.) Flora fanerogamica del Valle de Mexico. Comision Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad and Instituto de Ecologia A. C., Mexico D. F., pp. 124 - 132.","Sandoval-Ortega, M. H. (2020) Amaranthaceae. In: Siqueiros-Delgado, M. E., Murillo-Perez, G., Sierra-Munoz, J. C. & Martinez-Ramirez, J. (eds.) Flora Dicotiledonea de Aguascalientes. Universidad Autonoma de Aguascalientes. Aguascalientes, Aguascalientes, pp. 111 - 173. https: // doi. org / 10.33064 / UAA / 978 - 607 - 8782 - 12 - 3"]}

The family Amaranthaceae has a cosmopolitan distribution and it is one of the most diverse families within the order Caryophyllales. Species of Amaranthaceae live mainly in arid environments, saline habitats, or disturbed areas. Nomenclature is the necessary first-step to study the members of this group, aiming to clarify their identity which is often critical. The types of four names in Amaranthaceae (sensu lato, including Chenopodiaceae)—Chenopodium berlandieri, Celosia monosperma, Iresine grandis var. glabrata, Iresine interrupta—with Mexican loci classici are designated in the present paper, including comments on their identities.

During floristic research in 2017–2022 in the Emirate of Fujairah in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), the authors discovered new alien species that complement the species composition of the flora of vascular plants in the Emirate and the UAE as a whole. The article presents new records of five alien species previously unknown from the flora of UAE and Fujairah: Gomphrena serrata L. (Amaranthaceae), Portulaca pilosa L., P. grandiflora Hook., P. umbraticolaKunth (Portulacaceae), and Peperomia pellucida (L.) Kunth (Piperaceae). Gomphrena serrata which is rare in the country was found only in one place in the mountainous region of Fujarah, and it is a novelty for the flora of the Arabian Peninsula as a whole, while Portulaca pilosa was observed in several different areas of Fujairah Emirate and is also known for Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Oman. Peperomia pellucida was found only in a single locality in the “Alamarey plant nursery” in Dibba town but in large number of individuals. For every species, synonyms, overall distribution, habitat preferences, affinity and taxonomic remarks as well as the list of localities are given. The herbarium materials were deposited in the Herbarium of the Komarov Botanical Institute (LE, Saint-Petersburg, Russia), duplicates were sent to the Herbarium of Altai State University (ALTB, Barnaul, Russia) and the Scientific Herbarium of Fujairah (FSH, Wadi Wuraya National Park, Fujairah, UAE)., В ходе флористических исследований в 2017–2022 гг. в эмирате Фуджейра в Объединенных Арабских Эмиратах (ОАЭ) авторами были сделаны новые находки чужеродных видов, которые дополняют видовой состав флоры сосудистых растений на территории эмирата и ОАЭ в целом. В статье представлены новые сведения о пяти чужеродных видах, ранее неизвестных во флоре ОАЭ: Gomphrena serrata L. (Amaranthaceae), Portulaca pilosa L., P. grandiflora Hook., P. umbraticola Kunth (Portulacaceae) и Peperomia pellucida (L.) Kunth (Piperaceae). Все они были впервые найдены в эмирате Фуджейра в восточной части ОАЭ. Gomphrena serrata редко встречается в стране, был обнаружен только в одном месте в горной части Фуджейры и является новым видом для флоры Аравийского полуострова в целом, в то время как Portulaca pilosa наблюдался в нескольких различных районах эмирата Фуджейра и также известен в Саудовской Аравии, Йемене и Омане. Peperomia pellucida также является редкостью в стране, был обнаружен только в одном месте, но в большом количестве в «питомнике растений Аламарей» в городе Дибба. Представлены виды, синонимы, общее распространение, предпочтения в среде обитания и таксономия видов с замечаниями по идентификации и дифференциации от наиболее похожих таксонов, встречающихся в районе исследования, а также список местонахождений. Гербарные материалы хранятся в Гербарии Ботанического института им. Комарова (LE, Санкт-Петербург, Россия), дубликаты отправлены в Гербарий Алтайского государственного университета (ALTB, Барнаул, Россия) и Научный гербарий Фуджейры (FSH, Вади Национальный парк Вурайя, Фуджейра, ОАЭ).

Herbal plants are huge sources of neutraceuticals, prevent the different disease or maintain healthy life. Plant produces primary metabolites for their basic survival and secondary metabolites for their ecological, taxonomical and biochemical differentiation and diversity.Achyranthes asperaL. (Family Amaranthaceae) are broadly used in traditional system of medicine throughout different part of India, South Andaman Island, Pacific Island, Baluchistan, Tropical Asia, America, and Australia. It has great medicinal importance like to stomach tonic, diuretic, laxative, anthelmintic, anti hyperlipidemic, expectorant, anti-inflammatory, anti-bacterial, anti-fungal, hypoglycemic, anti-asthmatic and anti-allergic etc. The study of diseases and their treatment are important part of our ancient time worldwide. The knowledge of medicinal plants must have been accumulated in the course of many centuries. Herbal medicine prepare different part of plant are used. Herbal drug is design as the alternative formulation for the external use in the form of ointment. For the clinical use the herbal ointment apply externally on human body. The main aims of this research are Preliminary physico–phytochemical & phytocognostical evaluation of the leaves parts and preparation of herbal ointment from theAchyranthes aspera.Achyranthes asperaL. plants used as antibacterial activity. Under this research work, it is design as herbal ointment with the help of Ethanolic extract ofAchyranthes asperaand determines the anti-bacterial capacity on it. In vitro study the antibacterial activity of the Ethanolic extracts of dried leaves ofAchyranthes asperaL. are determine by using the Agar cup plate method versus different bacteria such asStaphylococcus aureus,Bacillus subtilis, Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa etc. By blending the Ethanolic extract ofAchyranthes asperaL. (10 % w/w) into aqueous cream we formulated herbal ointment. The emulsifying agent and simple ointment bases are added in above herbal ointment for increase the antibacterial effectiveness during in vitro evaluation. The current study deals with the characterization of morphological features, determination of physical constant such as the total cash value, water soluble ash value were 11.25%, 5.25% respectively. Loss of weight drying was 12.9%, foaming index>100, swelling index were1.5cm, the percent yield for petroleum ether 5.25%, chloroform 6.34%, ethanol 7.65%, and aqueous 8.35%, and determination of formulation and evaluation of herbal ointment usingAchyranthes asperaL. leave extract.

Stilbanthus scandens Hooker filius (1879: 67). Lectotype (designated here):— INDIA. “Hab. Sikkim. Regio subtrop. Alt. 4−6000 ped”, Hooker s.n. (CAL0000217508!) (Fig. 1). Description (Fig. 2):— Large gigantic woody climber with pendulous branches; stems quadrangular, grooved, sparsely pubescent, dense at swollen nodes. Leaves opposite, ovate-elliptic, 5.3–11.8 × 2.5–5.2 cm, base oblique-cuneate to equally cuneate, margins not prominently crenate or entire, apex acuminate, sparsely pubescent above, less pubescent only on nerves beneath; veins 5–7 pairs, prominent; petioles 0.7–1.5 cm long, sparsely pubescent. Flowers in densely flowered spikes; spikes pendulous, 2.0– 8.5 cm long, in terminal spreading trichotomously branched panicles and axillary, sometimes subtended by small foliaceous bracts; peduncles 2.0– 4.5 cm long, densely pubescent. Perianth segments ovate-lanceolate, 8–9 × 3.5–4.0 mm, accrescent, whitish woolly at apex, scarious, striated, midvein not prominent; perianth bracts 3.0–4.0 × 2.0– 2.5 mm, ovate, hairy at apex, midvein extended to mucronate, scarious; bracteoles 1.8–2.0 × 1.0– 1.5 mm, ovate, scarious. Stamens 5; filaments slender, 5.5–6.0 mm long, hairy up to 1/3 of length, connate at base; anthers oblong, c. 1 mm long, 2-celled; staminodes membranous, long ligulate lacerate irregularly. Ovary elliptic-oblong, 2.0– 2.5 mm long, compressed, densely hairy of penicillate at apex, otherwise smooth; style filiform, 4.5– 4.5 mm long, glabrous; stigma capitate. Fruit oblong, 3.0– 3.2 mm long, indehiscent, with a circular rim at apex, smooth except apical part. Phenology:— Flowering and fruiting times September–December Habitat:— Grows in the valleys of warm broad-leaved subtropical forests, 900–2100m. Distribution:— INDIA: Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Sikkim, West Bengal; BANGLADESH, BHUTAN, CHINA, MYANMAR. Lectotypification of the name:— The monotypic genus Stilbanthus was validly described by Hooker filius (1876: 67) by the publication of the species Stilbanthus scandens from “Forest of the Sikkim Sikkim Himalaya at elevation of 4–6000 ped; Herb. Griffith, J.D.H. [Jospeh Dalton Hooker] Fl. August, September”. These Griffith’s and Hooker’s gatherings represent at least two syntypes according to the Art. 9.6 of Schenzhen Code (hereafter reported as “ICN”; Turland et al. 2018). Moreover, Hooker filius (1876) published an illustration (”PLATE 1286”; image available at https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/ 54432#page/168/mode/1up) which is also an original material for the name (Art. 9.3 of ICN). We traced five syntypes, of which three were collected by Hooker filius [CAL0000217508, L1691279 (image at https://bioportal.naturalis.nl/specimen/ L.1691279/term= Stilbanthus +scandens&from=0), C10005461 (image at https://plants.jstor.org/stable/viewer/10.5555/al.ap. specimen.c10005461?loggedin=true),] and two by Griffith [K000848078 (image at http://apps.kew.org/herbcat/getImage. do?imageBarcode=K000848078) and CAL0000217104). Griffith’s collections (K000848078 and CAL0000217104) include the script (stamped) “HERBARIUM BENTHAMIANUM 1854”, so confirming that Hooker filius seen them. Note that the herbarium and types of Joseph Dalton Hooker (son of William Jackson Hooker) are mainly preserved at K (HUH-Index of Botanists 2013 +), where strangely we did not find any Hooker’s collection (but only a Griffith’s one). We here designate CAL0000217508 as the lectotype of the name Stilbanthus scandens: it matches the protologue, is well preserved, and corresponds to the correct concept of the species (see e.g., Bao et al. 2003, Mao et al. 2017, Paul & Chaudhury 2019). Taxonomic notes:— Hooker filius (1876: Pl. 1286) illustration does not exactly correspond to the original description. The shown staminodes is filiform with plumose apex while those are thin membranous and tored at random heights in to filiform appendages or irregularly lacerate. Apart from this, stamens are also equal to staminodes in studied specimens which is contradictory in figure. The shown ovary is glabrous at apex while it is found bearded or pencillate all around the style base. Hence, authors are discussing first time these errors to avoid confusion on identity, circumscription and illustration mismatch. Other specimens examined:— INDIA. Arunachal Pradesh, Kameng, 17 May 1958, Panigrahi 15695 (ASSAM); Tirap, 22 August 1958, Panigrahi 14549 (ASSAM). Nagaland, Naga hills, April 1936, Bor 17662 (ASSAM); Dzuko valley, Fakhanca hills, 14 April 2000, 2400m, Mao & Gogoi 111280 (ASSAM). Sikkim, 19 July 1881, King s.n. (CAL, 2 sheets); King 986; 23 November 1908, Craib 264; 25 October 1868, Kurz s.n. (CAL); November 1875, Kuntze 6849 (NYBG02592301 Image!); ibidem (NYBG02496900 Image!); Rungbee, 6,000ft, 08 August 1923, Cave s.n. (A01539283 Image!); Rungbee, 6000ft, 8 August 1923, Cave s.n. (E01153443 Image!). Darjeeling, Kalimpong district, Neora Valley National Park, Kolbong to Kolakham, 27°05’39.5”N 88°41’16.0”E, 1881.75m, 23 September 2016, Ranjan, Krishna & Kumar 77126 (CAL); Cowan s.n. (E01153444 Image!). MYANMAR (Burma). Mt. Victoria, 1924, Cooper 6033 (E00992615 Image!), Paypal Bunglow, 6-7000ft, 19 September 1912, Lace 38 (E00992616 Image!). CHINA. Yunnan, 4000ft, 1912, Forrest 9404 (S06-5050 Image!). NEPAL. Pheriche, 13,500ft, 30 July 1966, Banerji s.n. (A01539281 Image!)., Published as part of Ranjan, Vinay, Kumar, Anant & Krishna, Gopal, 2023, Recollection, typification, and taxonomic notes on Stilbanthus scandens (Amaranthaceae), pp. 209-212 in Phytotaxa 589 (2) on pages 209-212, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.589.2.9, http://zenodo.org/record/7762448, {"references":["Turland, N. J., Wiersema, J. H., Barrie, F. R., Greuter, W., Hawksworth, D. L., Herendeen, P. S., Knapp, S., Kusber, W. - H., Li, D. - Z., Marhold, K., May, T. W., McNeill, J., Monro, A. M., Prado, J., Price, M. J. & Smith, G. F. (Eds.) (2018) International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (Shenzhen Code) adopted by the Nineteenth International Botanical Congress Shenzhen, China, July 2017. Regnum Vegetabile 159. Glashutten: Koeltz Botanical Books. https: // doi. org / 10.12705 / Code. 2018","HUH-Index of Botanists (2013 +) Hooker, Joseph Dalton. Available from: https: // kiki. huh. harvard. edu / databases / botanist _ search. php? mode = details & id = 407 (accessed: 10 March 2023)","Bao, B., Borsch, T. & Clemants, S. E. (2003) Amaranthaceae Juss. In: Wu, Z. & Raven, P. H. (Eds.) Flora of China, vol. 5. Science Press & Missouri Botanical Garden Press, Beijing & St. Louis, pp. 415 - 429.","Mao, A. A., Odyuo, N., Verma, D. & Singh, P. (2017) Checklist of Flora of Nagaland. Botanical Survey of India, Kolkata, 196 pp.","Paul, T. K. & Chaudhury, G. (2019) Amaranthaceae. In: Lakshminarasimhan, P., Dash, S. S. Chowdhery, H. J. & Singh, P. (Eds.) Flora of West Bengal, vol. IV. Botanical Survey of India, Kolkata, pp. 367 - 387."]}

Ranjan, Vinay, Kumar, Anant, Krishna, Gopal (2023): Recollection, typification, and taxonomic notes on Stilbanthus scandens (Amaranthaceae). Phytotaxa 589 (2): 209-212, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.589.2.9, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.589.2.9

The Sierra de las Nieves National Park, declared by the Spanish Government in July 2021, is part of the Serranía de Ronda (Western Baetic mountains), which is considered one of the main centres of biodiversity and endemicity of the southern Iberian Peninsula (Andalusia, Spain) and the Mediterranean Basin. The park and its surroundings have an important diversity of vascular plants, mainly due to the orographic, climatic and geological diversity of the area, which is divided into three biogeographical sectors: Rondeño sector (limestones, dolomites and clays), Bermejense sector (peridotites and serpentines) and Aljíbico sector (gneisses and micaschists). This contribution presents the first catalogue of the vascular flora of this national park and its surrounding area, with 1,387 taxa distributed in 104 families and 542 genera. An amount of 79 taxa are endemic to Andalusia and 57 are endangered: 4 are Critically Endangered (CR), 17 are Endangered (EN) and 36 are Vulnerable (VU).

