Tanacetum L. (Anthemideae Cass., Asteraceae Bercht. & J. Presl) is a genus of approximately 160 species of perennial herbs and shrubs distributed in the Mediterranean region, Central, and south-western Asia, and parts of North America (see e.g. Oberprieler et al., 2009; Sonboli et al., 2012).

Linnaeus published 22 names under Chrysanthemum L. (Linnaeus, 1753, 1759, 1763, 1767b ). According to Jarvis (2007) 18 out of the 22 Linnaean names are already typified. Among the remaining 4 untypified names, two (Chrysanthemum italicum L., and C. achilleae L.) are applied to taxa belonging to the Tanacetum corymbosum group (see e.g. Heywood, 1976a ; Greuter, 2006–2009). Other taxa linked to this group (Pyrethrum cinereum Griseb., P. clusii Fisch. ex Rchb., P. daucifolium Pers., P. tenuifolium Ten.) need a nomenclatural revision which is here presented as part of the studies on Linnaean names and the cooperation in the treatment of the Asteraceae for the new edition of the Flora of Italy (see e.g. Del Guacchio & Iamonico 2015; Iamonico, 2013, 2015; Iamonico & Hjertson, 2015; Iamonico & Managlia, 2014; Iamonico & Peruzzi, 2016; Iamonico et al., 2014).

The nomenclatural and taxonomical study, which is here presented, was carried out by an extensive analysis of literature (protologues included), personal field investigations, and the examination of the specimens (see Appendix 1) kept in the Herbaria B, G, GOET, GZU, JE, K, L, LINN, P, PH, RO, W and WU (acronyms according to Thiers, 2018–).

The articles cited through the text follow the Shenzen Code (Turland et al. 2018) which is further referred to as ICN (International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants).

Chrysanthemum achilleae L.

Chrysanthemum achilleae was published by Linnaeus (1767b : 562) through a short diagnosis and a description. A Micheli’s illustration (Micheli, 1729: Tab. 29) was cited and it is original material for the name. No specimens useful for the typification purposes were traced (see also Jarvis, 2007), so this illustration is designated in this work as the lectotype of the name Chrysanthemum achilleae. I here recognize this taxon at subspecies rank of Tanacetum corymbosum, as already proposed by Greuter (in Greuter et al., 2003: 43) (see also the discussion of C. achilleae/C. italicum in the section “Nomenclatural and taxonomic remarks”).

Chrysanthemum italicum L.

Linnaeus’ protologue of Chrysanthemum italicum (Linnaeus 1767a : 116[1]) consists of a short diagnosis (“CHRYSANTHEMUM foliis bipinnatis serratis, florum radiis disci longitudine, caule procumbente”), and one synonym cited from Micheli (1729: 34) who provided an illustration[2] (“Tab. 29”) which is part of original material; the collector (“Arduini”), and the provenance (“Habitat in Italia”) were also provided; Linnaeus also highlighted a morphological similarity with C. millefoliatum (Linnaeus, 1767b : 563, nom. superfl. [3], Arts. 52.1. and 52.2 of the ICN). There is one sheet at LINN (no. 1012.21) bearing parts of a probably same plant whose features match the diagnosis, and the Linnaean annotation “chrysanth[emum] italicum Ard[uino]”. The plant was sent from P. Arduino to C. Linnaeus, and it can be considered an ante-1767 addition to the collection and original material for the name (Jarvis, 2007). I have not been able to locate any further original material in any other Linnaean or Linnaean-linked herbaria (see also Jarvis, 2007). Among the elements selected (specimen from LINN, and illustration by Micheli) I here designate the first one as the lectotype of the name Chrysanthemum italicum over the illustration because of its potential ability to provide a larger number of additional characters (micro-morphological, chemical, molecular, etc.) that cannot be examined by images (Jarvis, 2007: 21–22).

Chrysanthemum italicum is considered as a heterotypic synonym of C. achilleae, as is discussed in the section “Nomenclatural and taxonomic remarks”.

