taxonID	type	description	language	source
03F2F273FFECB13F87B8FB9CA881958F.taxon	materials_examined	Lectotype (designated here): “ Bohemia: In pratis Hrabanov pr. Lysá n. L. ”, June 1899, leg. J. Podpěra, BRNM no. 166217! [rev. R. Řepka 2023 as Carex hostiana × C. lepidocarpa = C. × leutzii] (Fig. 1). Isolectotype: BRNU no. 403278! [sub Carex distans × lepidocarpa = C. binderi Podp.].	en	Řepka, Radomír, Taraška, Vojtěch (2023): Typification of three Carex nothospecies names dedicated to Czech botanists by J. Podpěra. Phytotaxa 618 (2): 172-180, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.618.2.6, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.618.2.6
03F2F273FFECB13F87B8FB9CA881958F.taxon	description	Carex × binderi was the first Carex hybrid name published by J. Podpěra and dedicated to his friend and field guide, Emil Binder (1860 – 1939?). He was custodian of the herbarium of the Natural Sciences Club in Prague, who issued exsiccates for sale and therefore collected plants all over Bohemia (Klášterský et al. 1982). It was very likely E. Binder who informed J. Podpěra about the existence of remarkable hybrid plants at the locality of Hrabanov. Subsequently, J. Podpěra described them as C. × binderi, which he considered a hybrid between C. distans L. 1759: 1263 × C. lepidocarpa Tausch 1834: 179 [sub C. flava var. lepidocarpa (Tausch) Godron 1844: 118]. According to the protologue, C. × binderi was observed in two robust tussocks at the type locality, where it co-occurred with several other Carex taxa, namely C. hornschuchiana Hoppe 1824: 595 (= C. hostiana DC. 1813: 88), C. hostiana × C. lepidocarpa, C. buxbaumii Wahlenberg 1803: 163, and C. stricta Goodenough 1794: 196 (= C. elata Allioni 1785: 272). We managed to find two specimens of C. × binderi collected by J. Podpěra and equipped with labels bearing his handwriting, one in BRNM and the other in BRNU. The latter was indicated as holotype by W. J. Crins in 1984, but this is not in congruence with the ICN (Turland et al. 2018, Art. 9.1.). Instead, both specimens should be regarded as syntypes until a lectotype is designated (Art. 9.6.). Here we selected the specimen in BRNM as lectotype, making the specimen in BRNU an isolectotype. The plant selected by us as the lectotype predominantly shows the features of C. hostiana: rhizomes with extravaginal shoots having partially fibred whitish grey sheaths, oval female spikes with utricle beak 1.1 – 1.5 mm long, directed slightly obliquely upwards, stem length ca 70 cm, sheaths under lower female spikes 19 – 20 mm long, presence of a stem-like leaf in about the middle of the stem. However, the light rusty colour of the glumes of the female spikes rather corresponds to C. lepidocarpa. Also the purple sheath on the rhizome, which can in one case be observed on the C. × binderi type specimen, is typical of C. lepidocarpa, but not of C. distans or C. hostiana. The fertility of the plant is very low: utricles are fully developed, but achenes are missing. The features of utricles and its beak fully correspond to C. hostiana. In addition, no features of C. × binderi correspond to C. distans, which was identified by J. Podpěra as one of the parental species. In fact, the plant of C. × binderi is morphologically closer to C. hostiana than C. distans, which may be characterised by brown to reddish brown lower sheaths on the shoots, relatively long and wide bracts under the lower female spike (33 – 86 × 2.4 – 3.9 mm vs 34 – 45 × 1.8 – 2.7 mm in C. hostiana), and bracts under lower female spikes with a relatively long sheath (19 – 44 mm vs 9 – 26 mm in C. hostiana). Furthermore, the beak of C. × binderi is cylindrical, less incised than in C. distans, and the teeth are close together. In C. distans, the utricle beak is flat and broad with massive and widely spaced teeth (comparison based on unpublished data). Two more traits mentioned in the protologue (Podpěra 1900) are shared by C. distans and C. hostiana, namely a rounded stem and the presence of an antiligule. By contrast, the dirty yellow-brown colour of the lower sheaths mentioned in the protologue does not agree with the real state, as they are whitish grey, partly disintegrating into dark grey fibres in the type specimen. For the above-mentioned reasons, we consider the plants of