Betacyanins and their decarboxylated derivatives from fresh and dried edible leaves of Atriplex hortensis L. var. "Rubra" were fractionated for the first time by high-speed countercurrent chromatography. Pigments present in fresh leaf extract were separated in systems: ethanol - acetonitrile - n-propanol - ammonium sulphate - water (0.5:0.5:0.5:1.2:1.0, v/v/v/v/v) (tail-to-head mode) and tert-butyl methyl ether - n-butanol - acetonitrile - water with 0.7% heptafluorobutyric acid (2:2:1:5, v/v/v/v) (head-to-tail mode). The mobile phase flow rate was 2 mL/min and the retention of the stationary phase was 79.8 and 75.2%, respectively. Pigments from dried leaves were separated in a similar ion-pair system with heptafluorobutyric acid in different volume proportions 1:3:1:5 (head-to-tail mode) and the flow rate of the mobile phase 3 mL/min. The stationary phase retention was 64.0%. The application of the countercurrent chromatography for the fractionation of betacyanins from leaves of Atriplex hortensis enabled to isolate and pre-concentrate the pigments for further low- and high-resolution liquid chromatographic-tandem mass spectrometric detection. This study revealed the presence of 10 betacyanins in fresh and 16 in dried leaves of Atriplex hortensis. Two compounds were not previously identified in the whole Amaranthaceae family. Additionally, instead of (iso)amaranthin, celosianin and its epimer were dominant betacyanins in the Atriplex hortensis.

11. Amaranthus hybridus L., Sp. Pl. 2: 990. 1753 Type (lectotype designated by Townsend 1974: 19):— U.S.A. Habitat in Virginia, Herb. Linn. No. 1117.19 (LINN!, image of the lecyotype is available at http://linnean-online.org/11645/). = Amaranthus chlorostachys Willd., Hist. Amaranth.: 34. 1790. Type (lectotype designated by Iamonico 2016a: 521):— UNSPECIFIED LOCALITY, Hermes s.n. (B-W17521!, image of the lecyotype is available at https://herbarium.bgbm.org/object/BW17521000). = Amaranthus patulus Bertol., Comment. Itin. Neapol. 19. 1837. Type (lectotype designated by Iamonico 2016a: 525):— ITALY. Campania: Napoli al Pasconcello, September 1834, Bertoloni s.n. (BOLO!, image of the lectotype in Iamonico 2916°: Figure 3). = Amaranthus hybridus L. subsp. hybridus var. erythrostachys Moq., Prodr. [A.P. de Candolle] 13(2): 259. 1849. Type (lectotype designated by Iamonico 2016a: 522):— FRANCE. “ Hort. Tol. ”, 1844, sine coll. s.n. (G147762/1!, image of the lectotype available at http://www.ville-ge.ch/musinfo/bd/cjb/chg/adetail.php?id=138993&base=img&lang=en). Description:— Herbs 6–20(–25) dm tall, monoecious, annual (therophyte). Stems erect, glabrous (pubescent in the upper part), green to reddish, often branched. Leaves usually green, ovate to ovate-lanceolate, rhomboidal [(2.0–)3.0– 8.0(–13.0) × (1.0–)1.5–6.0(–6.0) cm], with usually entire margins, apex acute or obtuse, mucronate, base cuneate, usually glabrous, petioled [petiole (1.0–)1.5–4.0(–6.0) cm long]. Synflorescences terminal, panicle-like, the main florescence usually up to 15 cm long (longer than the paraclades), usually green. Floral bracts greenish or yellowish, lanceolate to lanceolate-linear [(2.5–4.5(–6.0) × 1.0– 1.5 mm)], 1.6–2.0 times longer than the perianth, acute, awned, with membranous border abruptly interrupted at the half, margin entire, glabrous. Staminate flowers with 5 tepals, ovate-lanceolate; stamens (4–)5. Pistillate flowers with 5 tepals, ovate to lanceolate [(1.5–)2.0–2.5(–3.0) × 0.5–0.7 mm], with acute and sometimes mucronate apex, median vein usually dark-green; stigmas 3. Fruit usually brown, ellipsoidal [1.5–2.5(–3.5) × 1.0– 1.2 mm], as long as or longer than the perianth, smooth to rugose, dehiscent. Seed lenticular (0.9–1.4 mm in diameter), black to dark reddish-brown. Iconography:— Ardenghi & Parolo (2010: 71, figs. 6b, e), Bayón (2015: 283, Figura 10). Phenology:— Flowering time April (Al-Eisawi & Al-Ruzayza 2015). Habitat and elevation:— Human-made habitat, at 250–300 m a.s.l. (Al-Eisawi & Al-Ruzayza 2015). Chromosome number:— 2n = 32, 34. Alien status:— Neophyte species native to tropical areas of North and Central America, it can be considered as naturalized in Saudi Arabia (Chaudhary 1998). Occurrence in Saudi Arabia (Fig. 14):— Al-Baha, Makkah (Al-Eisawi & Al-Ruzayza 2015), Tabuk (Aljieddani et al. 2021), Bisha (Abbas et al. 2020), and Taif (Abdullah et al. 2017). No finding was done during the filed surveys. Further researches are necessary to verify the distribution of Amaranthus hybridus in the country. Taxonomic annotations:— Amaranthus hybridus is a species characterized in having an high phenotypic variability, especially concerning the features of the flowers. Costea et al. (2001) recognized two subspecies [subsp. hybridus and subsp. quitensis (Kunth) Costea & Carretero] on the basis of the shape of the tepals (ovate and acute in subsp. hybridus, obovate to spathulate tepals and obtuse to truncate in subsp. quitensis). However, one of us (DI) believes that the taxon quitensis is more related to A. retroflexus, at least on the basis of shape and length of the tepal (a study is in progress by DI). In other cases, other taxa (e.g., A. cruentus L. or A. hypochondriacus L.) were accepted as subspecies of A. hybridus (see, e.g. Galasso et al. 2018). Anyway, further several forms were described in the past and a taxonomic revision is still lacking. We here accept the recognition of A. hybridus as separate species from the other member of the aggregate, according to Iamonico (2015)., Published as part of Hassan, Walaa A., Al-Shaye, Najla A., Alghamdi, Salma, Korany, Shereen M. & Iamonico, Duilio, 2022, Taxonomic revision of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae) in Saudi Arabia, pp. 135-157 in Phytotaxa 576 (2) on pages 151-152, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.576.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7461280, {"references":["Townsend, C. C. (1974) Amaranthaceae. In: Nasir, E. & Ali, S. I. (Eds.) Flora of West Pakistan, vol. 71. Ferozsons Press, Rawalpindi, pp. 1 - 49.","Iamonico, D. (2016 a) Nomenclature survey of the genus AMARANTHUS (AMARANTHACEAE). 3. Names linked to the Italian flora. Plant Biosystems 150 (3): 519 - 531. https: // dx. doi. org / 10.1080 / 11263504.2014.987188","Ardenghi, N. M. G. & Parolo, G. (2010) Primo contributo alla flora esotica della provincia di Sondrio (Lombardia, Italia). Atti del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Morbegno 21: 49 - 81.","Bayon, N. D. (2015) Revision taxonomica de las especies monoicas de Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae): Amaranthus subg. Amaranthus and Amaranthus subg. Albersia. Ann. Missouri Bot. Garden 101 (2): 261 - 383. https: // doi. org / 10.3417 / 2010080","Al-Eisawi, D. M. & Al-Ruzayza, S. (2015) The flora of holy Mecca district, Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Biodiversity Conservation 7 (3): 173 - 189. https: // doi. org / 10.5897 / IJBC 2014.0773","Chaudhary, S. A. (1998) Flora of the Kingdom of the Saudi Arabia, vol. 1. Ministry of Agriculture & Water, Riyadh, 692 pp.","Abbas, A. M., Al-Kahtani, M. A., Alfaifi, M. Y., Elbehairi, S. E. I. & Badry, M. O. (2020) Floristic Diversity and Phytogeography of JABAL Fayfa: A Subtropical Dry Zone, South-WestSaudi Arabia. Diversity 12: 345. https: // dx. doi. org / 10.3390 / d 12090345","Abdullah, M. A., Al. Yasee, H., Al-Sudani, Y. & Moneruzaman, M. (2017) Developing weeds of agricultural crops at different levels of heights, in taif area of Saudia Arabia. Bulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science 23 (5): 762 - 769.","Costea, M., Sanders, A. & Waines, G. (2001) Preliminary results towards a revision of the Amaranthus hybridus complex (Amaranthaceae). Sida 19: 931 - 974.","Galasso, G., Bartolucci, F., Peruzzi, L., Ardenghi, N. M. G., Albano, A., Alessandrini, A., Bacchetta, G., Ballelli, S., Baldini Mazzanti, M., Barberis, G., Bernardo, L., Bouvet, D., Bovio, M., Cecchi, L., Del Guacchio, E., Domina, G., Fascetti, S., Gallo, L., Gubellini, L., Guiggi, A., Iamonico, D., Iberite, M., Jimenez-Mejias, P., Lattanzi, E., Marchetti, D., Martinetto, E., Masin, R. R., Medagli, P., Passalacqua, N. G., Peccenini, S., Pennesi, R., Pierini, B., Podda, L., Poldini, L., Prosser, F., Raimondo, F. M., Roma-Marzio, F., Rosati, L., Santangelo, A., Scoppola, A., Scortegagna, S., Selvaggi, A., Selvi, F., Soldano, A., Stinca, A., Wagensommer, R. P., Wilhalm, T. & Conti, C. (2018) An updated checklist of the vascular flora alien to Italy. Plant biosystems 152 (3): 556 - 592. https: // doi. org / 10.1080 / 11263504.2018.1441197"]}

4. Amaranthus viridis L., Sp. Pl., ed. 2. 2: 1405. 1763 Type (lectotype designated by Fawcett & Rendle 1914: 131):—UNKNOWN ORIGIN. Habitat in Europa, Brasilia, Herb. Linn. No. 1117.15 (LINN!, image of the lectotype available at http://linnean-online.org/11641/). Description:— Herbs 1–7(–8) dm tall, monoecious, annual (therophyte). Stems erect, glabrous, green to brownish, branched. Leaves black-green, ovate, rhomboidal [(2.0–4.5) × (1.5–)2.0–7.0 cm], with entire (rarely undulate) margins, apex obtuse or rounded (rarely slightly emarginate) and sometimens mucronate, base usually cuneate, usually glabrous, petioled [petiole 1.5–5.0 cm long]. Synflorescences terminal, spike- or panicle-like (sometimes axillary glomerules also occur), the main florescence 3–4 cm long, green to brown, usually thin (5–7 mm in diameter). Floral bracts yellowish or greenish, ovate to lanceolate [0.5–1.0 × 0.4–0.7 mm], shorter (up to ⅓) than the perianth, acuminate, margin entire, glabrous. Staminate flowers with 3 tepals, ovate; stamens 3. Pistillate flowers with 3 tepals, ovatelanceolate or obovate-spathulate (1.2–1.5 × 0.3–0.6 mm), with rounded apex (sometimes acute), mucronate or not; stigmas (2–)3. Fruit brownish, subglobose [(1.2–)1.4–1.7(–1.9) × 1.4–1.6(–1.8) mm] as long as or slighly longer (up to ¼) than the perianth, clearly rugose, indehiscent. Seed lenticular (0.8–1.2 mm in diameter), black or brownish-black. Iconography:— Chaudhary (1998: 239, Plate. 129b), Bayón (2015: 371, Figura 64). Phenology:— Flowering time february. Habitat and elevation:— Human-made habitat, 400–600 m a.s.l. Chromosome number:— 2n = 34. Alien status:— Neophyte species native to South America, it can be considered as naturalized in Saudi Arabia (see also Chaudhary 1998). Occurrence in Saudi Arabia (Fig. 3):— Al hudud ash Shamaliyah (Osman & El-Ameid Abedin 2019), Bisha (Abbas et al. 2020), Jizan, and Taif (Abdullah et al. 2017). Taxonomic annotation:— The name Amaranthus gracilis Desf. was cited by Mandaville (2011) as synonym of A. viridis. Desfontaines’ name was widely discussed by Iamonico (2016b) who reached to the conclusion that it is a nomen ambiguum published by Desfontaines (1804) as nomen novum pro Chenopodium caudatum Jacq. The latter Jaquin’s name was proposed as nomen rejectendum by Iamonico et al. (2015). Specimina visa selecta:— SAUDI ARABIA, Jizan, human-made habitat, (coastal plain) 5–15 m a.s.l., 17 February 2021, leg. Masrhai et Al-shaye (PNUH), det. Masrhai, conf. Iamonico (RO!)., Published as part of Hassan, Walaa A., Al-Shaye, Najla A., Alghamdi, Salma, Korany, Shereen M. & Iamonico, Duilio, 2022, Taxonomic revision of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae) in Saudi Arabia, pp. 135-157 in Phytotaxa 576 (2) on page 141, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.576.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7461280, {"references":["Fawcett, W. & Rendle, A. B. (1914) Flora of Jamaica containing descriptions of the flowering plants known from the island, vol. 3. Order of the Trustees of the British Museum, London, 208 pp.","Chaudhary, S. A. (1998) Flora of the Kingdom of the Saudi Arabia, vol. 1. Ministry of Agriculture & Water, Riyadh, 692 pp.","Bayon, N. D. (2015) Revision taxonomica de las especies monoicas de Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae): Amaranthus subg. Amaranthus and Amaranthus subg. Albersia. Ann. Missouri Bot. Garden 101 (2): 261 - 383. https: // doi. org / 10.3417 / 2010080","Osman, A. K. E. & El-Ameid Abedin, M. A. (2019) Floristic diversity of Wadi Ar'ar, Saudi Arabia. Journal of Taibah University for Science 13 (1): 772 - 789. https: // doi. org / 10.1080 / 16583655.2019.1634177","Abbas, A. M., Al-Kahtani, M. A., Alfaifi, M. Y., Elbehairi, S. E. I. & Badry, M. O. (2020) Floristic Diversity and Phytogeography of JABAL Fayfa: A Subtropical Dry Zone, South-WestSaudi Arabia. Diversity 12: 345. https: // dx. doi. org / 10.3390 / d 12090345","Abdullah, M. A., Al. Yasee, H., Al-Sudani, Y. & Moneruzaman, M. (2017) Developing weeds of agricultural crops at different levels of heights, in taif area of Saudia Arabia. Bulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science 23 (5): 762 - 769.","Mandaville, J. P. (2011) Flora of eastern saudi Arabia. Routledge, London, 276 pp.","Iamonico, D. (2016 b) Nomenclature survey of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae). 4. Detailed questions arising around the name Amaranthus gracilis. Botanica Serbica 40 (1): 61 - 68.","Desfontaines, R. L. (1804) Tableau de l'ecole de Botanique du Museum d'Histoire Naturelle. J. A. Brosson, Paris, 238 pp. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 13828","Iamonico, D., Sukhorukov, A. P. & Reveal, J. L. (2015) (2360) Proposal to reject the name Chenopodium caudatum (Amaranthaceae / Chenopodiaceae). Taxon 64 (3): 638 - 639. https: // dx. doi. org / 10.12705 / 643.18"]}

2b. Amaranthus blitum subsp. blitum var. oleraceus (L.) Hook.f., Fl. Brit. India [J.D. Hooker] 4: 721. 1885 ≡ Amaranthus oleraceus L., Sp. Pl., ed. 2. 2: 1403. 1763 ≡ Amaranthus lividus proles oleraceus (L.) Thell. in Asch. & Graebn., Syn. Mitteleur. Fl. [Ascherson & Graebner] 5(1(5)): 321. 1914 ≡ Amaranthus blitum subsp. oleraceus (L.) Costea in Costea & al., Sida 19(4): 984. 2001 Type (lectotype designated by Filias et al. 1980: 150):—ASIA. Habitat in India, Herb. Linn., No. 1117.13 (LINN!, image of the lectotype available at http://linnean-online.org/11639/). Iconography:— Bayón (2015: 307, Figura 22). Chromosome number:— Unknown. Alien status:— The origin of this taxon is uncertain at present. It probably originated from a selection of the var. blitum which was used as cultivated vegetable (see e.g., Costea et al. 2001). However, it does not appear to have been used for this purpose in Saudi Arabia. We consider var. oleraceus as casual in Saudi Arabia. Occurrence in Saudi Arabia:— Var. oleraceus is here considered since it was listed by Thomas (2011). In fact, we did not found this variety during the field survey. Further investigations need to verify its real occurrence in Saudi Arabia., Published as part of Hassan, Walaa A., Al-Shaye, Najla A., Alghamdi, Salma, Korany, Shereen M. & Iamonico, Duilio, 2022, Taxonomic revision of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae) in Saudi Arabia, pp. 135-157 in Phytotaxa 576 (2) on page 140, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.576.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7461280, {"references":["Filias, F., Gaulliez, R. & Guedes, M. (1980) Amaranthus blitum vs. A. lividus (Amaranthaceae). Taxon 29: 149 - 150. https: // doi. org / 10.2307 / 1219612","Bayon, N. D. (2015) Revision taxonomica de las especies monoicas de Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae): Amaranthus subg. Amaranthus and Amaranthus subg. Albersia. Ann. Missouri Bot. Garden 101 (2): 261 - 383. https: // doi. org / 10.3417 / 2010080","Costea, M., Sanders, A. & Waines, G. (2001) Preliminary results towards a revision of the Amaranthus hybridus complex (Amaranthaceae). Sida 19: 931 - 974.","Thomas, H. (2011) Flora of Saudi Arabia - Checklist. Available from: http: // www. plantdiversityofsaudiarabia. info / Biodiversity-Saudi- Arabia / Flora / Checklist / Cheklist. htm (accessed 29 march 2022)"]}

