Typifications in neotropical Sapotaceae

Abstract Sapotaceae is historically known as having a tricky and challenging taxonomy due to tangled morphologic heterogeneity. Consequently, this resulted in a large number of described genera and binomials. After Pennington’s Flora Neotropica work, several of those nomenclature issues were resolved. Nevertheless, many binomials remain unsolved and up for typification. Thus, following the International Code of Nomenclature for Algae, Fungi and Plants, we propose 74 new lectotype designations, four of these are second-step typifications.

Historically, Sapotaceae taxonomy can be considered as tricky and truly challenging due to the morphologic heterogeneity of its many genera and species. This resulted in a large number of described genera and binomials associated with morphologically-related species that have tangled circumscriptions, such as Pouteria Aubl. and Chrysophyllum L. However, these numbers may often vary according to recent new discoveries Alves 2011, 2012a, b;Popovkin et al. 2016;Alves-Araújo and Mônico 2017;Sossai et al. 2017; Alves-Araújo 2018a), recircumscriptions (Swenson et al. 2007;Mackinder et al. 2016) and phylogenetic studies (Terra-Araújo et al. 2015;Faria et al. 2017). Pouteria and Chrysophyllum are the largest genera in Sapotaceae with around 270 and 100 accepted names, respectively (The Plant List 2013). Furthermore, for tropical Americas, they have together more than 60 synonyms, most of them applied to Pouteria (around 45) (Pennington 1990(Pennington , 1991. Efforts, focusing on Sapotaceae internal relationships, were raised in the past two decades aiming to clarify genera and species boundaries (Swenson and Anderberg 2005;Swenson et al. 2008Swenson et al. , 2013Terra-Araújo et al. 2015;Faria et al. 2017). In addition, better understanding of taxonomic delimitation for many species, or even infra-species categories, are the goals for some available works (Terra-Araújo et al. 2012Alves-Araújo et al. 2014; Alves-Araújo 2018b; Ferreira et al. 2019). Fortunately, those recent works had, as background, one of the most important contributions for the family in the world: Pennington's Flora Neotropica (Pennington 1990).
In his work, Pennington (1990) brings several aspects, from palynology (Harley 1990) to general taxonomy, approaching 11 genera and almost 1/3 of the world richness for Sapotaceae (approximately 400 species). Taxonomically, the author provides substantial historical information about those binomials and their typi, complementary analysed vouchers, geographic distribution maps and illustrations, keys and descriptions of many new species. He also included new synonyms and performed some typifications.
While performing Sapotaceae studies in Brazil and after consulting Flora Neotropica, despite Pennington's extraordinary efforts, we realised many binomials remain up for typification processes according to the International Code of Nomenclature (ICN) criteria (Turland et al. 2018). Thus, we aim to contribute for nomenclature stability through typification of the untypified names by choosing/indicating lectotypes when needed.
All the newly-proposed types were carefully checked and are in accordance with the Articles 9. 11, 9.12, 9.13 and 9.22 of the ICN adopted in Shenzhen (Turland et al. 2018). We also provide the homotypic synonyms and newly-tracked samples for accepted names with all available herbaria barcodes or collection numbers.
Pertinent details of some type designation were suppressed due to the amount of type designations. Nevertheless, we established that, to be eligible, the vouchers should be well-preserved and exhibit reproductive and/or diagnostic characteristics. There are three different situations (hereafter coded by numbers) that led us to typify: (1) Holotype not designated in the protologue; (2) If designated, there is more than one sample in the same herbarium or syntypes; and (3) Holotype destroyed or missing.
The lectotype designations take into account, depending on the context, the author's original institution, the collector's original institution and information from the labels. All lectotypes are formatted as follows: currently accepted name in each entry is shown alphabetically in bold italic typeface with full bibliographic reference, basionym (when present), any homotypic name, designation of lectotype and code for situation in bold typeface (1, 2 or 3) and any exceptional supporting notes. For those cases in which lectotypes were chosen for synonyms, they are presented below the currently accepted binomial with the same previously cited format, except by being preceded by "=" and only having italic typeface.
Type collections, including those cited by Pennington (1990), where we have not tracked or seen material are indicated by "n.v.". Additional information from herbarium labels are presented between square brackets "[...]".

Typifications and new combinations
We here provide a list of the species names in seven genera, 74 new lectotype designations [10 for code (1), 42 for code (2) and 22 for code (3)], four of these being secondstep typifications. Note. Pennington (1990) Pennington (1990) indicated the sample at K as isotype, he inadvertently lectotypified the name. However, we did not track the voucher at K herbarium and its confirmation is needed.