Solanum furcatum
2n=6x=72 (Stebbins and Paddock 1949; Edmonds 1982, 1983), but see 2n=2x=24 in Randell and Symon (1976; possible voucher identification issue).
Solanum furcatum is native to Pacific coastal South America and locally introduced and naturalised in the states of Victoria and Tasmania in Australia and in the western United States of America (California and Oregon, see Bohs 2017); Although the disjunct distribution of the species appears peculiar, other taxa native to the Pacific coast of South America have become established in similar areas with Mediterranean climates (e.g., Nicotiana acuminata (Graham) Hook.). In boht native and introduced ranges it grows in open places and disturbed areas, along roadsides, and field margins; between 0 - 3,000 m elevation in its native range, in Australia collected in coastal habitats along the foreshore or along creeks near sea level.
Old World: Australia: broad nightshade (Walsh and Entwisle 1999).
Preliminary conservation status (IUCN 2016). Solanum furcatum, while only rarely encountered in the Old World, is common in its native range (Barboza et al. 2013; Särkinen et al. 2015b), and can be assessed as LC (Least Concern; Table 7 in Särkinen et al. 2018) on a worldwide basis. In its native range in South America it has an EOO of 1,809,315 km2, and is not of conservation concern.
from Sarkinen et al. 2018 (https://phytokeys.pensoft.net/article/21991/): Solanum furcatum can be distinguished from all other Old World species based on its branched inflorescences, anthers 2.3-3.3 mm long, and flowers where styles are exserted up to 3.0 mm beyond anthers. It has been sparingly introduced into areas of Mediterranean habitat (e.g., Australia and California) but appears not to spread. It is potentially confusable with S. nigrum, but is distinguished from it in the characters mentioned above, and in its 6-14 stone cells per berry. Its subglobose buds are also distinct from the more ellipsoid buds of S. nigrum and S. villosum, but this character can be hard to see in herbarium specimens.
The name S. douglasii Dunal has been misapplied to some specimens of S. furcatum in Australia (e.g., Symon 1981; Walsh and Entwisle 1999). Careful assessment of the specimens cited in these publications and material labelled as S. douglasii confirms that the specimens from Victoria represent S. furcatum. Solanum douglasii is native to Mexico and southern USA and is known only from cultivation in the Old World.
Colla (1835) described S. deltoideum from material grown in Italy from seeds sent by C. Bertero from Chile as “Solanum scabrum”. Of the two specimens from Colla’s herbarium in TO, only one is labelled as originally identified as “S. scabrum” and this is the sheet we select as the lectotype of S. deltoideum.
Solanum furcatum was lectotypifed by Edmonds’ (1972) citation of “Type: Peru, Dombey s.n. (P, holotype!)”; Barboza et al. (2013) selected one of the two sheets in P (P00335357) as the second step lectotype.
The infraspecific taxa of S. furcatum described by Nees van Esenbeck (1843) were all based on specimens collected by F. Meyen (fide protologue) during his 1830-1832 voyage on the Princess Louise to Chile and Peru; we have found no duplicates of these, and so have chosen not to lectotypify these names until further in-depth searches have been conducted. These may belong to S. arequipense Bitter described from Arequipa which was previously considered as synonym of S. furcatum but is distinct based on morphology, ecology and molecular evidence.
Solanum rancaguense was lectotypified by Edmonds (1972) by citation of a P specimen of Bertero 633 as “holotype”, but because there are several sheets of this collection number preserved in P this is correctable to lectotype, and we select a particular sheet (P00384088) of the five there as a second step lectotype.
We have selected lectotypes in SGO for the taxa described by Philippi here considered synonyms of S. furcatum following the advice of Smith and Figuereido (2011). None of the protologues specify herbaria, and although Philippi worked in Chile, we have followed McNeill (2014) in lectotypifying these names.