C. × binderi to be taxonomically identical with C. × leutzii, a formerly relatively common hybrid of C. hostiana and C. lepidocarpa, which used to grow in fens with both parental species if they found suitable ecological conditions there. In the Czech Republic, this nothospecies is recently very rare, but it can survive at localities even in absence of both parental species, which are strongly sensitive to landscape changes and considered threatened (Grulich 2017). This hybrid may somewhat resemble C. distans in the shape and distance of the lower female spike as well as other features mentioned above, which may have been confusing for J. Podpěra as well.	en	Řepka, Radomír, Taraška, Vojtěch (2023): Typification of three Carex nothospecies names dedicated to Czech botanists by J. Podpěra. Phytotaxa 618 (2): 172-180, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.618.2.6, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.618.2.6
03F2F273FFEEB13F87B8FC9EA8C49F08.taxon	materials_examined	Lectotype (designated here): “ Brno: Evanovice, Kouty, mokrá louka ”, 30 June 1916, leg. V. Filkuka, BRNU no. 18123! [sub C. brizoides × leporina, later re-identified by J. Podpěra as C. × filkukae; rev. R. Řepka 2023 as C. leporina] (Fig. 2). Isolectotypes: BRNU no. 17894! [sub C. brizoides × leporina; rev. R. Řepka 1985 as C. brizoides]; BRNU no. 621211! [sub C. brizoides × leporina; rev. R. Řepka 1985 as C. leporina].	en	Řepka, Radomír, Taraška, Vojtěch (2023): Typification of three Carex nothospecies names dedicated to Czech botanists by J. Podpěra. Phytotaxa 618 (2): 172-180, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.618.2.6, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.618.2.6
03F2F273FFEEB13F87B8FC9EA8C49F08.taxon	description	The epithet filkukae refers to Vilém Filkuka (1859 – 1921), a regional botanist and teacher in Brno-Řečkovice. In 1916, V. Filkuka collected an unidentified sedge at a locality called Kouty in Brno-Ivanovice (“ Ewanowitz ”), which is a small stream valley situated west of the town quarter. This specimen was passed on to J. Podpěra, who identified it as the hybrid C. leporina L. 1753: 973 × C. brizoides L. 1755: 31, which he later described as a new nothospecies, C. × filkukae, named in honour of the collector of the plant (Podpěra 1928: 143). Later on, the epithet was also combined in the genus Vignea, in the rank of nothospecies as well (Soják 1980). Originally, two herbarium sheets in BRNU were associated to the protologue. The first, here selected as lectotype, was repeatedly (in 2016 and 2022) studied by the first author of this paper. All features of the plant were found to correspond to C. leporina, while there were no traits resembling C. brizoides. The characters of specimens generally shared with C. leporina were prolonged upper internodes, stem foliated even in its upper part, and an inflorescence comprised of four gynandrous spikes arranged in a dense way. The plant is, however, somewhat atypical in several traits influenced by environmental conditions rather than hybridisation. It has relatively narrow leaves, and female flowers have pale, light brown to silver coloured scales, which is typical of plants growing in fully shaded habitats; such an ecomorphosis is recognised as var. argyroglochin (Hornem.) W. D. J. Koch 1837: 753. Utricles and achenes could not be studied, as the plant was collected in an early phenophase (just after flowering), which was also noted by Podpěra (1928). Delayed flowering and fruiting time may also be a result of shading. Nevertheless, no evidence for hybrid origin was found in the specimen selected as the lectotype. The other sheet initially designated as “ C. leporina × brizoides ” by J. Podpěra actually contained a mixed sample of C. leporina and C. brizoides. After revision carried out by the first author in 1985, the material was split. Most of the material pertains to C. brizoides, while C. leporina is only represented by a single stem and inflorescence with five immature spikes; this plant is similar to that selected as lectotype. These two specimens should be regarded as isolectotypes. Because the collected plants were immature, the original description of C. × filkukae provided by Podpěra (1928) was paradoxically not based on the herbarium material, but