taxonID	type	description	language	source
038687CCFFE49E12FF070B1AD49BF891.taxon	materials_examined	Type (lectotype, here designated): — INDIA. Tamil Nadu: Neelgherry [Nilgiri], s. d., R. Wight, s. n., Wight Cat. 1479 (G-DC, G 00468223, digital image) (Fig. 1); isolectotypes: [G-DC, G 00468339; E, E 00417015 — 18; K, K 000852217 — 18; BM, BM 011032527, digital images].	en	Kanakambika, Govindan, Prabhukumar, Konickal Mambetta, Maya, Chandrashekaran Nair (2023): Lectotypification of four names in the genus Senecio L. (Asteraceae). Phytotaxa 612 (2): 244-249, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.612.2.9, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.612.2.9
038687CCFFE49E12FF070B1AD49BF891.taxon	discussion	Senecio candicans, invalidly (Art. 38.1 of the ICN) published by Wallich (1831: 107) based upon the collections by Wight from Neelgherry hills (Nilgiri), which appeared in Wallich catalogue no. 3123. Later, De Candolle (1834) validated the name S. candicans on the evidence of Wallich catalogue no. 3123 and further, Wight’s materials were placed under Catalogue no. 1479. During the study, we have traced out Wight’s homogeneous collection from Nilgiri hills preserved at G-DC, E, K and BM. In G-DC, two specimens are available and both are mounted on a single sheet. Of which, the specimen mounted on the right side of the sheet with barcode G 00468223 is preserved well with flowers and achenes, and also congruent with the description and the provenance mentioned in the protologue is designated here as the lectotype. De Candolle also mentioned the name Cineraria sarmentosa Lesch. (De Candolle in Wight & Arnott, 1834: 22) as a synonym of S. candicans and which is being anticipated and considered as a provisional synonym (Art. 36.1 and 50. A (1) of the ICN).	en	Kanakambika, Govindan, Prabhukumar, Konickal Mambetta, Maya, Chandrashekaran Nair (2023): Lectotypification of four names in the genus Senecio L. (Asteraceae). Phytotaxa 612 (2): 244-249, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.612.2.9, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.612.2.9
038687CCFFE49E16FF07093ED467FD7E.taxon	materials_examined	Type (lectotype, here designated): — INDIA. Tamil Nadu: Nilgiri hills, s. d., E. Noton, s. n. Wall. cat. No. 3130 a (G-DC, G 00329611, digital image) (Fig. 2 A); isolectotype (K, K 001118613, digital image).	en	Kanakambika, Govindan, Prabhukumar, Konickal Mambetta, Maya, Chandrashekaran Nair (2023): Lectotypification of four names in the genus Senecio L. (Asteraceae). Phytotaxa 612 (2): 244-249, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.612.2.9, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.612.2.9
038687CCFFE49E16FF07093ED467FD7E.taxon	materials_examined	Type (lectotype, here designated): — INDIA. Tamil Nadu: Neelgherry [Nilgiri], s. d., R. Wight, s. n., Wight Cat. 1481 (G-DC, G 00329612, digital image) (Fig. 2 B); isolectotypes [K 001118614, K 000852198 — 99, NY 259561, digital images].	en	Kanakambika, Govindan, Prabhukumar, Konickal Mambetta, Maya, Chandrashekaran Nair (2023): Lectotypification of four names in the genus Senecio L. (Asteraceae). Phytotaxa 612 (2): 244-249, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.612.2.9, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.612.2.9
038687CCFFE49E16FF07093ED467FD7E.taxon	diagnosis	The name S. lavandulifolius appeared invalidly in Wallich Catalogue no. 3130, which was based on the collections by E. Noton and R. Wight from Nilgiri hills. De Candolle (1834) validated the name S. lavandulifolius based on E. Noton’s collection (3130 a). He considered Wight’s collection from Nilgiris (3130 b) as distinct and named it var. wightii in Contribution to the Botanical India. Wight and Arnott (1834) were not convinced by the erection of var. wightii and hence, synonymized it under S. lavandulifolius with a comment “ we consider the variety ‘ B’ to be an accidentally starved state of the other, and not a distinct variety ”. Since then, De Candolle (1837) reinstated the variety wightii, along with a new variety ‘ notonis ’ under S. lavandulifolius. But var. notonis has been considered as an illegitimate name due to the incorporation of type of the former adopted legitimate name of the species Art. 6.8, 22.1 and 26.1 of the ICN. During the study, we were able to locate multiple specimens by Noton housed at G-DC and K and Wight’s collection at G-DC, K and NY. The specimens kept at G-DC (G 00329611 — 12) are well preserved and have flowers and achenes, which are congruent with the description and the provenance mentioned in the protologue are designated here as lectotypes for the names S. lavandulifolius var. lavandulifolius and S. lavandulifolius var. wightii, respectively.	en	Kanakambika, Govindan, Prabhukumar, Konickal Mambetta, Maya, Chandrashekaran Nair (2023): Lectotypification of four names in the genus Senecio L. (Asteraceae). Phytotaxa 612 (2): 244-249, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.612.2.9, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.612.2.9
038687CCFFE09E16FF070D4DD10AFB96.taxon	materials_examined	Type (lectotype, here designated): — INDIA. Tamil Nadu: Neelgherry [Nilgiri], s. d., R. Wight, s. n., Wight Cat. 1482 (K, K 000852138, digital image) (Fig. 3); isolectotypes: [E, E 00417003 — 05; P, P 00743095 — 96, K, K 000852139, K 000852141; NY, NY 00259562, digital images].	en	Kanakambika, Govindan, Prabhukumar, Konickal Mambetta, Maya, Chandrashekaran Nair (2023): Lectotypification of four names in the genus Senecio L. (Asteraceae). Phytotaxa 612 (2): 244-249, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.612.2.9, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.612.2.9
038687CCFFE09E16FF070D4DD10AFB96.taxon	discussion	Senecio neelgherryanus is based on Wight’s collection (Wight Catalogue no. 1482) from Neelgherry (Nilgiri) forest region. The original materials associated with the name were located at K, E, P, and NY herbaria. Of which, the specimen at K (K 000852138) is well preserved and perfectly fit with the protologue (having flowers and achenes) and is designated here as lectotype.	en	Kanakambika, Govindan, Prabhukumar, Konickal Mambetta, Maya, Chandrashekaran Nair (2023): Lectotypification of four names in the genus Senecio L. (Asteraceae). Phytotaxa 612 (2): 244-249, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.612.2.9, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.612.2.9
