J. Jpn. Bot. 88: 36–45 (2013)

A Nomenclatural Review on the Infrageneric Classifications of ()

a, b c Jin Murata *, Hidetoshi Nagamasu and Hiroyoshi Ohashi

a Botanical Gardens, Graduate School of Science, The University of Tokyo, 3-7-1, Hakusan, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 112-0001 JAPAN; b The Kyoto University Museum, Kyoto University, Kyoto, 606-8501 JAPAN; c Herbarium, Botanical Garden, Tohoku University, Sendai, 980-0862 JAPAN *Corresponding author: [email protected]

(Accepted on September 5, 2012)

Infrageneric classification systems of the genus Arisaema have been diverse in opinions by the different authors. The inconsistency is considered to be partly because of nomenclatural problems including typification. To make the point of discussion clear the history of the nomenclature of the infrageneric taxa of Arisaema is thoroughly reviewed. In reference to the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and (ICN, Melbourne Code) the original publications of infrageneric taxa were critically checked and the typification was reconsidered. Based on the results a revision for the most recent infrageneric classification system of Arisaema by Murata (2011) is made enumerating correct names and synonyms. Arisaema sect. Odorata J. Murata is validly published. Several taxa are newly lectotypified.

Key words: Arisaema, classification, lectotype, nomenclature, , unranked taxa.

The genus Arisaema is one of the major the typification, was reconsidered. The taxa in genera of Araceae consisting of about 180 bold face indicate that they were legitimately . Infrageneric systems of the genus published at that time. are, however, diverse in opinions showing considerable disagreements in recent floras, Discussion revisions and/or monographs (Li 1979, Murata 1) Martius (1831): When Arisaema Mart. 1984, Gusman and Gusman 2006, Li et al. 2010, was described, the type species was not Murata 2011). The inconsistency is considered designated. Three species, Arum nepenthoides to be partly because of different circumscriptions Wall., Arum costatum Wall. and Arum speciosum of the infrageneric taxa and of nomenclatural Wall. were referred, but these species were problems including typification. To make the not validly combined with Arisaema, because point of discussion clear we review the history Martius did not associates these epithets of Arum of the nomenclature of the infrageneric taxa of with Arisaema (ICN, Art. 35.2). Arisaema. In reference to the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants 2) Miquel (1856): In this publication (ICN, Melbourne Code) the original publications Arisaema subgenus Koryphephore Miq. based of infrageneric taxa were critically checked and on a single species, A. ornatum Miq., was

—36— February 2013 Journal of Japanese Botany Vol. 88 No.1 37 legitimately published. Indica Schott (‘Indo-arabica’ as an alternative name) 3) Schott (1860): In his “Prodromus [Sect. Radiatisecta] [unranked] (*§§a.) Aroidearum” Schott (1860) gave an infrageneric Indica Schott classification ofArisaema, which is summarized [Sect. Pedatisecta] [unranked] (**§§a.) in Table 1. The genus was divided into four Indo-arabica Schott sections, Trisecta, Pedatisecta, Radiatisecta [Sect. Radiatisecta] [unranked] (*§a.) and Peltatisecta, but these sections were not Indo-arabica Schott (‘Indica’ as an validly published because they accompanied alternative name) neither diagnosis nor description. Under these [Sect. Pedatisecta] [unranked] (**§b.) invalid sectional names he placed words that Japonica Schott (Type: A. thunbergii indicated geographical regions partly with rank Blume) denoting term “subsect.” and partly without. We [Sect. Pedatisecta] [unranked] (**§§b.) regard the words in the latter case as unranked Japonica Schott infrageneric names based on ICN Arts. 21.1 and [Sect. Trisecta] [unranked] (d.) Sundaica 37.3. All the subsectional and unranked epithets, Schott excepting [unranked] Indica or [unranked] Indo- [Sect. Pedatisecta] [unranked] (*a.) arabica in sect. Radiatisecta, were followed by Sundaica Schott a description so that they were validly published as summarized below (also in Table 1). These 4) Pfeiffer (1873): In his “Nomenclator [unranked] Indica and [unranked] Indo-arabica botanicus” Pfeiffer (1873) cited a single species were not followed by a description but they Arum speciosum Wall. (= Arisaema speciosum were also validly published because they were (Wall.) Mart. ex Schott), which is considered specified by the diagnostic key characters. As he to be lectotypification for the genus Arisaema used the same epithets that indicate geographical (Staffleu & Cowan 1983, Rye & Wilson 1999). range in each of the sections, he created some homonyms as summarized below. Schott’s 5) Engler (1879): In A. L. P. P. de Candolle’s unranked taxa, as well as subsections, have “Monographiae Phanerogamarum” Engler never been adopted in any later publications and (1879) compiled the part of Araceae including priority and types have not been considered for Arisaema. In this treatment Engler divided them. Arisaema into three groups, “A. Trisecta”, “B. Subsect. Himalaiensia Schott Pedatisecta” and “C. Radiatisecta”. These Subsect. Japonica Schott epithets were each followed by a short diagnosis. [Sect. Radiatisecta] [unranked] (*§§b.) Although these epithets came after Schott’s Abyssinica Schott (1860) undescribed sectional names, as was [Sect. Trisecta] [unranked] (c.) Boreali- indicated in the parenthesis after the epithets, americana Schott Engler did not intend to recognize them at the [Sect. Pedatisecta] [unranked] (**§c.) rank of section, because he used literal “section” Boreali-americana Schott to indicate the rank of section in another [Sect. Pedatisecta] [unranked] (**§§c.) parts of the same publication. Consequently Boreali-americana Schott (Type: A. [unranked] Pedatisecta Engl. and [unranked] quinatum Schott) Radiatisecta Engl. were validly published. [Sect. Pedatisecta] [unranked] (**§a.) However [unranked] Trisecta Engl. was not Indica Schott validly published as it included A. speciosum, [Sect. Radiatisecta] [unranked] (*§a.) the lectotype of the genus previously selected by 38 植物研究雑誌 第 88 巻 第 1 号 2013 年 2 月