7a. Amaranthus blitoides var. blitoides Description:— See above. Iconography:— Bayón (2015: 307, Figura 21). Phenology:— Flowering time february. Habitat and elevation:— Human-made habitat (coastal plain), 5–15 m a.s.l. Chromosome number:— 2n = 32, 34. Occurrence in Saudi Arabia (Fig. 7):— Jizan (first record). Alien status:— Neophyte species native to North America, it can be considered as casual in Saudi Arabia. Specimina visa selecta:— SAUDI ARABIA. Jizan, human-made habitat (coastal plain), 5–15 m a.s.l., 17 February 2021, leg. Masrhai et Al-shaye, det. Masrhai, rev. Iamonico (PNUH!, RO!; Fig. 8); ibidem (PNUH!, RO!); ibidem (PNUH!, RO!)., Published as part of Hassan, Walaa A., Al-Shaye, Najla A., Alghamdi, Salma, Korany, Shereen M. & Iamonico, Duilio, 2022, Taxonomic revision of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae) in Saudi Arabia, pp. 135-157 in Phytotaxa 576 (2) on page 146, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.576.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7461280, {"references":["Bayon, N. D. (2015) Revision taxonomica de las especies monoicas de Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae): Amaranthus subg. Amaranthus and Amaranthus subg. Albersia. Ann. Missouri Bot. Garden 101 (2): 261 - 383. https: // doi. org / 10.3417 / 2010080"]}

Amaranthus L., Sp. Pl. 2: 989. 1753. Type (lectotype designated by Green 1929: 188): Amaranthus caudatus L. Description:— Monoecious or dioecious herbs, usually annual (therophytes), sometimes perennial (hemicryptophytes). Stems erect, ascending, or prostrate, glabrous to tomentose (trichomes uniseriate, whitish to yellowish), green, white, brownish or red, usually branched. Leaves alternate, petioled, with blade lanceolate to ovate, elliptic to deltoid to rhombic; base cuneate to obtuse; apex acute, obtuse, or emarginate, sometimens mucronate; margins entire, sometimens undulate; blade glabrous to pubescent (sometimens hairs only along the veins), with trichomes whitish to yellowish, uniseriate. Synflorescences thyrsoid paraclades arranged in terminal and/or axillary spike- or panicle-like structures or only in axillary glomerules (for details see Iamonico 2015). Bracts 1–5, ovate to lanceolate, with membranous borders thinning to apex or abruptly interrupted at the half of the total length, sometimes keeled; apex acute to obtuse. Flowers unisexual, sessile. Staminate flowers with 3–5 free and more or less equal tepals, ovate to lanceolate, usually glabrous; apex usually acute; margin entire; stamens 3–5, anthers tetrasporangiate with 2 lines of dehiscence, filaments free to the base; pseudostaminodia absent. Pistillate flowers with (0–)2–5 usually free tepals, linear to ovate-lanceolate sometimes spathulate, usually glabrous; apex acute to emarginate (sometimes mucronate); margins entire; one pistil, one ovule, 2–5 stigmas. Fruit dry (dehiscent capsule, or indehiscent utricle), globose to ellipsoid, smooth to strongly rugose on the surface, with often persistent styles; seed one, usually lenticular, smooth to reticulate; embryo annular. General note and diagnostic key:— Twelve non-hybrid species (sixteen taxa, by considering the infraspecific taxa) were here recorded in Saudi Arabia, of which two (A. caudatus and A. tricolor L.) are cultivated only in the country. Four taxa (A. graecizans subsp. graecizans, A. graecizans subsp. sylvestris, A. graecizans subsp. thellungianus, and A. sparganicephalus) are authoctonous, whereas the other ones are aliens, mostly neophytes native to the Americas (Table 2). A diagnostic key of the Amaranthus species occurring in Saudi Arabia follows (the characters of the flowers refer to the pistillate ones, since the features of the staminate flowers have a very low taxonomical value in the genus Amaranthus; see e.g., Mosyakin & Robertson 2003, Iamonico 2015). We include also the two cultivated species (A. caudatus and A. tricolor) which could be found in wild in future. Diagnostic keys for infraspecific taxa of A. blitum L. and A. graecizans are reported after the morphological descriptions of them. 1. Tepals 3...............................................................................................................................................................................................2 - Tepals> 3...........................................................................................................................................................................................7 2. Stem white to white-greenish; bracts spinescent longer than the tepals.............................................................................1. A. albus - Stem never white to white-greenish; bracts not spinescent, shorter than the tepals...........................................................................3 3. Synflorescence spike- or panicle-like.................................................................................................................................................4 - Synflorescence in axillary glomerules................................................................................................................................................6 4 Fruit indehiscent (utricle), as long as or longer than the perianth......................................................................................................5 - Fruit dehiscent (capsule) shorter than the perianth.......................................................................................................... 3. A. tricolor 5. Fruit smooth or sligthly on the surface...................................................................................................................... 2. A. blitum s.lat - Fruit strongly rugose on the surface.................................................................................................................................. 4. A. viridis 6. Fruit shorter than the perianth......................................................................................................................................... 3. A. tricolor 6. Fruit as long as or longer than the perianth........................................................................................................................................8 8. Fruit up to 2.7 mm long 4, never longitudinally sulcate.................................................................................... 5. A. graecizans s.lat - Fruit> than 2.7 mm long, the proximal half longitudinally sulcate............................................................... 6. A. sparganocephalus 7. Tepals usually 4; stem prostrate-diffuse or ascending; synflorescence arranged in axillary glomerules...................... 7. A. blitoides - Tepals 5; stem erect; synflorescence arranged in spike- or panicle-like structures............................................................................ 8 8. Bracts of the first flower in the first cyme metamorphosed into a spine-like structure................................................ 8. A. spinosus - Bracts spine-like absent......................................................................................................................................................................9 9. Terminal synflorescence usually pendulous up to 70 cm long; tepals (at least the inner ones) obovate-spathulate.....9. A. caudatus - Terminal synflorescence always erect; tepals ovate to lanceolate.................................................................................................... 10 10. Bracts up to 2 mm long and always shorter than the tepals............................................................................................10. A. dubius - Bracts> 2 mm long and always longer than the tepals....................................................................................................................11 11. Bracts clearly longer (1.6–2.0 times) than the perianth; tepals with median vein usually dark-green....................... 11. A. hybridus - Bracts as long as or slightly longer (up to 1.5 times) than the perianth; tepals with median vein usually yellow-brown........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 12. A. cruentus

9. Amaranthus caudatus L., Sp. Pl. 2: 990. 1753 Type (lectotype designated by Towsend 1974: 10):—UNKNOWN ORIGIN. Habitat in Perù, Persia, Zeylonia, Herb. Linn. No. 1117.26 (LINN!, image of the lectotype available at http://linnean-online.org/11652/). Description:— Herbs 8–15 dm tall, monoecious, annual (therophyte). Stems erect, glabrous (pubescent in the distal part), red to purple, branched. Leaves red, ovate, rhomboidal 5.0–15.0 × 2.0–8.0 cm), with entire margins, apex obtuse or acute, mucronate, base cuneate, often pubescent, petioled (petiole 1.0–12.0 cm long). Synflorescences terminal, spike-like, up to 60–70 cm long, red to purple, pendulous (terminal florescence 30 cm long or more). Floral bracts greenish to reddish, ovate to lanceolate-linear (3.0–4.0 × 0.8–1.5 mm) longer than the perianth, acute, awned, margin entire, glabrous. Staminate flowers with 5 tepals, ovate; stamens 5. Pistillate flowers with 5 tepals, lanceolate-spathulate (1.0–2.5 × 0.3–1.3 mm), with acute (in this case mucronate) or obtuse (sometimes emarginate) apex; stigmas 3. Fruit brownish, globose (1.5–2.5 × 1.4–1.9 mm), as long as or longer than the perianth, smooth to rugose, dehiscent. Seed lenticular (1.0– 1.5 mm in diameter), dark-brown to brownish-black. Iconography:— Beck (1909: Tab. 297, figures 1–2), Bayón (2015: 277, Figura 6). Phenology:— Flowering time december. Habitat and elevation:— Dry and rocky places, human-made habitat, around 1700 m a.s.l. Chromosome number:— 2n = 34, 68. Alien status:— Neophyte species native to South America (Argentina, Equador, Peru, and Bolivia), it can be considered as casual in Saudi Arabia (Makkah). Occurrence in Saudi Arabia (Fig. 11):— According to Chaudhary (1998: 236) this species would be cultivated only in Saudi Arabia (as ornamental plant). Despite no wild plants were found by us during the field survey, we traced one specimen at IND, so confirming that the species occurs in Saudi Arabia. Specimina visa selecta:— SAUDI ARABIA, Makkah, about 5 km N of Taif, dry, rocky hillside, military base, 1720 m, 11 February 1977, leg. Humbles 100032, det. Johnson (IND0088369!)., Published as part of Hassan, Walaa A., Al-Shaye, Najla A., Alghamdi, Salma, Korany, Shereen M. & Iamonico, Duilio, 2022, Taxonomic revision of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae) in Saudi Arabia, pp. 135-157 in Phytotaxa 576 (2) on pages 148-149, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.576.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7461280, {"references":["Beck, G. (1909) Icones Florae Germanicae et Helveticae, vol. 24. F. Hofmeister, Lipsiae, 213 pp.","Bayon, N. D. (2015) Revision taxonomica de las especies monoicas de Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae): Amaranthus subg. Amaranthus and Amaranthus subg. Albersia. Ann. Missouri Bot. Garden 101 (2): 261 - 383. https: // doi. org / 10.3417 / 2010080","Chaudhary, S. A. (1998) Flora of the Kingdom of the Saudi Arabia, vol. 1. Ministry of Agriculture & Water, Riyadh, 692 pp."]}

Amaranthus L., Sp. Pl. 2: 989. 1753. Type (lectotype designated by Green 1929: 188): Amaranthus caudatus L. Description:— Monoecious or dioecious herbs, usually annual (therophytes), sometimes perennial (hemicryptophytes). Stems erect, ascending, or prostrate, glabrous to tomentose (trichomes uniseriate, whitish to yellowish), green, white, brownish or red, usually branched. Leaves alternate, petioled, with blade lanceolate to ovate, elliptic to deltoid to rhombic; base cuneate to obtuse; apex acute, obtuse, or emarginate, sometimens mucronate; margins entire, sometimens undulate; blade glabrous to pubescent (sometimens hairs only along the veins), with trichomes whitish to yellowish, uniseriate. Synflorescences thyrsoid paraclades arranged in terminal and/or axillary spike- or panicle-like structures or only in axillary glomerules (for details see Iamonico 2015). Bracts 1–5, ovate to lanceolate, with membranous borders thinning to apex or abruptly interrupted at the half of the total length, sometimes keeled; apex acute to obtuse. Flowers unisexual, sessile. Staminate flowers with 3–5 free and more or less equal tepals, ovate to lanceolate, usually glabrous; apex usually acute; margin entire; stamens 3–5, anthers tetrasporangiate with 2 lines of dehiscence, filaments free to the base; pseudostaminodia absent. Pistillate flowers with (0–)2–5 usually free tepals, linear to ovate-lanceolate sometimes spathulate, usually glabrous; apex acute to emarginate (sometimes mucronate); margins entire; one pistil, one ovule, 2–5 stigmas. Fruit dry (dehiscent capsule, or indehiscent utricle), globose to ellipsoid, smooth to strongly rugose on the surface, with often persistent styles; seed one, usually lenticular, smooth to reticulate; embryo annular. General note and diagnostic key:— Twelve non-hybrid species (sixteen taxa, by considering the infraspecific taxa) were here recorded in Saudi Arabia, of which two (A. caudatus and A. tricolor L.) are cultivated only in the country. Four taxa (A. graecizans subsp. graecizans, A. graecizans subsp. sylvestris, A. graecizans subsp. thellungianus, and A. sparganicephalus) are authoctonous, whereas the other ones are aliens, mostly neophytes native to the Americas (Table 2). A diagnostic key of the Amaranthus species occurring in Saudi Arabia follows (the characters of the flowers refer to the pistillate ones, since the features of the staminate flowers have a very low taxonomical value in the genus Amaranthus; see e.g., Mosyakin & Robertson 2003, Iamonico 2015). We include also the two cultivated species (A. caudatus and A. tricolor) which could be found in wild in future. Diagnostic keys for infraspecific taxa of A. blitum L. and A. graecizans are reported after the morphological descriptions of them. 1. Tepals 3...............................................................................................................................................................................................2 - Tepals> 3...........................................................................................................................................................................................7 2. Stem white to white-greenish; bracts spinescent longer than the tepals.............................................................................1. A. albus - Stem never white to white-greenish; bracts not spinescent, shorter than the tepals...........................................................................3 3. Synflorescence spike- or panicle-like.................................................................................................................................................4 - Synflorescence in axillary glomerules................................................................................................................................................6 4 Fruit indehiscent (utricle), as long as or longer than the perianth......................................................................................................5 - Fruit dehiscent (capsule) shorter than the perianth.......................................................................................................... 3. A. tricolor 5. Fruit smooth or sligthly on the surface...................................................................................................................... 2. A. blitum s.lat - Fruit strongly rugose on the surface.................................................................................................................................. 4. A. viridis 6. Fruit shorter than the perianth......................................................................................................................................... 3. A. tricolor 6. Fruit as long as or longer than the perianth........................................................................................................................................8 8. Fruit up to 2.7 mm long 4, never longitudinally sulcate.................................................................................... 5. A. graecizans s.lat - Fruit> than 2.7 mm long, the proximal half longitudinally sulcate............................................................... 6. A. sparganocephalus 7. Tepals usually 4; stem prostrate-diffuse or ascending; synflorescence arranged in axillary glomerules...................... 7. A. blitoides - Tepals 5; stem erect; synflorescence arranged in spike- or panicle-like structures............................................................................ 8 8. Bracts of the first flower in the first cyme metamorphosed into a spine-like structure................................................ 8. A. spinosus - Bracts spine-like absent......................................................................................................................................................................9 9. Terminal synflorescence usually pendulous up to 70 cm long; tepals (at least the inner ones) obovate-spathulate.....9. A. caudatus - Terminal synflorescence always erect; tepals ovate to lanceolate.................................................................................................... 10 10. Bracts up to 2 mm long and always shorter than the tepals............................................................................................10. A. dubius - Bracts> 2 mm long and always longer than the tepals....................................................................................................................11 11. Bracts clearly longer (1.6–2.0 times) than the perianth; tepals with median vein usually dark-green....................... 11. A. hybridus - Bracts as long as or slightly longer (up to 1.5 times) than the perianth; tepals with median vein usually yellow-brown........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 12. A. cruentus, Published as part of Hassan, Walaa A., Al-Shaye, Najla A., Alghamdi, Salma, Korany, Shereen M. & Iamonico, Duilio, 2022, Taxonomic revision of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae) in Saudi Arabia, pp. 135-157 in Phytotaxa 576 (2) on page 137, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.576.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7461280, {"references":["Green, M. L. (1929) Amaranthus caudatus L. In: Hitchcock, A. S. (Ed.) Nomenclature. Proposals by British Botanists. Wyman & Sons, London, p. 188.","Mosyakin, S. L. & Robertson, K. R. (2003) Amaranthus L. In: Flora of North America Editorial Committee (Org) Flora of North America North of Mexico (Magnoliophyta: Caryophyllidae, part 1), vol. 4. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 410 - 435."]}