Chrysanthemum tanacetifolium Pourr.

Pourret (1788: 311) published Chrysanthemum tanacetifolium thorugh a short diagnosis (“foliis bipinnatis, pinnis inciso-serratis, caule ramoso pedunculis axillaribus longis multifloris”) and provided some localities (“Aux environs de Narbonne, à Cascastel, l’Espinassiere, & c.”). I have not been able to trace specimens which are part of the original material. As a consequence, on the basis of the Art. 9.8 of the ICN, a neotypification is required. Unfortunately, no specimen collected by Pourret was found. I select a specimen (P 00731963) collected at Montpellier, which displays morphological characteristics matching the Pourret’s diagnosis. The P00731963 is designated in this work as the neotype of the name Chrysanthemum tanacetifolium. Based on the morphology of this specimen (especially concerning the leaf segments (2^nd order) which are ovate-lanceolate), and according to the current concept in Tanacetum (see e.g. Heywood, 1976a : 170–171), the name C. tanacetifolium is to be considered as heterotypic synonym of Tanacetum corymbosum subsp. corymbosum.

Pyrethrum cinereum Griseb.

Grisebach (1844: 203) provided a detailed diagnosis, the provenance (“In Macedonia et Bithynia[…] Pr. Palanka distr. Kostendil […] (Friedr.) [= E. Friedrichsthal]pr. Bolu (Pest.) [= F. Pestalozza]”), and the habitat (“in pascuis lapidosis […] alt. 2000ʹ–3000ʹ”) in the protologue of Pyrethrum cinereum. There are two specimens at GOET (where the most of the Grisebach specimens are preserved—see Stafleu and Cowan, 1976: 1007), GOET 002103 and GOET 002109 bearing plants collected respectively by E. Friedrichsthal at Palanka (Macedonia), and F. Pestalozza at Bolu (Turkey). A third specimen is kept at W (W 0051161) and bears a plant collected by E. Friedrichsthal at Palanka. According to the Art. 9.6 of the ICN, these three specimens (two at GOET, and one at W) are syntypes. Some considerations are to be made on these three specimens:

1. both E. Friedrichsthal and F. Pestalozza were explicity reported by Grisebach (1844) in the title page of his Spicilegium as collaborators of the work;

2. the localities indicated in the labels perfectly match the protologue;

3. the specimen GOET 002103 bears the original annotation “Pyrethrum cinereum m. [mihi] 454 / Pyrethrumniveum Lag. / Diff. foliis bipinna / tipartitis lobis obl. [oblongi] / in pascuis lapidosis / pr. Palanka” which refers to the comparison provided in the protologue by Grisebach (1844: 203).

All thing stated, I here consider these three specimens as part of the original material, and designate that at GOET 002103 (it appears to be better preserved) as the lectotype of the name Pyrethrum cinereum. I here recognize this taxon at subspecies rank of Tanacetum corymbosum, as already proposed by Davis (1975: 262).

Pyrethrum clusii Fisch. ex Rchb.

Reichenbach (1831: 231–232) named this species in honour of C. A. Clusius who described in his Rariorum Plantarum Historia (Clusius, 1601: 338) a “Tanacetum inodorum I”. This polynomial was reported by Reichenbach (1831: 232) as synonym of P. clusii. The illustration provided by Clusius (1601) is part of the original material and is designated in this work as the lectotype of the name Pyrethrum clusii.

According to the current concept in Tanacetum (see e.g. Heywood, 1976a : 170–171), and on the basis of the lectotype of P. clusii, this name seems to be referred to Tanacetum corymbosum subsp. subcorymbosum. However, since the typification of Chrysanthemum subcorymbosum Schur (basionym of T. corymbosum subsp. subcorymbosum) was not possible to achieve (see Note 6 in “Taxonomic treatment”), I here considered P. clusii as doubt synonym of T. corymbosum subsp. subcorymbosum. In anycase, although P. clusii would have nomenclatural priority (1831 vs. 1859), the combination at subspecies rank (here accepted as better taxonomic rank) was published earlier for C. subcorymbosum (1936 vs. 1976—see the section “Taxonomic treatment”). As a consequence the name to be used at subspecies rank would be however T. corymbosum subsp. subcorymbosum (Schur) Szafer & Pawłowski.