quinatum japonicum, serratum dracontium, macrospathum flavum abbreviatum, thunbergii atrorubens (= brasilianum , atrorubens hastatum ) laminatum, roxburghii commutatum, decipiens, filiforme curvatum, helleborifolium, neglectum, steudelii, tortuosum praecox, ringens Species included mirabile, propinquum, speciosum, mirabile, propinquum, stracheyanum, utile, verrucosum costatum, dorosum, eminens, costatum, dorosum, hookerianum, intermedium,

Schott,

nom. nud. sect. Radiatisecta Schott,

sect. Pedatisecta nom. nud.

Invalid taxa Schott, sect. Trisecta nom. nud.

Boreali-americana and the validity of taxa of validity the and [unranked] Boreali-americana Schott

[unranked] Japonica Schott [unranked] Boreali-americana Schott Schott Indo-arabica [unranked]

[unranked] Japonica Schott [unranked] Sundaica Schott [unranked] Indica Schott [unranked] [unranked] Schott [unranked] Sundaica Schott subsect. Japonica Schott Taxa validly published Taxa subsect. Himalaiensia Schott # with D. with D. without D. Prodromus Aroidearum Prodromus s s ʼ with D. with D. without D. * segmenta omnia ...... Sectio III. Radiatisecta Appendix sigmoidea ...... §. c. Boreali-Americana a. Indo-Arabica with D. b. Japonica §§. Appendix recta ...... §§. c. Boreali-Americana Sectio II. Pedatisecta a. Sundaica without D. a. Indica with D. b. Japonica d. Sundaica without D. * segmenta omnia ...... ** segmenta omnia ...... Appendix sigmoidea ...... §. c. Boreali-Americana Arrangement in the text Trisecta Sectio I. b. Japonica a. Himalaiensia without D.

42 41 39 40 38 34 34 35 38 33 32 27 31 27 Page s # epithets (in italic) in Schott in italic) (in epithets with D. with with D. with with D. with D. with D. with Arisaema Conspectu with D. with D. with D. with Japonica Himalaiensia Sundaica Borealia Americana Borealia * segmenta omnia ...... Sectio III. Radiatisecta Appendix sigmoidea ...... §. c. Boreali-Americana a. Indo-Arabica with D. b. Japonica §§. Appendix recta ...... §§. c. Boreali-Americana d. d. Sectio II. Pedatisecta a. Sundaica with D. a. Indica with D. b. Japonica * segmenta omnia ...... ** segmenta omnia ...... Appendix sigmoidea ...... §. c. c. Sectio I. Trisecta Sectio I. Subsect. a. Arrangementsectionum et subsectionum in b. Subsect. Subsect. b.