8. Amaranthus spinosus L., Sp. Pl. 2: 991. 1753 Type (lectotype designated by Fawcett & Rendle 1914: 103):—ASIA. Habitat in Indiis, Herb. Linn. No. 1117.27 (LINN!, image of the lectotype available at http://linnean-online.org/11653/). Description:— Herbs 1–85(–120) dm tall, monoecious, annual (therophyte), rarely biennial. Stems usually erect, ± glabrous (sometimes sparsely pubescent in the inflorescence region), white to white-greenish, much branched. Leaves green (usually pale green), ovate, elliptic to spathulate (3.5–6.0 × 1.5–3.0 cm in the main axis, greater than the leaves on the branches), often with undulate margins (sometimes with a white marginal vein), apex obtuse and mucronate, base cuneate, glabrous (rarely pubescent on the veins), petioled (petiole 1.6–3.0 cm long). Synflorescences arranged in axillary glomerules, light green. Floral bracts greenish, ovate-lanceolate [(2.0–)3.0–4.0(–6.0) × 0.3–0.6 mm], 2(–2.5) times longer than the perianth, awned, margin entire, glabrous. Staminate flowers with 3 tepals, lanceolate; stamens 3. Pistillate flowers with 3 tepals, linear to lanceolate [0.9–1.1 × 0.3–0.4(–0.5) mm], with acute apex; stigmas 3. Fruit brownish-black, ellipsoidal [(1.2–)1.4–1.8 × 1.0–1.2(–1.4) mm], as long as or slightly longer than the perianth, rugose when dry, dehiscent. Seed lenticular [(0.8–)0.9–1.1(–1.3) mm in diameter], black to brownish-black. Iconography:— Beck (1909: Tab. 297, figures 3–5); Chaudhary (1998: Plate. 127g –j), Bayón (2015: 296, Figura 15). Phenology:— Flowering time June (Al-Turki et al. 2000). Habitat and elevation:— Human-made habitat, about sea level (Al-Turki et al. 2000). Chromosome number:— 2n = 34 (Al-Turki et al. 2000: 341), 68. Alien status:— Neophyte species native to Neotropics, it can be considered as casual in Saudi Arabia (see also Chaudhary 1998). Occurrence in Saudi Arabia (Fig. 10):— Bisha (Abbas et al. 2020), Jizan (Al-Turki et al. 2000, Aljieddani et al. 2021). No finding was done during the filed surveys. Further researches are necessary to verify the distribution of A. spinosus in the country., Published as part of Hassan, Walaa A., Al-Shaye, Najla A., Alghamdi, Salma, Korany, Shereen M. & Iamonico, Duilio, 2022, Taxonomic revision of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae) in Saudi Arabia, pp. 135-157 in Phytotaxa 576 (2) on page 148, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.576.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7461280, {"references":["Fawcett, W. & Rendle, A. B. (1914) Flora of Jamaica containing descriptions of the flowering plants known from the island, vol. 3. Order of the Trustees of the British Museum, London, 208 pp.","Beck, G. (1909) Icones Florae Germanicae et Helveticae, vol. 24. F. Hofmeister, Lipsiae, 213 pp.","Chaudhary, S. A. (1998) Flora of the Kingdom of the Saudi Arabia, vol. 1. Ministry of Agriculture & Water, Riyadh, 692 pp.","Bayon, N. D. (2015) Revision taxonomica de las especies monoicas de Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae): Amaranthus subg. Amaranthus and Amaranthus subg. Albersia. Ann. Missouri Bot. Garden 101 (2): 261 - 383. https: // doi. org / 10.3417 / 2010080","Al-Turki, T. A., Filfilan, S. A. & Mehmood, S. F. (2000) A cytological study of flowering plants from Saudi Arabia. Willdenowia 30: 339 - 358. https: // doi. org / 10.3372 / wi. 30.30211","Abbas, A. M., Al-Kahtani, M. A., Alfaifi, M. Y., Elbehairi, S. E. I. & Badry, M. O. (2020) Floristic Diversity and Phytogeography of JABAL Fayfa: A Subtropical Dry Zone, South-WestSaudi Arabia. Diversity 12: 345. https: // dx. doi. org / 10.3390 / d 12090345"]}

12. Amaranthus cruentus L., Syst. Nat., ed. 10. 2: 1269. 1759 Type (lectotype designated by Townsend 1974: 12):— CHINA. Habitat in China, Herb. Linn. No. 1117.25 (LINN!, image of the lectotype available at http://linnean-online.org/11651/). = Amaranthus flavus L., Syst. Nat., ed. 10. 2: 1269. 1759. Type (lectotype designated by Iamonico 2014a: 147):—UNKNOWN ORIGIN. Herb. Linn. No. 1117.23 (LINN!, image of the lectotype available at http://linnean-online.org/11649/). = Amaranthus paniculatus L., Sp. Pl., ed. 2. 2: 1406. 1763. Type (lectotype designated by El Hadidi & El Hadidy 1981: 37):—AMERICA. Habitat in America, Herb. Linn. No. 1117.20 (LINN!, image of the lectotype available at http://linnean-online.org/11646/). = Amaranthus sanguineus L., Sp. Pl., ed. 2. 2: 1407. 1763. Type (lectotype designated by Iamonico 2014a: 148):—UNKNOWN ORIGIN. Herb. Linn. No. 1117.21 (LINN!, image of the lectotype available at http://linnean-online.org/11647/). Description:— Herbs 5–14 dm tall, monoecious, annual (therophyte). Stems erect, ± glabrous (slightly pubescent in the upper part), red or green, often distally branched. Leaves usually green, ovate to ovate-lanceolate, rhomboidal [(3.0–)5.0–12.0(–14.0) × (1.5–)3.0–6.0(–7.0) cm], with entire margins, apex acute or obtuse (sometimes slightly emarginate), mucronate, base cuneate, glabrous or slightly pubescent, petioled (petiole 1.5–10.0 cm long). Synflorescences terminal, panicle-like, the main florescence up to 15 cm long (longer than the paraclades), red or green. Floral bracts green or greenish, lanceolate (2.0–3.5 × 0.8–1.3 mm), 1.0–1.5 longer than the perianth, acute, awned, with membranous border abruptly interrupted at the half, margin entire, glabrous. Staminate flowers with 5 tepals, ovate-lanceolate; stamens (4–)5. Pistillate flowers with 5 tepals, ovate-lanceolate [(1.5–)2.0–2.5(–3.0) × 0.6–1.5 mm], with acute and sometimes mucronate apex, median vein usually yellow-brown; stigmas 3. Fruit brown, ellipsoidal (2.0–2.5 × 1.4–1.6 mm), longer than the perianth, smooth to slightly rugose, dehiscent. Seed lenticular (1.2–1.6 mm in diameter), dark-brown to reddish-brown. Iconography:— Willdenow (1790: Tab. II fig. 4, sub A. paniculatus), Beck (1909: Tab. 296, figures 3–4, sub Euxolus patulus), Bayón (2015: 280, Figura 7). Chromosome number:— 2n = 32, 34. Alien status:— Neophyte species native to Central America, it can be considered as naturalized in Saudi Arabia (Chaudhary 1998). Occurrence in Saudi Arabia:— Chaudhary (1998) indicated this species [sub Amaranthus hybridus subsp. cruenthus (L.) Thell.] in “the southwest of Saudi Arabia”, without further data about the localities in which it occurs. No finding was done during the filed surveys. Further researches are necessary to verify the distribution of A. cruentus in the country. Taxonomic annotations:— Amaranthus cruentus is quite variable from the morphological point of view, especially concerning the surface of the leaf blade (simple green, green with a white band arch-shaped, or green with a central red spot), the structure of the synflorescences (the paraclades can be erect to patent), and the colour of the stem and synflorescence (from green to red or dark-red). Some cultivars (A. cruentus is also used as ornamental plant), especially those with dark-red synflorescences, can be confused with some forms of A. hypochondriacus, but the two species differ each other by the characters of the bracts (see Iamonico 2015)., Published as part of Hassan, Walaa A., Al-Shaye, Najla A., Alghamdi, Salma, Korany, Shereen M. & Iamonico, Duilio, 2022, Taxonomic revision of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae) in Saudi Arabia, pp. 135-157 in Phytotaxa 576 (2) on pages 152-153, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.576.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7461280, {"references":["Townsend, C. C. (1974) Amaranthaceae. In: Nasir, E. & Ali, S. I. (Eds.) Flora of West Pakistan, vol. 71. Ferozsons Press, Rawalpindi, pp. 1 - 49.","Iamonico, D. (2014 a) Lectotypification of Linnaean names in the genus Amaranthus L. (Amaranthaceae). Taxon 63: 146 - 150. https: // doi. org / 10.12705 / 631.34","El Hadidi, N. & El Hadidy, A. M. H. (1981) Flora of Egypt. Amaranthaceae Juss. Taeckholmia, Additional Series 1 (2): 1 - 8.","Willdenow, C. L. (1790) Historia Amaranthorum. Impensis Ziegleri et fil., Turici, 38 pp.","Beck, G. (1909) Icones Florae Germanicae et Helveticae, vol. 24. F. Hofmeister, Lipsiae, 213 pp.","Bayon, N. D. (2015) Revision taxonomica de las especies monoicas de Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae): Amaranthus subg. Amaranthus and Amaranthus subg. Albersia. Ann. Missouri Bot. Garden 101 (2): 261 - 383. https: // doi. org / 10.3417 / 2010080","Chaudhary, S. A. (1998) Flora of the Kingdom of the Saudi Arabia, vol. 1. Ministry of Agriculture & Water, Riyadh, 692 pp."]}

5a. Amaranthus graecizans L. subsp. graecizans Iconography:— Beck (1909: Tab. 299, figures 1–7, sub A. angustifolius). Phenology:— Flowering time february. Habitat and elevation:— Human-made habitat (coastal plain), 5–15 m a.s.l. Chromosome number:— 2n = 32 (Baquar & Olusi 1988). Occurrence in Saudi Arabia: — Jizan. Specimina visa selecta (Fig. 4):— SAUDI ARABIA, Jizan, human-made habitat (coastal plain), 5–15 m a.s.l., 17 February 2021, leg. Masrhai et Al-shaye (PNUH), det. Masrhai, conf. Iamonico (RO!)., Published as part of Hassan, Walaa A., Al-Shaye, Najla A., Alghamdi, Salma, Korany, Shereen M. & Iamonico, Duilio, 2022, Taxonomic revision of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae) in Saudi Arabia, pp. 135-157 in Phytotaxa 576 (2) on pages 142-143, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.576.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7461280, {"references":["Beck, G. (1909) Icones Florae Germanicae et Helveticae, vol. 24. F. Hofmeister, Lipsiae, 213 pp.","Baquar, S. R. & Olusi, O. O. (1988) Cytomorphological and phylogenetic studies of the genus Amaranthus from Nigeria. Kromosomo 51 - 52: 1665 - 1674."]}

7. Amaranthus blitoides S.Watson, Proc. Amer. Acad. Arts 12: 273. 1877 Type (lectotype designated by Fernald 1945: 139):— U.S.A. Iowa: Ames, gravelly or sandy soils especially around buildings and along roads, Bessey s.n. (GH00036983!, image of the lectotype available at https://kiki.huh.harvard.edu/databases/specimen_search.php? mode=details&id=58020). Description:— Herbs (0.4–)1–5 (rarely up to 10) dm tall, monoecious, annual (therophyte). Stems prostrate-ascending, glabrous (rarely sparsely pubescent), pale green to brown, branched. Leaves usually green (sometimes with a central whitish spot), oblong-lanceolate to obovate-spathulate [1.0–3.0(–4.0) × (0.3–)0.5–1.0(–1.5) cm], sometimes fleshy, with entire or undulate margins, apex acute or rounded, often mucronate, base cuneate, glabrous, with marginal white vein, petioled (petiole 0.5–1.8 cm long). Synflorescences arranged in axillary glomerules, reddish or green. Floral bracts green or greenish, ovate to lanceolate (1.3–3.0 × 0.4–0.7 mm), shorter than the longest perianth segments, acute, margin entire, glabrous. Staminate flowers with 3(–4) tepals, ovate to lanceolate; stamens 3. Pistillate flowers with (4–)5 unequal tepals, lanceolate, elliptic [the greater 1.5–2.5(–3.5) × (0.7–)1.0– 1.2 mm], with acute to acuminate, and mucronate apex; stigmas 3. Fruit brown or reddish, ellipsoidal (2.0–2.2 × 1.0– 1.4 mm), as long as or longer than the tepals, usually smooth, dehiscent. Seed lenticular (1.5–1.7 mm in diameter), black. Occurrence in Saudi Arabia:— Jizan [first record, var. blitoides (see below)], Makkah (Iamonico 2016c)., Published as part of Hassan, Walaa A., Al-Shaye, Najla A., Alghamdi, Salma, Korany, Shereen M. & Iamonico, Duilio, 2022, Taxonomic revision of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae) in Saudi Arabia, pp. 135-157 in Phytotaxa 576 (2) on page 145, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.576.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7461280, {"references":["Fernald, M. L. (1945) Botanical specialities of the Seward Forest and adjacent Areas of Southeastern Virginia. Rhodora 47: 93 - 142.","Iamonico, D. (2016 c) Nomenclature survey of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae). 5. Moquin-Tandon's names. Phytotaxa 273 (2): 81 - 114. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / phytotaxa. 273.2.1"]}

2a. Amaranthus blitum subsp. blitum var. blitum Iconography:— Beck (1909: Tab. 300). Phenology:— Flowering time february to april (see also Al-Eisawi & Al-Ruzayza 2015). Habitat and elevation:— Human-made habitat on sandy soils, 250–580 m a.s.l. (see also (Al-Eisawi & AlRuzayza 2015). Chromosome number:— 2n = 34. Alien status:— Archeophyte species native to to Mediterranean area and other parts of Europe, it can be considered as naturalized in Saudi Arabia (see also Chaudhary et al. 1981). Occurrence in Saudi Arabia (Fig. 2):— Hail (El-Ghanim et al. 2010), Makkah (Al-Eisawi & Al-Ruzayza 2015), Riyhad (our investigation). Specimina visa selecta:— SAUDIA ARABIA, Riyadh, sandy soil, 623 m a.s.l., 11 February 2021, leg. Hassan et Alali, det. Iamonico (PNUH!); ibidem (RO!)., Published as part of Hassan, Walaa A., Al-Shaye, Najla A., Alghamdi, Salma, Korany, Shereen M. & Iamonico, Duilio, 2022, Taxonomic revision of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae) in Saudi Arabia, pp. 135-157 in Phytotaxa 576 (2) on pages 139-140, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.576.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7461280, {"references":["Beck, G. (1909) Icones Florae Germanicae et Helveticae, vol. 24. F. Hofmeister, Lipsiae, 213 pp.","Al-Eisawi, D. M. & Al-Ruzayza, S. (2015) The flora of holy Mecca district, Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Biodiversity Conservation 7 (3): 173 - 189. https: // doi. org / 10.5897 / IJBC 2014.0773","Chaudhary, S. A., Parker, C. & Kasasian, L. (1981) Weeds of central, southern and eastern Arabian Peninsula. Tropical Pest Management 27 (2): 181 - 190. https: // doi. org / 10.1080 / 09670878109413649","El-Ghanim, W. M., Hassan, L. F., Gala, T. M. & Badr, A. (2010) Floristic composition and vegetation analysis in Hail region north of central Saudi Arabia. Saudi Journal of Biological Science 17 (2): 119 - 128. https: // doi. org / 10.1016 / j. sjbs. 2010.02.004"]}

