| Classification | Asteraceae: Haplopappus |
| Classification 1 | Asteraceae: Stenotus |
| Harvard University Herbaria Barcode(s) | 00008679 |
| Type Status | Holotype |
| Collector | Wilkes Expedition |
| Country | United States of America |
| Geography | North America: North America (CA, US, MX) (Region): United States of America |
| Locality | Upper north fork of the Columbia River |
| GUID | http://purl.oclc.org/net/edu.harvard.huh/guid/uuid/32ed0eb7-9c11-44a5-bfa3-8eb337e48dd1 |
| Harvard University Herbaria Barcode | 00008679 |
| Herbarium | GH |
| Family | Asteraceae |
| Type Status | Holotype |
| Holotype of | Haplopappus lanuginosus A. Gray |
| Verified by | D. E. Boufford |
| Determination Remarks | Comment on the type status of the Wilkes Expedition collection affixed to GH 8679. It is unclear wheather H. M. Hall saw this specimen prior to selecting the sheet at US as the type of Haplopappus lanuginosus (Hall 1928). If he did, Hall probably regared the GH material as a fragment of the specimen deposited at US, since Hall generally seems to have followed the tradition of attributing to GH Gray's types. [See label text in Determinations Field for part 2] |
| Taxon Reference | (for Haplopappus lanuginosus A. Gray) U.S. Expl. Exped., Phan. Pacific N. Amer. 1874. 347. |
| Family | Asteraceae |
| Determination | Stenotus lanuginosus Greene |
| Determination Remarks | Thus, I have followed Hall (1928) in taking the specimen at US to be the holotype. Alternatively, if both specimens were attributed equal status, it would appear that Hall inadvertantly lectotypified the US specimen. In that case, the GH material would be a duplicate of the lectotype, rather than a fragment of the holotype. ----Caleb. A. Morse, 2008, R. L. McGregor Herbarium (KANU) University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas USA [current name] |
| Annotation Text | (For instance, Hall recored as the [holo]type the specimen of H. stenophyllus deposited in GH. The protologue for that species is found on the same page as that for H. languinosus and there are duplicates of the type of H. stenophyllus at PH and US, which Hall almost certainly also saw.) At any rate, it is not evident to me that the GH specimen of H. lanuginosus can be treated as more than a mere fragment of the specimen at US. [See note field for part 3] |
| Sex | not determined |
| Phenology | NotDetermined |
| Preparation Type | Sheet |
| Preparation Method | Pressed |
