Abstract
In a recently-published work it was demonstrated that the previous circumscription of Erechtites valerianifolius encompassed two distinct species, thus calling for the re-establishment of E. petiolatus. However, in that work it was overlooked that Senecio albiflorus, a replacement name for Cacalia prenanthoides, was published three months before E. petiolatus. In the present work we make the necessary amendments to the taxonomic treatment of this species of Erechtites due to this nomenclatural oversight. We also discuss the issue of the provenance of the type of C. prenanthoides.