The Reichenbach’s name is to be considered as a later homonym of Pyrethrum clusii Tausch (see the discussion below), and so illegitimate according to Art. 53.1 of the ICN. Dostál (1950: 1603) and Heywood (1976b : 272) proposed new combinations of the Reichenbach’s name at subspecies rank under Chrysanthemum and Tanacetum, respectively. On the basis of the Art. 58.1 (and see the Ex. 2) “The final epithet in an illegitimate name may be re-used in a different name, at either the same or a different rank; or an illegitimate generic name may be re-used as the epithet in the name of a subdivision of a genus. The resulting name is then treated either as a replacement name with the same type as the illegitimate name”. As a consequence, the Dostál’s and Heywood’s combinations are legitimate and to be considered as replaced names of Pyrenthrum clusii.

Pyrethrum clusii Tausch

Tausch (1821: 8, 12) published Pyrethrum clusii citing “Huc spectat T. [Tanacetum inodorum] inodorum II. Clus. hist. I. 338.” (which refers to Clusius, 1601: 338) as synonym. The Tausch’s name is lectotypified in this work using the Clusius’s illustration “Tanacetum inodorum II”. The Clusius’s illustration displays morphological characters matching the current concept [see e.g. Heywood (1976a : 170–171)] of Tanacetum corymbosum subsp. corymbosum (leaf blades glabrous and 1-pinnatipartite, and involucral bracts of capitula without a broad blackish-brown margin).

Pyrethrum tenuifolium Ten.

Tenore (1815: 50) described Pyrethrum teniufolium through just a diagnosis (any locality or habitat were cited). The same author published a more complete treatment of the species in the 2^nd volume of Flora Napolitana (Tenore, 1820: 236) where he provided a detailed description, some localities (“…monti di Abruzzo, alla Majella, al Gran sasso…”), an illustration (“Tav. LXXX”, image available at http://www.ortobotaniconapoli.it/paginadimenu.htm), and a comparison with the similar P. corymbosum. I traced three specimens at K (K 000928497, image available at http://apps.kew.org/herbcat/getImage.do?imageBarcode=K000928497) and G (G 00450830, and G 00450834, images available at http://www.ville-ge.ch/musinfo/bd/cjb/chg/adetail.php?id=317570&base=img&lang=en). The K 000928497 specimen bears a plant collected by M. Tenore in May 1830 in the locality “Majella M.te de Fiori”, and (date of collection post-1815) cannot be considered as part of the original material. The G00450830 specimen was collected “In Majella”, but the collection date is lacking and I cannot be sure it was an atne-1815 addition to the collection, so I avoid this specimen for he lectotypification purpose. On the contrary, the G 00450834 specimen was collected in 1814, as indicated in the original label. Moreover it was reported “nob.” [nobis]. The morphological characteristics of the plant beared in the G 00450834 specimen matches both the diagnosis by Tenore (1815: L), and the later description by Tenore (1820: 236). I designate in this work the specimen G 00450834 as the lectotype of the name Pyrenthrum tenuifolium. The morphology of the lectotype [leaf blades 2-pinnatipartite with segments (2^nd order) ovate-lanceolate] allows to synonymized the Tenore’s name with Tanacetum corymbosum subsp. achilleae.

The Tenore’s name is to be considered as a later homonym of Pyrethrum tenuifolium Willd., and so illegitimate according to the Art. 53.1 of the ICN.