26 26 26 26 26 25 25 25 26 26 25 25 25 25 Page Table 1. Arrangement of of Arrangement 1. Table February 2013 Journal of Japanese Botany Vol. 88 No.1 39

ennaphyllum, schimperianum, nepenthoides, echinatum, cornutum, ochraceum affine, concinnum, leschenaultii consanguineum, cummingii, erubescens, tatarinowii, vituperatum Species included murrayi, jaquemontii, exile, bottae, wightii alienatum, fraternum, huegelii, papillosum gracile, griffithii boscii, amplissimum, heterophyllum, cochinchinense, stictopodum pluckenctii, latisectum, ornatum Species (= Arisaema spp.) heptaphyllum, pentaphyllum, pumilum pentaphyllum, heptaphyllum, Schott, sect. Peltatisecta nom. nud.

Invalid taxa

Schott

[unranked] Abyssinica Taxa validly published Taxa [unranked] Indica and [unranked] Indo-arabica (as alternative names) [unranked] Indica Schott

with D. * segmenta omnia ...... Foliis trisectis. Foliis pedatisectis.

Sectio III. Peltatisecta Species recognoscendae Appendix stipitata ...... §...... incrassata haud Appendix §§...... ex cylindroidea Appendix §§§. Arrangement in the text a. Indo-Arabica without D. a. Indica with D. b. Abyssinica §§. Appendix abbreviata ...... §§. † † Miq. Subgen. Coryphephore 220). Ind. Bat. III. P. (Flor. cognita Vix Dubia Excludenda

48 48 50 52 54 42 44 46 55 56 57 59 60 Page s Conspectu with D. * segmenta omnia ...... Sectio IV. Peltatisecta Sectio IV. Indica, Luzonense, Sinense. Appendix stipitata ...... §...... incrassata haud Appendix §§. .... ex cylindroidea Appendix §§§. Arrangement in sectionum et subsectionum a. Indica without D. a. Indica with D. b. Abyssinica §§. Appendix abbreviata ...... §§. with D. = description, without description

27 26 26 26

# Page Table 1. Continued 1. Table 40 植物研究雑誌 第 88 巻 第 1 号 2013 年 2 月

Pfeiffer (1873). with A. ringens Schott) [unranked] Tenuipistillata Engl. 6) Engler (1920): In his monographic [unranked] Tortuosa Engl. (Type: A. treatments in the series of “Das Pflanzenreich” tortuosum (Wall.) Schott, Art. 22.6) Engler (1920) divided Arisaema into 15 groups [unranked] Wallichiana Engl. (Type: A. without referring to Schott (1860) or his own wallichianum Hook. f., Art. 22.6) previous publications (Engler 1879). The name of the groups are prefixed with a section sign 7) Nakai (1929): In enumerating Japanese “§”. In the studies of Arisaema this mark was and Korean species of Arisaema, Nakai (1929) frequently considered to indicate the rank used Engler’s (1920) two unranked taxa at the of section (as in Hara 1971) but Engler used rank of section. Consequently, two sections literal “section” to indicate the rank of section Tortuosa (Engl.) Nakai and Ringentia (Engl.) in other parts of the same publication such as Nakai were established. in Stylochiton, Theriophonum and Typhonium. Consequently, Engler (1920) created following 8) Nakai (1950): In this paper Nakai (1950) 15 unranked infrageneric taxa (Art. 37.5). Most published the following three new sections of the taxa are automatically typified with the including a new combination in the genus constituent species which the epithets of the Arisaema and also three new genera that were unranked taxa were identical with or derived separated from Arisaema. Sect. Pistillata (Engl.) from (Art. 22.6) or they were monotypic (Art. Nakai was legitimately combined at the rank of 40.3). [unranked] Speciosa Engl. was illegitimate section. He designated the type for each taxon. as it included A. speciosum, the lectotype of the Sect. Colocasiarum Nakai (type: A. genus. [unranked] Attenuata, Lunata, Pistillata ternatipartitum Makino) and Tenuipistillata awaited to be lectotypified. Sect. Pistillata (Engl.) Nakai (lectotypified [unranked] Attenuata Engl. with A. serratum (Thunb.) Schott) [unranked] Auriculata Engl. (Type: A. Sect. Sinarisaema Nakai (type: A. auriculatum Buchet, Art. 22.6) formosanum Hayata) [unranked] Barbata Engl. (Type: A. Gen. Flagellarisaema Nakai (type: barbatum Buchet, Art. 22.6) Flagellarisaema thunbergii (Blume) Nakai ≡ [unranked] Clavata Engl. (Type: A. Arisaema thunbergii Blume) clavatum Buchet, Art. 22.6) Gen. Heteroarisaema Nakai (type: [unranked] Decipientia Engl. (monotypic Heteroarisaema heterophyllum (Blume) with A. decipiens Schott) Nakai ≡ Arisaema heterophyllum Blume) [unranked] Fimbriata Engl. (Type: A. Gen. Ringentiarum Nakai (type: fimbriatum Masters, Art. 22.6) Ringentiarum ringens (Schott) Nakai ≡ [unranked] Franchetiana Engl. (Type: Arisaema ringens Schott) A. franchetianum Engl., Art. 22.6) [unranked] Lunata Engl. 9) Hara (1971): In this revision of the [unranked] Nepenthoidea Engl. Eastern Himalayan species of Arisaema Hara (monotypic with A. nepenthoides (Wall.) (1971) made a contemporary classification of Schott) the genus. He created only a single infrageneric [unranked] Pistillata Engl. taxon, Arisaema sect. Exappendiculata H. [[unranked] Speciosa Engl., nom. illegit. Hara (monotypic with A. exappendiculatum H. Type: A. speciosum (Wall.) Schott] Hara), but made several new combinations as [unranked] Ringentia Engl. (monotypic mentioned below. Two new combinations, sect. February 2013 Journal of Japanese Botany Vol. 88 No.1 41

