Lectotypification of 16 names in Rubus subg. Idaeobatus, 12 names in R. subg. Malachobatus, and 1 name in R. subg. Chamaebatus (Rosaceae) Author Idrees, Muhammad 0000-0001-7031-7247 College of Life Science, Neijiang Normal University, Neijiang 641000, Sichuan, China & idreesbiotech @ yahoo. com; https: // orcid. org / 0000 - 0001 - 7031 - 7247 idreesbiotech@yahoo.com Author Zhang, Zhiyong 0000-0003-4533-1789 College of Life Science, Neijiang Normal University, Neijiang 641000, Sichuan, China & zhangzyong 219 @ 126. com; https: // orcid. org / 0000 - 0003 - 4533 - 1789 text Phytotaxa 2022 2022-08-19 559 1 13 24 http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.559.1.2 journal article 124888 10.11646/phytotaxa.559.1.2 007d42e0-65f9-4fa1-84f7-e3013a33d03d 1179-3163 7009287 25. Rubus malifolius Focke (1890 : t. 1947) Type ( lectotype designated here ):— CHINA . Hupeh [ Hubei ], District of Chienshi , A. Henry 5794 (barcode K000737665!, isolectotypes: BM000622260!, GH00040667!, LE 01015291 !, US00097945!) . [Image available at http://specimens.kew.org/herbarium/K000737665]. Note :—In the protologue, Focke (1890) cited one collection: “Hab. China : Prov. Hupeh, District of Chienshi, Dr. A. Henry 5794 ” as the type, without indicating the herbaria where the specimen was deposited. We located five duplicate sheets, deposited in BM, GH, K, LE , and US . According to Arts. 9.6, and 40 Note 1 ( Turland et al . 2018 ), none of them can be treated as holotype , but all these collections should be regarded as syntypes ; hence, a lectotype may be designated (Art. 9.17 of ICN ). It is well known that Focke’ original type materials were deposited in A, B, BORD, BR, BREM, HAN, K, LE , W . Thus, we designate here the sheet kept in K (barcode 000737665) as the lectotype (Art. 9.12). The selected sheet is a complete and well-preserved specimen that displays all the morphological diagnostic features in agreement with the protologue.