About 20 years later the publication of the original descriptions of Chrysanthemum achilleae and C. italicum, Gilibert (1785: 399, 401) maintained these taxa as distinct species (the first one placed under the group named “Leucanthema”, the other species placed under “Chrysanthema”), although he pointed out (a note under C. italicum): “Synonymon Micheli ad Ch. achilleae jam adducitur; forsan Ch. achilleae & italicum una eademque planta bis posita”. Few other authors listed both the Linnaean names. Forsyth (1794) accepted to list separately C. italicum, and C. achilleae. Candolle (1838: 67) included C. italicum in the group of “Species non satis notae”, stating “C. [Chrysanthemum] italicum…Species onminò obscura…affinis Pyr. [Pyrethrum] millefoliatus, sed erectior et ligulae albae”, while C. achilleae was reported as the basionym of Pyrethrum achilleae (L.) DC. (new proposed combination in Candolle’s Prodromus). Arcangeli (1882: 353) recognized the genus Pyrethrum according to Candolle (1838), accepting P. achilleae (L.) DC. as a separate species. Nyman (1879: 372) proposed the new combination P. corymbosum subsp. achilleae (L.) Nyman. Fiori (in Fiori & Béguinot, 1903: 244) treated C. achilleae at variety rank of C. corymbosum L. on the basis of the leaf blades, 2-pennatifid vs. pennatifid in the nominal variety [the latter taxon was invalidly named “typicum” by Fiori (in Fiori & Béguinot, 1903: 243)]; these authors listed C. italicum as doubtful synonym of C. corymbosum var. achilleae (L.) Fiori. Recent citations of C. achilleae are rare, while C. italicum was sometimes listed as good species especially by the Italian authors who had not cited C. achilleae (e.g. Allioni, 1785: 191; Tenore, 1815: 23). Greuter (in Greuter et al., 2003: 43) recently proposed the new combination Tanacetum corymbosum subsp. achilleae (L.) Greuter, although in his Asteraceae treatment for the Euro+Med PlantBase, the same author (Greuter, 2006–2009; Greuter & Raab-Straube, 2008) preliminarly accepted this name.

Chrysanthemum corymbosum is currently recognized under the genus Tanacetum L., as T. corymbosum (L.) Sch. Bip., a variable species including four subspecies (see e.g. Greuter, 2006–2009): subsp. corymbosum, subsp. achilleae, subsp. cinereum (Griseb.) Grierson, and subsp. subcorymbosum (Schur) Pawl. The type of C. corymbosum s. str. (≡ C. corymbiferum) [lectotype (LINN, Herb. Linn. No. 1012.13) designated by Humphries in Jarvis & Turland (1998: 358); image available at http://linnean-online.org/10439/)] shows a plant with leaves pinnatipartite, the segments having margins toothed or incised. On the whole, the morphological configuration of C. corymbosum subsp. corymbosum [both considering the lectotype, and the current concept of the species (see e.g. Heywood 1976a : 170–171)] does not match those of C. achilleae which type show leaves clearly 2-pinnatipartite. C. achilleae cannot be associated neither with the subsp. cinereum, nor with the subsp. subcorymbosum that are characterized in having pinnatipartite leaves. The Micheli’s illustration (lectotype of C. achilleae) shows the segments of 1^st order about two times longer than wide and those of the 2^nd order ovate with margins mainly toothed, while the specimen Herb. Linn No. 1012.21 at LINN (lectotype of C. italicum; image available at: http://linnean-online.org/10447/) is a plant with segments (1^st order) 2.5–3.0 times longer than wide, and segments (2^nd order) lanceolate incised to laciniate. On the basis of the lectotypes of C. achilleae, and C. italicum, these two names appear to be referred to different taxa. However, the forms with leaves 2-pinnatipartite have segments (2^st order) which margins configuration vary continuously from toothed to deeply incised (pers. observ.). The type of C. achilleae and C. italicum seems to represent the limits of the range concerning the character of the margin of the leaves segments (2^st order). I here propose to treat the names Chrysanthemum italicum and C. achilleae as heterotypic synonyms. Since both names were published in the same date (15–31 october 1767 according to Stafleu & Cowan (1981: 107), the Art. 11.4 of the ICN cannot be applied, and I am obliged to consider Art. 11.5 instead. Arcangeli (1882: 353) was the first author who united both names, choosing Chrysanthemum achilleae (sub Pyrethrum achilleae) which deserves priority.