Flagellarisaema (Nakai) H. Hara and sect. For Arisaema sect. Pistillata (Engl.) Dochafa (Schott) H. Hara (monotypic with A. Nakai (as sect. Pistillata Engl.) that had been flavum (Forssk.) Schott) were positively made. typified with A. serratum by Nakai (1950), Hara (1971) regarded Engler’s (1920) Hara (1971) re-chose A. triphyllum (L.) Schott unranked infrageneric taxa as sections and as lectotype with a comment “judging from lectotypified them whether or not they were Engler’s treatment it is more proper to regard cited as correct names or synonyms. This A. triphyllum as the lectotype”. But this cannot typification is effective for the Engler’s unranked be considered a proper reason to change the taxa. As most of these names are followed by lectotype. a full and direct reference given to their author Hara designated A. nepenthoides as the type and the place of valid publication they are species of the genus Arisaema but this is against considered to be published as new combinations the preceding typification by Pfeiffer (1873) (Art 41.6). The combinations are valid when with A. speciosum. Hara (1971) recognized they are used as correct names, whereas the “sect. Trisecta” (as sect. Trisecta Schott, p.p. combinations are invalid in cases where they (a. Himalaiensia) ) as a correct name but this is are used as synonyms (Art. 36.1). Hara also invalid because Hara selected A. speciosum as designated types and lectotypes by underlining the type of this taxon. the proposed type species in the diagram that showed relationships among the sections (Hara 10) Li (1979): In this publication, “Flora 1971, page 324). But lectotypification with Reipublicae Popularis Sinicae”, Li basically A. fargesii Buchet for [unranked] Auriculata adopted Hara’s (1971) classification system. Engl. (as sect. Auriculata), which had been As in the case of Hara (1971), following three automatically typified with A. auriculatum, sections each with a full and direct reference should be cancelled. given to the author and place of valid publication Consequently the following two accepted are considered to be established as new names were validly combined to the rank of combinations. section: Sect. Fimbriata (Engl.) H. Li Sect. Franchetiana (Engl.) H. Hara Sect. Attenuata (Engl.) H. Li Sect. Tenuipistillata (Engl.) H. Hara Sect. Decipientia (Engl.) H. Li (lectotypified withA. jacquemontii Blume) Incidental combinations for the infrageneric 11) Ohashi and Murata (1980): In this study unranked taxa Clavata, Lunata, Nepenthoidea, on the taxonomy of Japanese Arisaema the Speciosa and Wallichiana to the rank of section unranked infrageneric taxon Clavata Engl. was were not valid because they were cited as recognized as a correct name at the rank of synonyms. section. Then a new combination sect. Clavata Sections Attenuata Engl., Decipientia Engl. (Engl.) H. Ohashi & J. Murata was made and Fimbriata Engl. were used only in the legitimately. diagram and sect. Barbata Engl. was mentioned only in the text. As they did not accompany 12) Murata (1984): In this study the full and direct references given to their authors circumscription of the infrageneric taxa and the places of valid publication these names of Arisaema was thoroughly revised but were not validly combined at the rank of nomenclatural changes were few. New section. Designation of lectotype for [unranked] combinations subsect. Flagellarisaema (Nakai) Attenuata Engl. with A. laminatum Blume was J. Murata and subsect. Exappendiculata (H. effective. Hara) J. Murata were made. 42 植物研究雑誌 第 88 巻 第 1 号 2013 年 2 月