1. Amaranthus albus L., Syst. Nat., ed. 10. 2: 1268. 1759 Type (lectotype designated by Raus 1997: 143):—NORTH AMERICA. Habitat in Philadelphiae maritimis, Herb. Linn. No. 1117.1 (LINN!, image of the lectotype available at http://linnean-online.org/11627/). Description:— Herbs 1–85(–120) dm tall, monoecious, annual (therophyte), rarely biennial. Stems usually erect, ± glabrous (sometimes sparsely pubescent in the inflorescence region), white to white-greenish, much branched. Leaves green (usually pale green), ovate, elliptic to spathulate (3.5–6.0 × 1.5–3.0 cm in the main axis, greater than the leaves on the branches), often with undulate margins (sometimes with a white marginal vein), apex obtuse and mucronate, base cuneate, glabrous (rarely pubescent on the veins), petioled (petiole 1.6–3.0 cm long). Synflorescences arranged in axillary glomerules, light green. Floral bracts greenish, ovate-lanceolate [(2.0–)3.0–4.0(–6.0) × 0.3–0.6 mm], 2(–2.5) times longer than the perianth, awned, margin entire, glabrous. Staminate flowers with 3 tepals, lanceolate; stamens 3. Pistillate flowers with 3 tepals, linear to lanceolate [0.9–1.1 × 0.3–0.4(–0.5) mm], with acute apex; stigmas 3. Fruit brownish-black, ellipsoidal [(1.2–)1.4–1.8 × 1.0–1.2(–1.4) mm], as long as or slightly longer than the perianth, rugose when dry, dehiscent. Seed lenticular [(0.8–)0.9–1.1(–1.3) mm in diameter], black to brownish-black. Iconography:— Chaudhary (1998: 245, Plate. 126a–e), Bayón (2015: 304, Figura 19). Phenology:— Flowering time April (Al-Eisawi & Al-Ruzayza 2015). Habitat and elevation:— Human-made habitat, at about 300 m a.s.l. (Al-Eisawi & Al-Ruzayza 2015). Chromosome number:— 2n = 32, 34. Alien status:— Neophyte species native to North America, it can be considered as invasive in Saudi Arabia (see Aljeddani et al. 2021). Occurrence in Saudi Arabia (Fig. 1):— Jizan, Qassim (El-Ghazali & Al-Soqeer 2013), Makkah (Al-Eisawi & Al-Ruzayza 2015), Tabuk and Taif (Aljieddani et al. 2021). No finding was done during the field surveys. Further researches are necessary to verify the distribution of Amaranthus albus in the country., Published as part of Hassan, Walaa A., Al-Shaye, Najla A., Alghamdi, Salma, Korany, Shereen M. & Iamonico, Duilio, 2022, Taxonomic revision of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae) in Saudi Arabia, pp. 135-157 in Phytotaxa 576 (2) on page 138, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.576.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7461280, {"references":["Raus, Th. (1997) Amaranthus L. In: Strid, A. & Tan, K. (Eds.) Flora Hellenica vol. 1. Koeltz Scientific Books, Konigstein, pp. 138 - 146.","Chaudhary, S. A. (1998) Flora of the Kingdom of the Saudi Arabia, vol. 1. Ministry of Agriculture & Water, Riyadh, 692 pp.","Bayon, N. D. (2015) Revision taxonomica de las especies monoicas de Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae): Amaranthus subg. Amaranthus and Amaranthus subg. Albersia. Ann. Missouri Bot. Garden 101 (2): 261 - 383. https: // doi. org / 10.3417 / 2010080","Al-Eisawi, D. M. & Al-Ruzayza, S. (2015) The flora of holy Mecca district, Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Biodiversity Conservation 7 (3): 173 - 189. https: // doi. org / 10.5897 / IJBC 2014.0773","Aljeddani, G. S., Al-Harbi, N. A., Al-Qathani, S. M., Al-Absy, K. M., Abdullatif, B. M. & Dahan, T. N. (2021) Inventory of some introduced and invasive plant species in some governorates of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Applied Ecology and Environmental Research 19 (6): 4373 - 4388. https: // doi. org / 10.15666 / aeer / 1906 _ 43734388","El-Ghazali, G. E. B. & Al-Soqeer, A. R. A. (2013) A Checklist of the Weed Flora of Qassim Region, Saudi Arabia. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Science 7 (2): 900 - 905."]}

3. Amaranthus tricolor L., Sp. Pl. 2: 989. 1753 Type (lectotype designated by Townsend 1974: 14):—ASIA. Habitat in India, Herb. Linn. No. 1117.7 (LINN!, image of the lectotype available at https://linnean-online.org/11633/). = Amaranthus melancholicus L., Sp. Pl. 2: 989. 1753. ≡ Amaranthus tricolor var. melancholicus (L.) Lam. & Monnet, Encycl. [J. Lamarck & al.] 1: 115. 1783. Type (lectotype designated by Townsend 1994: 11):—ASIA. Habitat in India, Herb. Linn., No. 1117.4 (LINN!, image of the lectotype available at http://linnean-online.org/11630/). = Amaranthus tristis L., Sp. Pl. 2: 989. 1753. ≡ Amaranthus tricolor var. tristis (L.) Thell. in Asch. & Graebn., Syn. Mitteleur. Fl. [Ascherson & Graebner] 5: 274. 1914. ≡ Amaranthus tricolor subsp. tristis (L.) Aellen in Hegi, Ill. Fl. Mitt.- Eur. 3(2): 495. 1959. Type (lectotype designated by Iamonico 2014: 149):—ASIA. Habitat in China, Herb. Linn., No. 1117.11 (LINN!, image of the lectotype available at http://linnean-online.org/11637/). = Amaranthus mangostanus L., Cent. Pl. I. 32. 1755. ≡ Amaranthus tricolor var. mangostanus (L.) Thell. in Asch. & Graebn. Syn. Mitteleur. Fl. [Ascherson & Graebner] 5: 274. 1914. ≡ Amaranthus tricolor subsp. mangostanus (L.) Aellen, in Hegi, Ill. Fl. Mitt.- Eur. 3(2): 495. 1959. Type (lectotype designated by Iamonico 2014a: 147):—ASIA. Habitat in India, Herb. Linn., No. 1117.10 (LINN!, image of the lectotype available at http://linnean-online.org/11636/). = Amaranthus polygamus L., Cent. Pl. I. 32. 1755. ≡ Amaranthus tricolor subsp. tristis var. polygamus (L.) Aellen in Hegi, Ill. Fl. Mitt.- Eur. 3(2): 495. 1959. Type (lectotype designated by Iamonico 2014a: 148):—ASIA. Habitat in India, Herb. Linn., No. 1117.9 (LINN!, image of the lectotype available at http://linnean-online.org/11635/). Description:— Herbs 8–10 dm tall, monoecious, annual (therophyte). Stems erect or ascending, ± glabrous, green or red, branched (rarely simple). Leaves green, red, red-purpureus or red-yellow mixed, ovate-rhomboidal (4.0–12.0) × 1.4–6.0), with usually entire margins, apex obtuse to emarginate, often mucronate, base cuneate, glabrous, petioled (petiole 2–6 cm long). Synflorescences arranged in axillary glomerules and terminal spike-like, green to reddish. Floral bracts, usually greenish, deltoid-ovate (5.0–6.0 × 0.8–1.8 mm) as long as the perianth, awned, margin entire, glabrous. Staminate flowers with 3 tepals, ovate to lanceolate, apex acute, awned; stamens 3. Pistillate flowers with 3 tepals, ovate (3.0–5.0 × 1.5–2.5 mm); stigmas 2–3. Fruit brown, subglobose to ellipsoidal (2.0–2.5 × 0.8–1.3 mm), shorter than the perianth, rugose, dehiscent. Seed lenticular (about 1.0 mm in diameter), black or brown. Iconography:— Chaudhary (1998: 245, Plate. 127a–f), Bayón (2015: 368, Figura 61). Chromosome number:— 2n = 34, 68, 85. Occurrence in Saudi Arabia:— Cultivated only in Saudi Arabia according to Chaudhary (1998: 238). No wild plants were found by us during the field survey., Published as part of Hassan, Walaa A., Al-Shaye, Najla A., Alghamdi, Salma, Korany, Shereen M. & Iamonico, Duilio, 2022, Taxonomic revision of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae) in Saudi Arabia, pp. 135-157 in Phytotaxa 576 (2) on page 140, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.576.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7461280, {"references":["Townsend, C. C. (1974) Amaranthaceae. In: Nasir, E. & Ali, S. I. (Eds.) Flora of West Pakistan, vol. 71. Ferozsons Press, Rawalpindi, pp. 1 - 49.","Townsend, C. C. (1994) Amaranthacees. In: Bosser, J., Cadet, T., Gueho, J. & Marais, W. (Eds.) Flore des Mascareignes: La Reunion, Maurice, Rodrigues, vol. 142. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, pp. 1 - 32.","Iamonico, D. (2014 a) Lectotypification of Linnaean names in the genus Amaranthus L. (Amaranthaceae). Taxon 63: 146 - 150. https: // doi. org / 10.12705 / 631.34","Chaudhary, S. A. (1998) Flora of the Kingdom of the Saudi Arabia, vol. 1. Ministry of Agriculture & Water, Riyadh, 692 pp.","Bayon, N. D. (2015) Revision taxonomica de las especies monoicas de Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae): Amaranthus subg. Amaranthus and Amaranthus subg. Albersia. Ann. Missouri Bot. Garden 101 (2): 261 - 383. https: // doi. org / 10.3417 / 2010080"]}

10. Amaranthus dubius Mart. ex Thell., Fl. Adv. Montpell.: 203. 1912 Type (neotype designated by Townsend 1974: 471–472):— GERMANY. Herbairum Regio Monacense, ex horto Erlangensis, s.d., s.c. s.n. (M0107382!, image of the neotype available at https://plants.jstor.org/stable/viewer/10.5555/al.ap.specimen. m0107382?loggedin=true). = Amaranthus tristis var. xanthostachys Moq., Prodr. [A. P. de Candolle] 13(2): 260. 1849 ≡ Amaranthus dubius var. xanthostachys (Moq.) Thell. in Asch. & Graebn., Syn. Mittel-Eur. Fl. 5: 266. 1914. Type (neotype designated by Iamonico 2016c: 104): UNKNOWN ORIGIN. Herbarium Requien, s.d., s.coll. s.n. (P 04021942!, image of the neotype is available at http://mediaphoto.mnhn.fr/media/14494899601942MO7c2qCCiZJWunt). Description:— Herbs 3–10 dm tall, monoecious, annual (therophyte). Stems erect, glabrous, green, branched. Leaves green, ovate, ± rhomboidal (2.0–)3.0–10.0 × (1.5–)2.0–6.0 cm, with entire margins, apex obtuse, mucronate, base cuneate, glabrous, petioled (petiole 0.8–5.5 cm long). Synflorescences terminal, panicle-like, green to yellowhish. Floral bracts greenish-yellowhish, lanceolate (1.2–2.0 mm long) shorter than the perianth, acute, awned, margin entire, glabrous. Staminate flowers with 5 tepals, ovate; stamens 5. Pistillate flowers with 5 tepals, oblong-spathulate (1.5–2.0) × 0.5–1.0 mm), with acute and mucronate apex; stigmas 3. Fruit brownish, ovoid (1.5–2.0 × 1.0– 1.5 mm), shorter than the perianth, smooth to slightly rugose, dehiscent. Seed lenticular (0.8–1.0 mm in diameter), dark-brown to black. Iconography:— Bayón (2015: 280, Figura 8). Phenology:— Flowering time february. Habitat and elevation:— Human-made habitat (coastal plain), 5–15 m a.s.l. Chromosome number:— 2n = 64 (Behera & Patnaik 1982, Baquar & Olusi 1988, Ugborogho & Oyelana 1992, Greizerstein & Poggio 1994). Alien status:— Neophyte species native to South America, it can be considered as casual in Saudi Arabia. Occurrence in Saudi Arabia (Fig. 12):— Our collections (Jizan) represent the first records of Amaranthus dubius in Saudi Arabia. Nomenclatural notes on Amaranthus dubius:— The name Amaranthus dubius was published for the first time by Martius (1814: 197) who did not reported any diagnosis [only the symbols “*” (that means “ significat plantam, de qua anno 1813 non nisi semen adfuit ”), and “†” (that means “ nomen plantae nondum extra omnem dubitationem positum ”) were indicated (see Martius 1814: 3). As a consequence, Martius’ name is a nomen nudum and invalid from the nomenclatural point of view (Art. 38.2 Ex.1 of ICN). Moquin-Tandon (1849: 260), in his treatment of Amaranthaceae in Candolle Prodromus, reported “ A. dubius Mart. Hort. Erlang. 1814, p. 197 ” as synonym of A. tristis L. and, again, this name cannot be considered as valid according to the Art. 36.1b of ICN. Finally, Thellung (1912: 203) validly published the Martius’ name providing a diagnosis partially taken from Moquin-Tandon (1849, “ calyce vix bracteas superante…sepala oblonga, obtusa, mucronulata…Stam 5, interdum 4, raro 3 ”). Thellung (1912: 203) further indicated the provenance (“ Am. trop. … Indes occ. … Afr. trop.... Afr. trop. … mais peut-être seulement à l’etat d’introduction récente ”) and a reference to Seubert’s Amaranthus tristis (Seubert 1864: 237–238). Note, however, that Seubert (1864) described A. tristis in having “bracteis perogonium subaequantibus” which is a character that contrasts the current concept of A. dubius. In fact, this latter species can be easily identified, among the species belonging to the subgen. Amaranthus sensu Mosyakin & Robertson (1996), by the lenght of its bracts which are clearly shorter than the perianth (see also Mosyakin & Robertson 2003). According to the description given by Seubert (1864: 237–238), the species appears to be the real Linnaean A. tristis, a name that is currently considered as heterotypic synonym of A. tricolor (see Iamonico, 2014a: 148–149). The typification of the name Amaranthus dubius has to be addressed in searching Martius’ collection which, according to HUH Index of Botanists (2013 -onwards), is preserved at the herbaria BR and M. No specimen of original material we traced at M. On the other hand, we traced three specimens at BR bearing labels reporting “HERBARIUM MARTII” (collected before 1806, July 20, 1827 and 1864). However, the “HERBARIUM MARTII” is in contrast with Martius’ so-called “private herbarium” which includes all specimens he received from others but not collected by him himself, and that was given to BR after his death (H. Esser pers. comm.). So, just because there is a label head “HERBARIUM MARTII”, it does not mean the specimen was collected by Martius, it just shows that it had been in his possession (H. Esser pers. comm.). As a consequence, we cannot be sure that the three BR specimens found are part of the original material for the name Amaranthus dubius. No further specimen, useful for the lectotypification purpose, were found. So, a neotypification is required according to the Art. 9.8 of ICN and we here confirm the proposal by Townsend (1974: 471–472) who neotypified the name using a specimen included in the Schwaegrichen’s collection at M (barcode M0107382). Specimina visa selecta:— SAUDI ARABIA, Jizan, human-made habitat (coastal plain), 5–15 m a.s.l., 17 February 2021, leg. Masrhai et Al-shaye, det. Masrhai, conf. Iamonico (PNUH!, RO!; Fig. 13); ibidem (PNUH!, RO!); ibidem (PNUH!, RO!); ibidem (PNUH!, RO!)., Published as part of Hassan, Walaa A., Al-Shaye, Najla A., Alghamdi, Salma, Korany, Shereen M. & Iamonico, Duilio, 2022, Taxonomic revision of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae) in Saudi Arabia, pp. 135-157 in Phytotaxa 576 (2) on pages 149-150, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.576.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7461280, {"references":["Townsend, C. C. (1974) Amaranthaceae. In: Nasir, E. & Ali, S. I. (Eds.) Flora of West Pakistan, vol. 71. Ferozsons Press, Rawalpindi, pp. 1 - 49.","Iamonico, D. (2016 c) Nomenclature survey of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae). 5. Moquin-Tandon's names. Phytotaxa 273 (2): 81 - 114. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / phytotaxa. 273.2.1","Bayon, N. D. (2015) Revision taxonomica de las especies monoicas de Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae): Amaranthus subg. Amaranthus and Amaranthus subg. Albersia. Ann. Missouri Bot. Garden 101 (2): 261 - 383. https: // doi. org / 10.3417 / 2010080","Behera, B. & Patnaik, S. N. (1982) Genome analysis of Amaranthus dubius Mart. ex Thell. through the study of Amaranthus spinosus × A. dubius hybrids. Cytologia 47: 379 - 389. https: // doi. org / 10.1508 / cytologia. 47.379","Baquar, S. R. & Olusi, O. O. (1988) Cytomorphological and phylogenetic studies of the genus Amaranthus from Nigeria. Kromosomo 51 - 52: 1665 - 1674.","Ugborogho, R. E. & Oyelana, O. A. (1992) Meiosis, pollen morphology and perianth stomata of some taxa of Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae) in Nigeria. Feddes Repertorium 103: 363 - 373. https: // doi. org / 10.1002 / fedr. 19921030514","Martius, C. F. P. von (1814) Plantarum Horti Academici Erlangensis. Typis Hilpertianis, Erlangae, 209 pp.","Moquin-Tandon, C. H. B. A. (1849). Amaranthaceae Juss. In: Candolle A. P. De (ed.), Prodromus systematics naturalis regni vegetabilis, vol. 13, part. 2, pp. 231 - 424. Treuttel & Wurtz, Paris.","Seubert, M. (1864) Amaranthaceae Juss. In: Martius, C. F. P. (Ed.) Flora Brasiliensis, vol. 5 (1). Frid. Fleischerm, Monachii et Lipsiae, pp. 165 - 252.","Mosyakin, S. L. & Robertson, K. R. (1996) New infrageneric taxa and combinations in Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae). Annales Botanici Fennici 33: 275 - 281.","Mosyakin, S. L. & Robertson, K. R. (2003) Amaranthus L. In: Flora of North America Editorial Committee (Org) Flora of North America North of Mexico (Magnoliophyta: Caryophyllidae, part 1), vol. 4. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 410 - 435.","Iamonico, D. (2014 a) Lectotypification of Linnaean names in the genus Amaranthus L. (Amaranthaceae). Taxon 63: 146 - 150. https: // doi. org / 10.12705 / 631.34","HUH Index of Botanists (2013 - onwards) Index of botanists, Harward University Herbaria & Libraries. Available from: https: // kiki. huh. harvard. edu / databases / botanist _ search. php? mode = details & id = 266 (accessed 29 march 2022)"]}