Greuter (2006–2009) synonymized C. daucifolium Pers. and Pyrethrum tenuifolium Willd. with T. corymbosum subsp. achilleae. Podlech (1988) widely discussed the identity of C. daucifolium, listed P. tenuifolium as synonym, and proposed the new combination T. corymbosum var. tenuifolium (Willd.) Podlech[4]. The name Chrysanthemum daucifolium was correctly lectotypified by Podlech (l. c.) on a specimen preserved at L (no. 900.227-31). Concerning the Willdenow’s name, Podlech (1988: 70) stated “Typus: Hab. in Caucaso, herb. Willd. (vidi Microfiche)”. The Willdenow’s Pyrethrum tenuifolium is characterized in having the basal and lower leaf blades 2-pinnatipartite, with segments (1^st order) lanceolate (2.5–3.0 times longer than wide) and segments (2^nd order) linear [Willdenow (1809: 906) also highlighted in the protologue “…foliis radicalibus bipinnatis, pinnis linearibus pinnatifidis, caulinis bipinnatifidis, laciniis linearibus subintegerrimis”]. The Willdenow’s P. tenuifolium makes the homonym Tenore’s name as illegitimate (Art. 53.1 of the ICN).

As a whole, and on the basis of the personal examination of specimens collected in Europe and Middle Asia, I highlighted two main morphological groups in Tanacetum corymbosum, i.e. corymbosum/subcorymbosum/cinereum (group I) and achilleae/daucifolium (group II). The group I is characterized in having the leaf blades 1-pinnatipartite with the segments toothed or incised, while the group II shows blades 2-pinnatipartite with segments (2^nd order) toothed to incised or linear. Differential characters among the taxa included in each group refer to bracts of capitula and hairness of leaves (group I), and shape of leaf segments of 2^nd order (group II) as reported in the following diagnostic key:

1. Leaves (the basal and lower ones) 1-pinnatipartite ........................................................................................................ 2

-. Leaves (the basal and lower ones) 2-pinnatipartite ........................................................................................................ 4

2. Involucral bracts of capitula with a broad blackish-brown margin (each margin up to 1/3 wider of the total size of the bract) ........................................................................................................ T. corymbosum subsp. subcorymbosum

-. Involucral bracts of capitula without a broad blackish-brown margin ........................................................................................................ 3

3. Leaf blades glabrous to slightly pubescent ........................................................................................................ T. corymbosum subsp. corymbosum

-. Leaf blades densely pubescent ........................................................................................................ T. corymbosum subsp. cinereum

4. Leaf segments (2^nd order) ovate to lanceolate ........................................................................................................ T. corymbosum subsp. achilleae

-. Leaf segments (2^nd order) linear ........................................................................................................ T. corymbosum subsp. daucifolium

From the corological point of view Tanacetum corymbosum s. l. is a Paleotemperate element, occuring in Europe, Northern Africa and Asia (Heywood, 1976a ; Tela Botanica 2000–; Bartolucci et al., 2018; Greuter, 2006–2009; SANBI, 2012). General distribution areas for each taxa considered in the present paper follow:

(1) subsp. achilleae has a focal point in SW Europe and N Africa occurring in Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, CS Italy (Liguria region, and from Emilia-Romagna to Calabria regions), SE France (departments of Var and Alpes Maritimes), and Spain.

(2) subsp. cinereum occurs in E Europe (Serbia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Greece, Bulgaria), and Turkey.

(3) subsp. daucifolium occurs in Caucasus, and Russia.

(4) subsp. subcorymbosum occurs in CE Europe from Switzerland, Poland, Austria, N Italy (regions Lombardy, Trentino Alto-Adige, and Fruili-Venezia Giulia) to Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Romania, and Ukraine (this subspecies is doubtfully native in SE France, in the department of Var).