13) Murata (1991): In this study [unranked] for sect. Attenuata in the sense of Gusman & Pedatisecta Engl. was used at the rank of section Gusman (2006), which is to be validly described with full and direct reference given to the author below. and place of valid publication and lectotypified with A. japonicum Blume. This name was used Taxonomic treatment for sect. Arisaema in the sense of previous Arisaema Mart., Flora 14: 459 (1831). treatments such as Hara (1971), Li (1979) and Lectotype (designated by Pfeiffer 1873): Murata (1984). Arisaema speciosum (Wall.) Mart. ex Schott. Sect. Pedatisecta (Engl.) J. Murata = A. [sect. Pedatisecta] [unranked] (*a.) (lectotypified withA. japonicum Blume) Sundaica Schott, Prodr. Syst. Aroid.: 25 & 34 (1860). Type: Not designated. 14) Gusman & Gusman (2002): In this = A. [sect. Radiatisecta] [unranked] (*§a.) monograph the authors basically adopted Indo-arabica Schott, Prodr. Syst. Aroid.: 42, Murata’s system proposed in Murata (1984) and in p. 26 ‘Indica’ as an alternative name (1860). emended in Murata (1991), but they modified Type: Not designated. the system to some extent. They used sections Anomala Gusman & L. Gusman and Lobata 1. Sect. Tenuipistillata (Engl.) H. Hara, Gusman & L. Gusman, but these were nomina Univ. Mus. Univ. Tokyo Bull. 2: 346 (1971). ≡ nuda. As they used “sect. Nepenthoidea Engl.” A. [unranked] Tenuipistillata Engl., Pflanzenr. without reference this name was still unranked. (Engler) IV 23F (Heft 73): 195 (1920). Lectotype (designated by Hara 1971): A. 15) Hetterscheid & Gusman (2003): jacquemontii Blume. Sect. Anomala Gusman & L. Gusman was = A. [sect. Radiatisecta] [unranked] (*§§b.) legitimately published with A. anomalum Hemsl. Abyssinica Schott, Prodr. Syst. Aroid.: 26 & 46 as the type. (1860). Type: Not designated.

16) Gusman & Gusman (2006): This edition 2. Sect. Dochafa (Schott) H. Hara, Univ. stands on more mature nomenclatural framework Mus. Univ. Tokyo Bull. 2: 344 (1971). ≡ than the previous edition (Gusman and Gusman Dochafa Schott, Syn. Aroid.: 24 (1856). Type: 2002). A monotypic section Lobata Gusman & Dochafa flava Schott (≡ A. flavum (Forssk.) L. Gusman was legitimately published. They Schott). typified sect. Pistillata with A. triphyllum but = A. [sect. Pedatisecta] [unranked] (**§§a.) this is against the previous designation with A. Indo-arabica Schott, Prodr. Syst. Aroid.: 26 & serratum by Nakai (1929). They typified sect. 39 (1860). Type: Not designated. Attenuata with A. prazeri Hook. f. but this is also against the previous designation with A. 3. Sect. Tortuosa (Engl.) Nakai, Bot. Mag. laminatum by Hara (1971). (Tokyo) 43: 524 (1929). ≡ A. [unranked] Tortuosa Engl., Pflanzenr. (Engler) IV 23F Heft( 17) Murata (2011): This monograph of 73): 185 (1920). Type: A. tortuosum (Wall.) Japanese Arisaema whose text is written Schott. in Japanese accompanies an infrageneric = A. [sect. Pedatisecta] [unranked] (**§a.) classification of the whole genus. A new Indica Schott, Prodr. Syst. Aroid.: 26 & 35 combination sect. Nepenthoidea (Engl.) (1860). Type: Not designated. Gusman & L. Gusman ex J. Murata was = A. [sect. Radiatisecta] [unranked] (*§a.) made. Sect. Odorata J. Murata was proposed Indica Schott, Prodr. Syst. Aroid.: 26, in p. 42 February 2013 Journal of Japanese Botany Vol. 88 No.1 43