5b. Amaranthus graecizans L. subsp. sylvestris (Vill.) Brenan, Watsonia 4: 273. 1961 ≡ Amaranthus sylvestris Vill., Cat. Pl. Jard. Strasb. 111. 1807 ≡ Amaranthus sylvestris Desf. ex Poiret, Tabl. École Bot.: 44. 1804, nom. nud., nom. inval. (Art. 38.2 Ex.1 of the ICN) ≡ Amaranthus graecizans var. sylvestris (Desf.) Asch., Beitr. Fl. Aethiop.: 176. 1867, comb. illeg. ≡ Amaranthus graecizans subsp. sylvestris (Vill.) O.Bolòs & Vigo, Butl. Inst. Catalana Hist. Nat., Secc. Bot. 38(1): 89. 1974 ≡ Amaranthus angustifolius proles sylvestris (Vill.) Thell., Syn. Mitteleur. Fl. [Ascherson & Graebner] 5(1(5)): 300. 1914 ≡ Amaranthus angustifolius subsp. sylvestris (Vill.) Heukels, Geïllustreerde Schoolflora voor Nederland: 170. 1934. Type (lectotype designated by Townsend 1985: 31):— Herb. Tournefort 1849 (P!). Iconography:— Willdenow (1790: Tab. VIII, fig. 16 sub A. viridis), Bayón (2015: 329, Figura 34) Phenology:— Flowering time february. Habitat and elevation:— Human-made habitat (coastal plain), 5–15 m a.s.l. Chromosome number: —2n = 32. Occurrence in Saudi Arabia (Fig. 5): — Jizan, Makkah. Specimina visa selecta:— SAUDI ARABIA, Makkah, Jeddah, s.d., Kruijt 48 (L 1684182!); Jizan, human-made habitat (coastal plain), 5–15 m a.s.l., 17 February 2021, leg. Masrhai et Al-shaye, det. Masrhai, conf. Iamonico (PNUH!, RO!)., Published as part of Hassan, Walaa A., Al-Shaye, Najla A., Alghamdi, Salma, Korany, Shereen M. & Iamonico, Duilio, 2022, Taxonomic revision of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae) in Saudi Arabia, pp. 135-157 in Phytotaxa 576 (2) on page 143, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.576.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7461280, {"references":["Townsend, C. C. (1985) Amaranthaceae. In: Polhill, R. M. (Ed.) Flora of Tropical East Africa. A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 1 - 136.","Willdenow, C. L. (1790) Historia Amaranthorum. Impensis Ziegleri et fil., Turici, 38 pp.","Bayon, N. D. (2015) Revision taxonomica de las especies monoicas de Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae): Amaranthus subg. Amaranthus and Amaranthus subg. Albersia. Ann. Missouri Bot. Garden 101 (2): 261 - 383. https: // doi. org / 10.3417 / 2010080"]}

5c. Amaranthus graecizans L. subsp. thellungianus (Nevski) Gusev, Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Leningrad) 57(5): 462. 1972 ≡ Amaranthus thellungianus Nevski, Trudy Bot. Inst. Akad. Nauk S.S.S.R., Ser. 1, Fl. Sist. Vyssh. Rast. 4: 311. 1937 Holotype:— TURKMENISTAN, In angustiis Bulak-Dara ad pedem montium Kuhitang supra pagum Karluk, 11 August 1931, Nevski 730 [LE non vidi fide Townsend (1985); photo of the isotype at K000814926!, image of the photo of the isotype available at http://apps. kew.org/herbcat/getImage.do?imageBarcode=K000814926). Chromosome number: —Not still counted. Occurrence in Saudi Arabia:— Chaudhary (1998: 238) indicated this taxon as “probably doubtful” in Saudi Arabia. No finding was done during the filed surveys. Further researches are necessary to verify the occurrence of this taxon in the country., Published as part of Hassan, Walaa A., Al-Shaye, Najla A., Alghamdi, Salma, Korany, Shereen M. & Iamonico, Duilio, 2022, Taxonomic revision of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae) in Saudi Arabia, pp. 135-157 in Phytotaxa 576 (2) on page 143, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.576.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7461280, {"references":["Townsend, C. C. (1985) Amaranthaceae. In: Polhill, R. M. (Ed.) Flora of Tropical East Africa. A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 1 - 136.","Chaudhary, S. A. (1998) Flora of the Kingdom of the Saudi Arabia, vol. 1. Ministry of Agriculture & Water, Riyadh, 692 pp."]}

A taxonomic revision of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae) in Saudi Arabia, based on both field surveys and examination of harbarium specimens, is here presented. Collected exsiccata are kept the Herbaria PNUH and RO. An extensive literature was also analysed. Sixtheen non-hybrid taxa (twelve species) are recognized. Data about nomenclature (accepted names, main synonyms, and types), morphology, chromosome number, chorology (for native taxa) or alien status (for exotic taxa), occurrence in Saudi Arabia, ecology (preferential habitat, phenology, elevation), and taxonomic annotations are provided for each taxon. A diagnostic key is proposed. Four taxa (A. graecizans subsp. graecizans, A. graecizans subsp. sylvestris, A. graecizans subsp. thellungianus, and A. sparganicephalus) are native, whereas the other ones are to be considered aliens. A. dubius and A. blitoides var. blitoides are new for the national flora. Furthermore, the name A. sparganicephalus is neotypified on a specimen deposited at E and a nomenclatural change (A. blitum var. nanus comb. nov.) is proposed.

2. Amaranthus blitum L., Sp. Pl. 2: 990. 1753 Type (lectotype designated by Filias et al. 1980: 149–150):—EUROPE. Habitat in Europa temparatiore, Herb. Linn. No. 1117.14 (LINN!, image of the lectotype available at http://linnean-online.org/11640/). = Amaranthus lividus L., Sp. Pl. 2: 990. 1753, nom. rejec. (see Filias et al. 1980: 149–150) ≡ Amaranthus lividus proles lividus (Loisel.) Thell. in Asch. & Graebn. Syn. Mitteleur. Fl. [Ascherson & Graebner] 5: 274. 1914. Type (lectotype designated by Reveal & Jarvis, 2009: 978):—[Icon] “ Blitum pulchrum rectum magnum rubrum ” in Bauhin & Cherler (1651: 966); image of the lectotype available at https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/246944#page/1004/mode/1up. = Amaranthus ascendens Loisel., Not. Fl. France 141. 1810 ≡ Amaranthus blitum var. ascendens (Loisel.) DC., Cat. Pl. Horti Monsp. 4. 1813 ≡ Amaranthus lividus proles ascendens (Loisel.) Thell. in Asch. & Graebn. Syn. Mitteleur. Fl. [Ascherson & Graebner]. 5(1(5)): 321 (v-322). 1914 ≡ Amaranthus lividus subsp. ascendens (Loisel.) Heukels, Geïllustreerde Schoolflora voor Nederland: 169. 1934. Type (neotype designated by Iamonico 2016a: 520):—[Icon] “ Blitum majus “ from Dodoens (1616: 617); image of the lectotype available at https://bibdigital.rjb.csic.es/viewer/11145/?offset=#page=633&viewer=picture&o=bookmark&n=0&q=. Description:— Herbs 1–5 (rarely up to 10) dm tall, monoecious, annual (therophyte). Stems prostrate-ascending, glabrous, pale green to pale brown, branched. Leaves green or green-yellowhish, ovate, rhomboidal to deltoid, some subcircular [1.5–3.5(–7.5) × (0.7–)1.5–2.5(–5.0) cm], sometimes fleshy, with entire or undulate margins, apex acute or rounded, often mucronate, base cuneate, glabrous, with marginal white vein, petioled (petiole 1.0– 5.5 cm long). Synflorescences arranged in axillary glomerules, reddish or green. Floral bracts, green or greenish, ovate to lanceolate (1.3–3.0 × 0.4–0.7 mm), shorter than the longest perianth segments, acute, margin entire, glabrous. Staminate flowers with 3(–4) tepals, ovate to lanceolate; stamens 3. Pistillate flowers with (4–)5 unequal tepals, lanceolate, elliptic [the greater 1.5–2.5(–3.5) × (0.7–)1.0– 1.2 mm], with acute to acuminate, and mucronate apex; stigmas 3. Fruit brown or reddish, ellipsoidal (2.0–2.2 × 1.0– 1.4 mm), as long as or longer than the tepals, usually smooth, dehiscent. Seed lenticular (1.5–1.7 mm in diameter), black. Taxonomic annotations:— Amaranthus blitum shows a high phenotypic variability (both in vegetative and in generative characters) and several names (at subspecies, variety, and form ranks) were published in the past, especially in the nineteenth century (see e.g., IPNI 2008). As a consequence, misapplication of names and nomenlcatural disorder exsist. We here recognized two varieties which can be distinguished as follows: 1. Seed with minutely punctiform surface and diameter 1.1–1.2 mm..................................................................................... var. blitum - Seed with smooth surface and diameter (1.2–)1.4–1.7(–1.9) mm................................................................................. var. oleraceus, Published as part of Hassan, Walaa A., Al-Shaye, Najla A., Alghamdi, Salma, Korany, Shereen M. & Iamonico, Duilio, 2022, Taxonomic revision of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae) in Saudi Arabia, pp. 135-157 in Phytotaxa 576 (2) on pages 138-139, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.576.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7461280, {"references":["Filias, F., Gaulliez, R. & Guedes, M. (1980) Amaranthus blitum vs. A. lividus (Amaranthaceae). Taxon 29: 149 - 150. https: // doi. org / 10.2307 / 1219612","Bauhin, J. & Cherler J. H. (1651) Historia Plantarum Universalis, vol. 2. Fr. Lud. Graffenried, Ebroduni, 1074 pp.","Iamonico, D. (2016 a) Nomenclature survey of the genus AMARANTHUS (AMARANTHACEAE). 3. Names linked to the Italian flora. Plant Biosystems 150 (3): 519 - 531. https: // dx. doi. org / 10.1080 / 11263504.2014.987188","Dodoens, R. (1616) Stirpium Historiae pemptades sex, sive libri XXX. Ex Officina Plantiniana, Antuerpiae, 872 pp.","IPNI (2008) The International Plant Names Index. Available from: http: // www. ipni. org (accessed 29 march 2022)"]}

7b. Amaranthus blitoides var. nanus (Moq.) Iamonico, comb. nov. ≡ Amaranthus blitum var. nanus Moq., Prodr. [A. P. de Candolle] 13(2): 263. 1849 Type (lectotype designated by Iamonico 2016c: 91):— SAUDI ARABIA. Ad cisternas Dschedda Arab feliz, 02 January 1836, Schimper 857 (MPU022388!, image of the lectotype available at https://herbier.umontpellier.fr/zoomify/zoomify.php?fichier=MPU022388); isolectotypes at HAL0140219 (image of the isolectotype available at http://141.48.4.202/djatoka/jacq-viewer/viewer.html?rft_ id=hal_0140219&identifiers=hal_0140219), M0241403! (image at https://plants.jstor.org/stable/viewer/10.5555/al.ap.specimen. m0241403?loggedin=true) and M0241404! (image at https://plants.jstor.org/stable/viewer/10.5555/al.ap.specimen.m0241404). Description:— Similar to var. blitoides but smaller, i.e. 2.0– 4.5 cm tall. Phenology:— Flowering time january. Habitat and elevation:— Human-made habitat, around the sea level. Chromosome number:— Not still counted. Alien status:— Native (endemic?) to Saudi Arabia. Occurrence in Saudi Arabia (Fig. 9):— This species was firstly published for Saudi Arabia by Iamonico (2016c: 91–92; see below “TAXONOMIC NOTES”), sub Amaranthus blitum var. nanus Moq. on the basis of an old Schimper’s collection in Makkah (lectotype). No further finding was done during the filed surveys. Taxonomic notes:— Iamonico (2016c: 91) lectotypified the name Amaranthus blitum var. nanus on a specimens preserved at MPU (barcode MPU022388). We found further three specimens at HAL (barcode HAL0140219) and M (barcodes M0241403 and M0241404) which can be considered as the isolectotypes, here published for the first time. Concerrning the identity of Amaranthus blitum var. nanus, Iamonico (2016c: 91–92) proposed to synonymized it with A. blitoides based on characters of flowers. However, no discussion was provided by Iamonico (2016c: 91–92) regarding the generative characters. Based on the examination of the types of A. blitum var. nanus, and the comparison with specimens and living plants examined by one of us (DI) during the last 15 years, Moquin-Tandon’s variety appear to be very small, i.e. 2.0– 4.5 cm tall, whereas A. blitoides s.str. is at least 10–20 cm tall (see also Akeroyd 1993, Bao et al. 2003, Mosyakin & Robertson 2003, Bayón 2015, Iamonico 2015, Atlas of Living Australia 2022). Waiting further studies (floristic and molecular ones could be useful), we think that this taxon should be maintained as separate for the moment, at least at variety rank. Lacking a combination under A. blitoides, we here propose a nomenclatural change. Specimina visa selecta:— SAUDI ARABIA, Makkah, Ad cisternas Dschedda Arab feliz, 02 January 1836, Schimper 857 (MPU022388!), Published as part of Hassan, Walaa A., Al-Shaye, Najla A., Alghamdi, Salma, Korany, Shereen M. & Iamonico, Duilio, 2022, Taxonomic revision of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae) in Saudi Arabia, pp. 135-157 in Phytotaxa 576 (2) on page 147, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.576.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7461280, {"references":["Iamonico, D. (2016 c) Nomenclature survey of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae). 5. Moquin-Tandon's names. Phytotaxa 273 (2): 81 - 114. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / phytotaxa. 273.2.1","Akeroyd, J. R. (1993) Amaranthus L. In: Tutin, T. G., Burges, N. A., Chater, A. O., Edmondson, J. R., Heywood, V. H., Moore, D. M., Valentine, D. H., Walters, S. M. & Webb, D. A. (Eds.) Flora Europaea (second edition), vol. 1. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 130 - 132.","Bao, B., Clemants, S. E. & Borsch, T. (2003) Amaranthus L. In: Wu, Z. Y., Raven, P. H. & Hong, D. Y. (Eds.) Flora of China, vol. 5. Science Press, Beijing and Missouri Botanical Garden Press, St. Louis, pp. 415 - 429.","Mosyakin, S. L. & Robertson, K. R. (2003) Amaranthus L. In: Flora of North America Editorial Committee (Org) Flora of North America North of Mexico (Magnoliophyta: Caryophyllidae, part 1), vol. 4. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 410 - 435.","Bayon, N. D. (2015) Revision taxonomica de las especies monoicas de Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae): Amaranthus subg. Amaranthus and Amaranthus subg. Albersia. Ann. Missouri Bot. Garden 101 (2): 261 - 383. https: // doi. org / 10.3417 / 2010080","Atlas of Living Australia (2022) Amaranthus blitoides S. Watson. Available from: https: // bie. ala. org. au / species / NZOR- 6 - 118464 (accessed 19 January 2022)"]}