Tanacetum corymbosum (L.) Sch. Bip., Tanaceteen: 57 (1844) subsp. corymbosum ≡ Chrysanthemum corymbosum L., Sp. Pl. 2: 890 (1753) [basionym] ≡ C. corymbiferum L., Amoen. Acad. 4: 491 (1759), orth. var. [5] ≡ Pyrethrum corymbosum (L.) Scop., Fl. Carniol (ed. 2) 2: 148 (1772) ≡ P. corymbiferum (L.) S. G. Gmel., Reise Russland 1: 115 (1770–1774) ≡ Leucanthemum corymbosum (L.) Godr. and Gren. in Gren. and Godron, Fl. France 2: 145 (1850).

Lectotype (designated by Humphries in Jarvis & Turland, 1998: 358): Herb. Linn., No. 1012.13, LINN photo!, image available at: http://linnean-online.org/10439/.

= Pyrethrum clusii Tausch, Ind. Pl. Prague: 8, 12 (1821).

Lectotype (designated here): [Icon] “Tanacetum inodorum II” from Clusius (1601: 338) (image available at: http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/14549#page/350/mode/1up).

Tanacetum corymbosum subsp. achilleae (L.) Greuter in Greuter et al., Willdenowia 33: 43 (2003) ≡ Chrysanthemum achilleae L., Syst. Nat., ed. 12, 2: 562 (1767b) [basionym] ≡ Pyrethrum achilleae (L.) DC., Prodr. 6: 57 (1838) ≡ P. corymbosum subsp. achilleae (L.) Nyman, Consp. Fl. Eur.: 372 (1879) ≡ C. corymbosum var. achilleae (L.) Fiori and Paol., Fl. Anal. Ital. [Fiori in Fiori & Béguinot] 3: 244 (1903).

Lectotype (designated here): [Icon] Tab. 29 “Parthenium” from Micheli (1729), image available at: http://bibdigital.rjb.csic.es/ing/Libro.php?Libro=2801&Pagina=287.

= Chrysanthemum italicum L., Mant. Pl.: 116 (1767a).

Lectotype (designated here): “Nº 69 / Parthenium foliis tenuissimis, achill [sic] / caesaris Mich. nov. gen. pag. 34 / t. 29 / Matricaria / s. Chrysant [sic] / P. Arduino”, Herb. Linn., No. 1012.21 (LINN photo!, image available at: http://linnean-online.org/10447/)

= Chrysanthemum tanacetifolium Pourr., Hist. Mém. Acad. Roy. Sci. Toulouse 3: 311 (1788) ≡ Pyrethrum corymbosum subsp. pourretii (Pourr.) Nyman, Consp. Fl. Eur.: 372 (1879).

Neotype (designated here): [France, Occitania] “Chrysanthemum / corymbosum / N. de Montpellier / La Valette / 27.VI.41” (m. unknown) “HERBARIUM MUSEI PARISIENSIS / Herbier E. LICENT (1876-1952) / Tanacetum corymbosum (L.) Sch. Bip. / Montpellier. La Valette / 27.6.1941” (m. unknown) (P 00731963 photo!, image available at : http://mediaphoto.mnhn.fr/media/1441452107028DinFVwf5jJWUufsx.

= Pyrethrum tenuifolium Ten., Fl. Napol. Prodr.: L (1815), nom. illeg. non P. tenuifolium Willd. (1809), Art. 53.1 of the ICN (see McNeill et al., 2012).

Lectotype (designated here): “Pyrethrum tenuifolium Nob. / Me Tenore 1814” (m. unknown) (G 00450834 photo!, specimen on the left, image available at: http://www.ville-ge.ch/musinfo/bd/cjb/chg/adetail.php?id=317570&base=img&lang=en).

Tanacetum corymbosum subsp. cinereum (Griseb.) Grierson in Davis, Fl. Turkey 5: 262 (1975) ≡ Pyrethrum cinereum Griseb., Spic. Fl. Rumel. 2: 202 (1844) [basionym].