largely (with just slight modifications) adopted from Ascherson & Graebner (1904: 79 – 80), who characterised a hybrid of C. brizoides × C. leporina without giving it a binomial name. This description does, however, not fairly comply with the herbarium specimens labelled as C. × filkukae by J. Podpěra. In fact, the specimen here designated as lectotype diverges from the protologue in several morphological traits, which are summarised in Tab. 1. Nonetheless, taxonomic identity of the type is crucial for the interpretation of the name.	en	Řepka, Radomír, Taraška, Vojtěch (2023): Typification of three Carex nothospecies names dedicated to Czech botanists by J. Podpěra. Phytotaxa 618 (2): 172-180, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.618.2.6, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.618.2.6
03F2F273FFEBB13A87B8FDD5A8F99154.taxon	materials_examined	Lectotype (designated here): “ Flora moravica. Slatiny u Pavlovic ned. Olomouce ”, June 1907, leg. J. Podpěra BRNU no. 42433! [sub Carex riparia × glauca (= C. lausii Podp. 07); rev. H. Toivonen 1981 as C. acutiformis, ibid. R. Řepka 2023] (Fig. 3). Isolectotype: BRNM no. 4347 / 26! [sub Carex riparia × flacca; rev. R. Řepka 2010 as C. acutiformis].	en	Řepka, Radomír, Taraška, Vojtěch (2023): Typification of three Carex nothospecies names dedicated to Czech botanists by J. Podpěra. Phytotaxa 618 (2): 172-180, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.618.2.6, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.618.2.6
03F2F273FFEBB13A87B8FDD5A8F99154.taxon	description	Other specimen studied: “ Pavlovice u Olomouce ”, May 1908, leg. J. Podpěra, BRNM no. 4346 / 26! [sub Carex riparia × glauca; rev. R. Řepka 2010 as C. acutiformis]. This putative hybrid was named after Heinrich Laus (1872 – 1941), a grammar school teacher and museum custodian in the town of Olomouc, which was the core area of Laus’ botanical activities (Otruba 1946). The syntypes of C. lausii were also collected in the vicinity of Olomouc, specifically in its quartier Pavlovičky (formerly Pavlovice). One specimen is deposited in BRNU (selected as lectotype) and one in BRNM (isolectotype). Another specimen deposited in the latter herbarium (BRNM 4346 / 26) was collected at the type locality by J. Podpěra as late as 1908, i. e. one year after the formal nothospecies description. It must be thus excluded from the original material (see ICN Art. 9.4), but it may be helpful for interpretation of the name. All of these specimens are sampled imperfectly, only consisting of fertile stems, lacking the lower sheaths and rhizomes. Each stem has a single terminal spike, which is either male or, in a few cases, bisexual. Notably, the peduncles of the female spikes are up to 6 – 8 cm long, which may have convinced J. Podpěra of the hybrid origin with participation of C. flacca Schreber (syn. C. glauca Scop.). However, morphological features of all the specimens correspond to C. acutiformis; this identification was also confirmed for the lectotype by H. Toivonen in 1981. The plants may further be classified as f. spadicea (Nyman) Asch. & Graebn. for their female scales long-awned at the apex, and they also correspond to f. longipedunculata Staněk for the extremely long peduncles of the female spikes (Podpěra 1928: 341). The plant selected as lectotype has comparably shorter female spikes which are not fully fertile, some flowers are withered, and the terminal spike is partly composed of female flowers. This might imply a hybrid origin with C. acutiformis as one of the parents. Only a one such hybrid could be considered in the area, namely C. × sooi Jakucs 1953: 90 (= C. acutiformis × C. riparia Curtis 1783: 60), whose parents are recently and historically known to occur in central Moravia (Kaplan et al. 2019). However, there are no morphological traits on the specimen resembling C. riparia, nor any other ways to confirm its hybrid origin, therefore it would be best to regard the plant as a somewhat atypical C. acutiformis.	en	Řepka, Radomír, Taraška, Vojtěch (2023): Typification of three Carex nothospecies names dedicated to Czech botanists by J. Podpěra. Phytotaxa 618 (2): 172-180, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.618.2.6, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.618.2.6