6. Amaranthus sparganicephalus Thell. in Ascherson & Graebner, Syn. Mitteleur. Fl. 5: 312. 1914 Type (neotype, here designated):— OMAN, Dhofar, J. Qara, nr. Aqarnahawat, Acacia hollow, 880 m a.s.l., 19.09.1985, A. G. Miller 7693 (E00687024!, image of the neotype available at https://data.rbge.org.uk/herb/E00687024). Description:— Herbs, 0.7–6 cm tall, monoecious, annual (therophyte). Stems erect, glabrous (pubescent in the upper part), yellowish, simple or branched (branches sometimes decumbent). Leaves green to dark-green, ovate (1.5–5.5 × 0.6–3.0 cm), with entire margins, apex obtuse to retuse, mucronate, base cuneate, glabrous (short hairs on the nerves of the abaxial surface), long petioled (petiole up to 6.0 cm long). Synflorescences arranged in axillary spherical glomerules, ± 1 cm in diameter, brown to dark-brown. Floral bracts ovate (0.3–0.5 × ca. 0.2 cm), about 1/2 times shorter than the perianth, acute to acuminate, mucronate. Staminate flowers with 3 tepals, green, ovate-lanceolate; stamens 3. Pistillate flowers with 3 tepals, green, ovate-lanceolate (1.0–1.3 × ca. 0.3 mm), with obtuse apex, median vein green; stigmas 2. Fruits arranged in stellate heads (divergent capsules), each one brown, as a double cone (2.75–3.25 × ca. 1.5 mm), longer than the perianth, the half base longitudinally sulcate, dehiscent with point of junction of lid and base cristate-crenulate. Seeds lenticular (1.2–1.5 mm in diameter), black. Iconography:— Townsend (1985: 33, Fig. 6). Phenology:— Flowering time from march to april. Habitat and elevation:— Uncultivated land, around 2000 m a.s.l. Chromosome number:— Not still counted. Chorology:— Species native to eastern tropical Africa (Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan, Tanzania), Arabian Peninsula (Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Oman), and Socotra (POWO 2022b and literature therein). Occurrence in Saudi Arabia (Fig. 6): — Riyadh. Typification of the name Amaranthus sprganicephalus:— Amaranthus sparganicephalus was validly published by Thellung (1914: 312, a note) by a short diagnosis (in german) in which the following two characters were highlighted: the shape of the fruiting glomerules (which resembles those of the members belonging to the genus Sparganium L.; the specific epithet “ sparganicephalus ” derives from this feature) and that of each fruit (“polyedrisch abgeflachten” = “polyhedral flattened”); a morphologic comparison with A. angustifolius Lam. (currently A. graecizans subsp. graecizans) and A. macrocarpus Benth. was also given. Finally the provenance (“tropischen Africa... und Arabiens” = tropical Africa and Saudi Arabia) and three specimens (“ Abessinien: Massaua: Hildebrandt n. 716!; ostafrican. Grabenrand, 1904, Merken!... “Chedrasch et Chedolia, Ehrenberg!”) were reported. According to the Art. 9.6 of ICN, these three citations are syntypes, original material for the name A. sparganicephalus (Art. 9.4 of ICN), and useful for the lectotypification purpose (Art. 9.3 of ICN). Verdcourt (1967: 252) listed 16 specimens of Amaranthus sparganicephalus adding “ syntype ” after three of them, i.e. “ARABIA. Chedrasch and Chedolia, Ehrennberg (B)”, “ ERITREA. Massawa, Hildebrandt 716 (B)”, and “ TANZANIA. Grabenland, 1904, Merker (B)”. These three specimens was also cited (as “Types”) by Townsend (1985: 32) in his treatment of Amaranthaceae for the Flora of Tropical East Africa. According to Shenzen Code, neither Verdcourt (1967: 252) nor Townsend (1985: 32) proposed a correct typification, since they just re-listed the syntypes which was originally reported by Thellung (1914: 312) in the protologue. As a consequence, a lectoptypification is necessary. Note moreover that both Verdecourt and Townsend reported after the syntypes the symbol “†” which would indicate that the specimen was are no longer exsisting. R. Vogt (pers. comm.) informed one of us (DI) that no original material for A. sparganicephalus is preserved at B being probably lost/destroyed during the II World War. Lacking material useful for the lectotypification purpose (Arts. 9.3 and 9.4 of ICN), a neotyipfication is required under the Art. 9.8 of ICN. We here propose to designate, as neotype of the name A. sparganicephalus, a well preserved specimen at E (barcode E00687024) collected in Oman in 1985 which matches the Thellung’s description and the current application of the name (see e.g., Townsend 1985: 32). Specimina visa selecta:— SAUDI ARABIA. Raidah Village near base of scarp. 25 km NNW of Abha, waste ground in villane, 07 April 1995, Collinette 9337 (E00121397!)., Published as part of Hassan, Walaa A., Al-Shaye, Najla A., Alghamdi, Salma, Korany, Shereen M. & Iamonico, Duilio, 2022, Taxonomic revision of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae) in Saudi Arabia, pp. 135-157 in Phytotaxa 576 (2) on pages 144-145, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.576.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7461280, {"references":["Townsend, C. C. (1985) Amaranthaceae. In: Polhill, R. M. (Ed.) Flora of Tropical East Africa. A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 1 - 136.","POWO (2022 b) Plants of the World Online. Amaranthus sparaganicephalus Thell. Available from: https: // powo. science. kew. org / taxon / urn: lsid: ipni. org: names: 59735 - 1 (accessed 29 March 2022)","Thellung, A. (1914) Amaranthus L. In: Ascherson, P. & Graebner, P. (Eds.) Synopsis der Mitteleuropaischen Flora, vol. 5. Verlag Von Gebruder Borntraeger. Leipzig, Germany, pp. 225 - 356.","Verdcourt, B. (1967) Tropical African Plants: XXVIII. AMARANTHACEAE. Amaranthus sparganiocephalus. Kew Bulletin 21 (2): 252. https: // doi. org / 10.2307 / 4108530"]}

5. Amaranthus graecizans L., Sp. Pl. 2: 990. 1753 Type (lectotype designated by Fernald 1945: 139):— U.S.A. Habitat in Virginia, Herb. Clayton No. 442 (BM000051563!, image of the lectotype available at https://data.nhm.ac.uk/object/ca635ca9-9252-42a3-9082-60ec097bc2d6/1641427200000). = Amaranthus angustifolius Lam., Encycl. [J. Lamarck & al.] 1: 115. 1783, nom. illeg. Art. 52.21 of the ICN (Turland et al. 2018). 1 Amaranthus angustifolius was described citing among synonyms an earlier legitimate name (A. graecizans L.). Description:— Herbs 1–8 dm tall, monoecious, annual (therophyte). Stems erect or ascending, ± glabrous (sometimes sparsely pubescent in the distal region), pale to black-brown to reddish, usually branched. Leaves usually green, ovaterhomboidal to lanceolate (decreasing in size towards stem apex), with entire margins, apex acute or obtuse, sometimes mucronate, base cuneate, glabrous, petioled [petiole (1.0–)2.0–5.0(–6.0) cm long]. Synflorescences arranged in axillary glomerules, often reddish. Floral bracts brown-yellowish, lanceolate (1.2–2.0 × 0.3–0.6 mm) as long as or shorter than the perianth, acute, margin entire, glabrous. Staminate flowers with 3 tepals, ovate to lanceolate; stamens 3. Pistillate flowers with 3 tepals, ovate-lanceolate [(1.3–)1.5–2.0 × 0.4–0.7 mm], with acute, and often mucronate apex; stigmas 3. Fruit brown, subglobose [(1.5–)2.0–2.5(–2.7) × (1.0–)1.4–1.5(–1.8) mm], longer than the perianth, rugose, dehiscent. Seed lenticular [1.0–1.3(–1.5) mm in diameter], black to dark-brown. Chorology:— Paleotemperate taxon native to Europe, Central-Western Asia, and Northern Africa (Carretero 1990, Akeroyd 1993, Boulos 1999, Ghafoor et al. 1977, Fennane & Tatou 2005, Le Floc’h et al. 2008), it is considered introduced in some European countries, North America, South Africa, and Australia (POWO 2022a and literature therein). Concerning Saudi Arabia, it is native. At subspecific rank two main distribution areas can be distinguished, the first one including Central and southern Europe plus North Africa [subsp. graecizans and subsp. sylvestris (Vill.) Brenan], the second area being the eastern Europe (Russia and adjacent territories) plus Central and southern Asia [subsp. aschersonianus (Thell.) Costea and subsp. thellungianus (Nevski) Gusev] (see Iamonico 2015: 34). Occurrence in Saudi Arabia:— See varieties. Taxonomic annotations:— Amaranthus graecizans is a species morphologically variable, especially regarding the hairiness of stem, the shape of leaves (lanceolate or ovate-rhomboidal), the structure of synflorescence (with or without terminal synflorescence), the apex of bracts and tepals (acute-mucronate or awned), the margin of seed (obtuse or acute), and the dehiscence/indehiscence of fruit. These variability is currently interpreted recognizing four subspecies, i.e. subsp. graecizans, subsp. sylvestris, subsp. aschersonianus, subsp. thellungianus (see e.g., Costea 2003). Based on our field surveys and according to Chaudhary (1998) three subspecies occur in Saudi Arabia. These taxa can be distinguisced as follow: 1. Bracts and tepals awned (awn 0.3–0.7 mm long)................................................................................................ subsp. thellungianus 2. Bracts and tepals mucronate (mucro about 0.1 mm long)..................................................................................................................3 3. Leaf blade lanceolate [2.0–3.0(–4.0) × 0.5–1.0 cm], ratio length/width of the blade 3.0–6.0................................ subsp. graecizans - Leaf blade ovate-rhomboidal [5.0–6.0 × 2.5–3.0(–3.5) cm], ratio length/width of the blade 1.8–2.2....................... subsp. sylvestris, Published as part of Hassan, Walaa A., Al-Shaye, Najla A., Alghamdi, Salma, Korany, Shereen M. & Iamonico, Duilio, 2022, Taxonomic revision of the genus Amaranthus (Amaranthaceae) in Saudi Arabia, pp. 135-157 in Phytotaxa 576 (2) on pages 141-142, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.576.2.1, http://zenodo.org/record/7461280, {"references":["Fernald, M. L. (1945) Botanical specialities of the Seward Forest and adjacent Areas of Southeastern Virginia. Rhodora 47: 93 - 142.","Turland, N. J., Wiersema, J. H., Barrie, F. R., Greuter, W., Hawksworth, D. L., Herendeen, P. S., Knapp, S., Kusber, W. - H., Li, D. - Z., Marhold, K., May, T. W., McNeill, J., Monro, A. M., Prado, J., Price, M. J. & Smith, G. F. (2018) International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (Shenzhen Code) adopted by the Nineteenth International Botanical Congress, Shenzhen, China, July 2017. Regnum Vegetabile 159: i - xxxviii + 1 - 254. https: // doi. org / 10.12705 / Code. 2018","Carretero J. L. (1990) Amaranthus L. In: Castroviejo, S., Lainz, M., Lopez Gonzales, G., Montserrat, P., Munoz Garmendia, F., Paiva, J. & Villar, L. (Eds.) Flora Iberica, vol. 2. Real Jardin Botanico, CSIC, Madrid, pp. 559 - 569.","Akeroyd, J. R. (1993) Amaranthus L. In: Tutin, T. G., Burges, N. A., Chater, A. O., Edmondson, J. R., Heywood, V. H., Moore, D. M., Valentine, D. H., Walters, S. M. & Webb, D. A. (Eds.) Flora Europaea (second edition), vol. 1. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 130 - 132.","Ghafoor, A., Jafri, S. M. H. & El-Gadi, A. (1977) Amaranthaceae. In: Jafri, S. M. H. & El-Gadi, A. (Eds.) Flora of Libya, vol. 42. Al Faateh University, Tripoli, pp. 1 - 25.","Fennane, M. & Tatou, M. (2005) Flore Vasculaire du Maroc. Inventaire et chorologie. Travaux de l'Institut Scientifique, Universite Mohammed V. Serie Botanique 37: 1 - 483.","POWO (2022 a) Plants of the World Online. Amaranthus graecizans L. Available from: https: // powo. science. kew. org / taxon / urn: lsid: ipni. org: names: 10641 - 2 (accessed 29 march 2022)","Costea, M. (2003) The identity of a cultivated Amaranthus from Asia and a new nomenclature combination. Economic Botany 57: 646 - 649. https: // doi. org / 10.1663 / 0013 - 0001 (2003) 057 [0646: NOEP] 2.0. CO; 2","Chaudhary, S. A. (1998) Flora of the Kingdom of the Saudi Arabia, vol. 1. Ministry of Agriculture & Water, Riyadh, 692 pp."]}

Genus Cornuventer gen. nov. urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: 66B597D1-E741-42AC-A86E-5654078DB5D5 Type species Luperodes tuberculatus Blake, 1942, by present designation. Diagnosis In this genus, the anterior margin of the pronotum is fringed by a row of short setae, the basal margin of the pronotum is equipped with a fine bead, and the second abdominal ventrite of the male is equipped with two short horns (Fig. 201). See the following key for additional diagnostic characters. Etymology The name ‘ Cornuventer ’ is Latin for ‘horn belly’, and it refers to the abdominal appendages of the male. It should be treated as a male noun. Remarks The single species included in this genus is C. tuberculatus (Blake, 1942) comb. nov. It was originally named in Luperodes and most recently placed in Pseudoluperus from California. See Fig. 122 for a habitus photograph., Published as part of Viswajyothi, Keezhpattillam & Clark, Shawn M., 2022, New World genera of Galerucinae Latreille, 1802 (tribes Galerucini Latreille, 1802, Metacyclini Chapuis, 1875, and Luperini Gistel, 1848): an annotated list and identification key (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae), pp. 1-102 in European Journal of Taxonomy 842 on page 29, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2022.842.1945, http://zenodo.org/record/7222499

Genus Cornuventer gen. nov. urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: 66B597D1-E741-42AC-A86E-5654078DB5D5 Type species Luperodes tuberculatus Blake, 1942, by present designation. Diagnosis In this genus, the anterior margin of the pronotum is fringed by a row of short setae, the basal margin of the pronotum is equipped with a fine bead, and the second abdominal ventrite of the male is equipped with two short horns (Fig. 201). See the following key for additional diagnostic characters. Etymology The name ‘ Cornuventer ’ is Latin for ‘horn belly’, and it refers to the abdominal appendages of the male. It should be treated as a male noun. Remarks The single species included in this genus is C. tuberculatus (Blake, 1942) comb. nov. It was originally named in Luperodes and most recently placed in Pseudoluperus from California. See Fig. 122 for a habitus photograph.