Lectotype (designated here): [Macedonia] “Pyrethrum cinereum m. [mihi] 454/ Pyrethrum niveum Lag. / Diff. foliis bipinna / tipartitis lobis obl. [oblongi] / in pascuis lapidosis / pr. Palanka” (m. unknown) “HERBARIUM GOTTINGEN / Comp. / Pyrethrum cinereum Griseb. / Spicil. Fl. Rumel. Bithyn. 2: 202.1846 / Syntypus / leg. FRIEDRICHSTHAL 454” “Tanacetum corymbosum / subsp. cinereum (Gris.) Grierson / LECTOTYPUS / 1986 / rev. B. Voith-Drescher” (GOET 002103 photo!, image available at: http://plants.jstor.org/stable/10.5555/al.ap.specimen.goet002103?searchUri=filter%3Dname%26so%3Dps_group_by_genus_species%2Basc%26Query%3DPyrethrum%2Bcinereum);

Syntypes: Turkey, pr. Bolu, F. Pestalozza s.n. (GOET 002109 photo!); [Macedonia, Palanka] “Nº HRB MUSEI PALAT. VINDOB / Vid Boissier / Friedrichsthal / Palanka / Hb. Maced. 454” (m. unknown) (W 0051161!, image available at: http://jacq.nhm-wien.ac.at/djatoka/jacq-viewer/viewer.html? rft_id=w_0051161& identifiers=w_0051161).

Tanacetum corymbosum subsp. daucifolium (Pers.) Iamonico, comb. et stat. nov. ≡ Pyrethrum daucifolium Pers., Syn. Pl. 2: 462 (1805) [basionym] ≡ Chrysanthemum daucifolium (Pers.) Ledeb., Fl. Ross. (Ledeb.) 1: 549 (1845).

Lectotype (designated by Podlech, 1988: 70): in Caucaso, M. Bieberstein s.n. (L 900.227-31 photo!).

= Pyrethrum tenuifolium Willd., Enum. Pl.: 906 (1809) ≡ P. corymbosum var. tenuifolium (Willd.) Ledeb., Fl. Ross. 2: 552 (1844) ≡ Tanacetum corymbosum var. tenuifolium (Willd.) Briq. and Cavill in Burnat, Fl. Alpes Marit. 6: 125 (1916).

Lectotype (designated by Podlech, 1988: 70): Habitat in Caucaso, C. L. Willdenow (B-Willd. 16219 photo!, image available at: http://ww2.bgbm.org/herbarium/specimen.cfm?SpecimenPK=131011&idThumb=393487&SpecimenSequenz=1&loan=0

− “Tanacetum corymbosum var. tenuifolium” in Podlech, Mitt. Bot. Staatssamml. München 27: 70 (1988), isonym (Art. 6.3 Note 2 of the ICN).

Tanacetum corymbosum subsp. subcorymbosum (Schur) Szafer & Pawłowski, Pl. Polon. Exic., ser. 2, 3: 21 (1936) ≡ Chrysanthemum subcorymbosum Schur, Verh. Mitth. Siebenbürg. Vereins Naturwiss. Hermannstadt 10: 146 (1859) [basionym]

Type: not designated[6].

? = Pyrethrum clusii Fisch. ex Rchb., Fl. Germ. Excurs.: 231–232 (1831), nom. illeg. (Art. 53.1) ≡ Chrysanthemum corymbosum subsp. clusii Dostál, Květena ČSR: 1603 (1950), nom. nov. pro Pyrethrum clusii Rchb. non Tausch (Art. 58.1) ≡ Tanacetum corymbosum subsp. clusii Heywood, Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 71(4): 272 (1976b ), nom. nov. pro Pyrethrum clusii Rchb. non Tausch (Art. 58.1).

Lectotype (designated here): [Icon] “Tanacetum inodorum I” from Clusius (1601: 338) (image available at: http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/14549#page/350/mode/1up).