An annotated list, including information on type species, distribution, and number of species, is provided for all of the non-flea-beetle galerucine genera known to occur in the New World (tribes Galerucini, Metacyclini, and Luperini). A diagnostic key to the genera is provided. Habitus illustrations are provided for most genera. The following new genera are proposed: Amplioluperus gen. nov., Cornuventer gen. nov., Geethaluperus gen. nov., Megarhabda gen. nov., Mexiluperus gen. nov., Monoaster gen. nov., Pyesexora gen. nov., Texiluperus gen. nov., Trachyelytron gen. nov. and Yingabruxia gen. nov. The following new taxonomic placements are proposed: Microbrotica Jacoby, 1887 is transferred from the tribe Metacyclini to the section Diabroticites Chapuis, 1875 (tribe Luperini, subtribe Diabroticina Chapuis, 1875); Pteleon Jacoby, 1888 is transferred from the section Exosomites Wilcox, 1973 (tribe Luperini, subtribe Luperina Gistel, 1848) to the section Scelidites Chapuis, 1875 (subtribe Luperina). The following new combinations are proposed: Luperodes histrio Horn, 1895, Luperus maculicollis LeConte, 1884, and Scelolyperus cyanellus Horn, 1895 are transferred from Pseudoluperus Beller & Hatch, 1932 to Amplioluperus; Luperodes tuberculatus Blake, 1942 is transferred from Pseudoluperus to Cornuventer; Luperus flavofemoratus Jacoby, 1888 is transferred from Pseudoluperus to Geethaluperus; Trirhabda obscurovittata Jacoby, 1886 is transferred from Trirhabda LeConte, 1865 to Megarhabda; Cneorane nigripes Allard, 1889 is transferred from Scelida Chapuis, 1875 to Metacycla Baly, 1861; Luperodes wickhami Horn, 1893 and Luperus dissimilis Jacoby, 1888 are transferred from Pseudoluperus to Mexiluperus; Scelolyperus tenuimarginatus Bowditch, 1925, is transferred from Scelida to Mimastra Baly, 1865 and is synonymized with Mimastra semimarginata Jacoby, 1886 syn. nov.; Pseudoluperus fulgidus Wilcox, 1965 and Pseudoluperus linus Wilcox, 1965 are transferred from Pseudoluperus to Monoaster; Crioceris detrita detrita Fabricius, 1801, Malacosoma detrita laevicollis Jacoby, 1887, Pyesia detrita meridionalis Bechyné, 1958, Pyesia elytropleuralis elytropleuralis Bechyné, 1958, and Pyesia elytropleuralis subalutacea Bechyné, 1958 are transferred from Pyesia Clark, 1865 to Pyesexora; Luperodes spretus Horn, 1893 and Luperodes texanus Horn, 1893 are transferred from Pseudoluperus to Texiluperus; Chthoneis smaragdipennis Jacoby, 1888 is transferred from Platymorpha Jacoby, 1888 to Trachyelytron; Luperus albomarginatus Jacoby, 1888 is transferred from Pseudoluperus to Trichobrotica Bechyné, 1956; and Galleruca sordida LeConte, 1858, Monoxia apicalis Blake, 1939, Monoxia batisia Blatchley, 1917, and Monoxia brisleyi Blake, 1939 are transferred from Monoxia LeConte, 1865 to Yingabruxia; all comb. nov. Pseudoluperus decipiens (Horn, 1893), originally described in Scelolyperus Crotch, 1874, is reduced to a junior synonym of Pseudoluperus longulus (LeConte, 1857), syn. nov. Trachyscelida dichroma Viswajyothi & Clark is proposed as a nom. nov. for Racenisa bicolor Bechyné, 1958 (not Agelastica bicolor LeConte, 1884), as both species are currently placed in the genus Trachyscelida Horn, 1893.

Salicornia rubra is a commonly occurring annual species of the salt playas of the Great Basin Desert of the western United States. In such habitats, plants experience high levels of ultraviolet radiation, which could potentially damage DNA. As a member of the Amaranthaceae (Caryophyllales), S. rubra shoots typically contain high concentrations of the red‐violet pigments called betacyanins, which are ultraviolet‐absorbing compounds. Nevertheless, some specimens of S. rubra are green even when growing with full exposure to the sun. We, therefore, tested several hypotheses regarding the causes of variation among S. rubra plants in betacyanin concentration and the role of betacyanins in the absorption of ultraviolet radiation. We measured ultraviolet radiation absorption and the concentrations of betacyanins and phenolic compounds of the cell sap expressed from red and green plants growing in full sun, as well as plants grown under various levels of shade. We found that while betacyanin concentrations were predictable from plant color (red plants contained more betacyanins than green plants), the ability to absorb ultraviolet radiation was determined primarily by the concentration of phenolic compounds, which was determined by the level of exposure to the sun. Therefore, the DNA of green plants growing in full sun appears to be at no greater risk than the DNA of red plants.

The direct effect of Palmer amaranth, Amaranthus palmeri Watson, on cotton growth and development is well documented, but its indirect effect through harboring feeding insects is less understood. Palmer amaranth emerged with cotton and remaining in the field for 30 days increased tarnished plant bug, Lygus lineolaris (Palisot de Beauvois), populations compared with a weed-free system. Weedy systems noted up to 49% more damaged terminals than weed-free systems, with cotton yield decreasing as damaged terminals increased at one of two locations. Thrips (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) populations were effectively controlled with Aeris® (Bayer, St. Louis, MO) seed treatment (imidacloprid + thiodicarb at 0.375 mg active ingredient per seed), but there was no correlation between thrips infestations and increasing damaged cotton terminals. However, Aeris seed treatment significantly reduced the occurrence of damaged cotton terminals. In a second experiment, Palmer amaranth infesting an area adjacent to a weed-free cotton field had maximum damaged terminals of 51% on the cotton row proximal to the weedy area, with the distal cotton row (44 m away) having 8% terminal damage. Cotton yield significantly decreased as damaged terminals increased. A final bioassay experiment further evaluated the influence of seed treatment on tarnished plant bug feeding impacting cotton seedlings. With Aeris seed treatment, tarnished plant bug mortality was 97%, compared with 37% for nontreated seed. Results suggest tarnished plant bug infestations increased where Palmer amaranth was present in cotton fields. Additionally, greater Palmer amaranth infestations led to an increase in damaged cotton terminals and lower yields.

Representatives of the Chenopodiaceae Vent. family are the hallmark of the flora of the desert regionsof Kazakhstan, as they far outnumber other leading families. Moreover, this applies not only to the flora of the mountainousterritories, but also to the flora of the river valleys, in particular, the flora of the wide valley of the Syrdarya river. Thepredominance of Chenopodiaceae is due to the excellent adaptability of its species to desert conditions. Quite a few speciesof Chenopodiaceae are dominant plant communities, especially in the middle deserts of the North Turan province. Amongthem there are many species that have useful properties (forage, landscape, medicinal, etc.). The aim of the work was toidentify the current species composition of the Chenopodiaceae family (Amaranthaceae Juss.) of the flora of the desertpart of the Syrdarya river valley. Classical botanical methods were used in the research process. As a result of the conductedstudies, the modern species composition of the Chenopodiaceae family of the studied territory, consisting of 112 speciesfrom 38 genera, was revealed. The three largest genera include genera: Salsola–17 species, Atriplex–15 species, Suaeda–11species. The remaining genera contain from 6 to 1 species. Genera represented by a small number of species predominate(26 genera of 1–2 species each).

The study on diversity of insects associated with grain amaranth, Amaranthus spp was conducted from August to November 2019 at College of Agriculture, Vijayapura. A total of thirty one insects belonging to twenty one families and eight orders; comprising of twenty six insect pests, four predators and one parasitoid were recorded. Each genus recorded during the study was represented by a single species totaling thirty one genus and species. Order Hemiptera was the most diverse with a relative abundance of 29.03 per cent followed by Coleoptera (22.58 per cent), Lepidoptera and Thysanoptera (12.90 per cent), Homoptera, Orthoptera and Hymenoptera (6.45 per cent) while Neuroptera was the least (3.23 per cent) abundant.

Present study was aimed to characterize the effects of heat-moisture treatments supported by ultrasound on structural, physicochemical and digestive properties of the starch from Agriophyllum squarrosum seeds. The starch sample was subjected to heat-moisture (120°C, 25% moisture) for different durations with assisting by pre- or post-treatment of ultrasound (20 Hz, 300 W, 20 min). A. squarrosum starch exhibited the original A-type of crystalline structure after all treatments. All modified starches had lower amylose content, amylopectin molecular weight, swelling power and solubility, and higher resistant starch content than the native starch. Heat-moisture treatments and dual modifications of heat-moisture and ultrasound increased the gelatinization temperature of starch granules and significantly (p ≤ 0.05) reduced the viscosity of starch paste. Pretreatment of ultrasound enhanced the effects of heat-moisture on the viscosity properties while post-treatment of ultrasound weakened which on the gelatinization temperature, by regulating the changes of double helix structure and short-range ordered structure in starch granules tested by Fourier-transform infrared spectrometer. Scanning electron microscopy unveiled that A. squarrosum starch pretreated by ultrasound became more susceptible to heat moisture in morphology. This work was very important for the deep excavation of the characteristics of A. squarrosum starch and the effective application of ultrasound in starch modifications.

Our work was based on the study of aqueous and hydroethanol extracts from the leaves ofAmaranthus hybridus L.(Amaranthaceae),Corchorus olitorius L.(Tiliaceae) andHibiscus sabdariffaL. (Malvaceae), and decoction. This work presents for the first time the phytochemical screening and the antioxidant activity of extracts of leaves of these three plants coming from the Côte d’Ivoire. Phytochemicalanalysisof theseextractsrevealed thepresenceof polyphenols and alkaloids in the three leaves. Thetotal phenolic contentof the extractsshowedvariations,between13.22 and 90.89 mg GAE/g. The hydroethanol extract (90.89 mg GAE/g) and decoction ofC. olitorius(57.89 mg GAE/g) had the most elevated contents. The evaluation of the reducing power with DPPH method revealed that the hydroethanol extract ofC. olitoriuswas the most active (IC50= 45.58 µg/mL). This result was in agreement with that obtained by FRAP method.

Following the comprehensive molecular phylogenetic results presented by Uotila et al. (2021), comments are provided on the infrageneric classification system of the genus Dysphania in its amended circumscription. Amendments and additions to the five-section scheme of Uotila et al. (2021) are proposed. In particular, the morphologically distinct lineage containing Dysphania atriplicifolia (earlier widely recognized in the monospecific genus Cycloloma as C. atriplicifolium) is recognized as a separate section, Dysphania sect. Cycloloma (Moq.) Mosyakin, comb. et stat. nov. Extensive synonymy of the section and its species is provided. The subclades revealed in the Australian clade of Dysphania sect. Dysphania are rather well characterized morphologically and were treated earlier as sections of either Chenopodium (sensu lato) or Dysphania. These subclades are recognized here as three subsections of sect. Dysphania: (1) subsect. Orthospora (R.Br.) Mosyakin, comb. et stat. nov.; (2) subsect. Dysphania; and (3) subsect. Tetrasepalae (Aellen) Mosyakin, comb. et stat. nov. The nomenclature of Dysphania graveolens (≡ Chenopodium graveolens) is discussed. It is confirmed that the name Chenopodium graveolens was first validated not by Willdenow in 1809 but by Lagasca and Rodríguez in 1802. Original specimens associated with that name in both publications belong taxonomically to the same species currently known as D. graveolens (= Chenopodium incisum Poir.). In my opinion, Art. 41.8(a) of the ICN (Shenzhen Code) is directly applicable here. Consequently, the name D. graveolens should be cited with the corrected authorship "(Lag. & Rodr.) Mosyakin & Clemants", and the new combination in Dysphania based on Chenopodium incisum (provisionally cited in POWO as "Dysphania incisa (Poir.) ined.") is unnecessary.

Indobanalia thyrsiflora is an endemic species occurring in peninsular India (Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu States) and Sri Lanka. A nomenclatural study of the basionym Banalia thyrsiflora, published by Moquin-Tandon in Candolle’s Prodromus (year 1849), is carried out and the name is lectotypified on a specimen deposited at P (barcode P00609924); isolectotypes are traced at K and CAL. A preliminary morphological characterization of the species is also given, based on field surveys and examination of herbarium specimens. We noted that I. thyrsiflora is highly variable. However, we prefer to avoid, for the moment, taxonomic conclusions about the various morphotypes found, waiting the complete results of this ongoing morphological and molecular investigations.

A UHPLC-HRMS method for simultaneous quantification of flavonoid contents in the aerial parts of Chenopodium bonus-henricus L. was developed and validated. The amount of 12 detected flavonoids was calculated relative to external standard hyperoside. The calibration curve of hyperoside showed very good linear regressions and the correlation coefficient was R2 > 0.9979. The limits of detection and quantitation limits were 0.39 ng/mL and 1.17 ng/mL, respectively. The UHPLC-HRMS method showed acceptable accuracy. At three different concentrations the recoveries of hyperoside ranging from 99.63% to 100.70% with RSD from 1.58% to 2.31%. The intra-day and inter-day precision were determined by analyzing the retention times and recovery of the external standard. The glycosides of spinacetin and patulenin (1) were the predominant compounds in the wild spinach which contents ranging from 1.79 to 4.41 mg g-1 D.W., calculated as hyperoside. The total amount of flavonoids was found to be 15.12 mg g-1 D.W.

Amaranthaceae s.lat. is a stenopalynous family showing, in contrast, a considerable phenotypic diversity for macromorhological characters. A total of one quantitative and seven qualitative characte...

Background: Epilepsy is one of the most common serious neurological disorders. Most antiepileptic or anticonvulsant drugs do not prevent or reverse the pathological process that underlies epilepsy, hence the continuous search for new therapeutic agents with minimal side effects and greater efficacy.Objective: The objectives of this study were to determine the acute toxicity profile and investigate the anticonvulsant activity of volatile oil of Kochia scoparia (Amaranthaceae ).Method: Volatile oil was extracted from fresh leaves of K. scoparia through hydrodistillation process, using a Clavenger-type apparatus. Acute toxicity testing was done using Lorke’s method. The anticonvulsant models used were pentylenetetrazol, strychnine and maximal electroshock. Albino mice were randomly divided into five groups (n=5). Group I (control group) was given 0.2 ml each of water orally while groups II, III and IV received 75, 150 and 300 mg/kg of the volatile oil. Group V received the standard drug solution; 30 mg/kg phenobarbitone for Maximal electroshock and 2 mg/kg diazepam for pentylenetetrazol and strychnine models. The onset of tonic leg extension, duration and protection from mortality were noted.Results: Sub acute toxicity test revealed that doses above 1000mg/kg of the volatile oil is toxic. Doses of 75, 150 and 300 mg/kg significantly (P 0.05.Conclusion: The volatile oil of K. scoparia could be useful in the management of epilepsy.