‘Indo-arabica’ as an alternative name (1860). 6. Sect. Odorata J. Murata [Arisaema in Type: Not designated. Japan: 58 (2011), nom. nud. descr. jap.] ex J. Murata, sect. nov. 4. Sect. Arisaema Tuberous winter-dormant herbs. Phyllotaxis ≡ [A. sect. Trisecta Schott, Prodr. Syst. Aroid.: quincuncial. Pseudostem less than half of 25 & 27 (1860) nom. nud. ≡ A. [unranked] total height. Leaves trifoliolate or pedate to Trisecta Engl., Monogr. Phan. (A. DC. & C. radiate. Spadix female or monoecious when DC.) 2: 534 (1879), nom. inval. superfl. (by mature; appendix short or long whip-like, including the lectotype of the genus selected by usually depending from the mouth of spathe. Pfeiffer 1873) (Art. 22.2). Lectotype (designated Female flowers bottle-shaped or rarely spindle by Hara 1971) : A. speciosum (Wall.) Mart. ex shaped (in A. saxatile). Infructescence upright. Schott]. Chromosome numbers 2n = 16, 22, 24, 26, or = A. subsect. Himalaiensia Schott, Prodr. 48. Syst. Aroid.: 25 & 27 (1860). Lectotype (here Type (here designated): A. odoratum J. designated) : Arisaema speciosum (Wall.) Mart. Murata & S. G. Wu. ex Schott. Species included: A. aridum H. Li, A. = [A. sect. Speciosa Engl., Pflanzenr. (Engler) lidaense J. Murata & S. G. Wu, A. mairei H. IV 23F (Heft 73): 151 & 193 (1920), nom. inval. Lév. (= A. wumengense H. Li), A. odoratum superfl.]. Type: A. speciosum (Wall.) Mart. ex J. Murata & S. G. Wu, A. prazeri Hook. f., Schott. A. quinquelobatum H. Li & J. Murata, A. = A. [unranked] Wallichiana Engl., Pflanzenr. saxatile Buchet (= A. bathycoleum Buchet), A. (Engler) IV 23F (Heft 73): 151 & 211 (1920). yunnanese Buchet. Type: A. wallichianum Hook.f. Distribution: SW China and adjacent = A. [unranked] Lunata Engl., Pflanzenr. subtropical regions. (Engler) IV 23F (Heft 73): 151 & 215 (1920). Lectotype (here designated) : A. costatum 7. Sect. Anomala Gusman & L. Gusman, (Wall.) Schott. Aroideana 26: 40 (2003). Type: A. anomalum Hemsl. 5. Sect. Attenuata (Engl.) H. Li, Fl. Reipubl. = A. subg. Koryphephore Miq., Fl. Nederl. Popul. Sin. 13(2): 127 (1979). ≡ A. [unranked] Ind. 3(2): 220 (1856); Schott, Prodr. Syst. Aroid. Attenuata Engl., Pflanzenr. (Engler) IV 23F 56 (1860), ‘Coryphephore’. Type: A. ornatum (Heft 73): 155 (1920). Lectotype (designated by Miq. Hara 1971) : A. laminatum Blume. = A. [sect. Trisecta] [unranked] (d.) Sundaica 8. Sect. Flagellarisaema (Nakai) H. Hara, Schott, Prodr. Syst. Aroid.: 25 & 33 (1860). Univ. Mus. Univ. Tokyo Bull. 2: 326 (1971). ≡ Type: Not designated. Flagellarisaema Nakai, J. Jpn. Bot. 25: 6 (1950). = A. sect. Fimbriata (Engl.) H. Li, Fl. Type: Flagellarisaema thunbergii (Blume) Reipubl. Popul. Sin. 13(2): 123 (1979). ≡ Nakai (≡ A. thunbergii Blume). A. [unranked] Fimbriata Engl., Pflanzenr. = A. (sect. Pedatisecta) [unranked] (**§b.) (Engler) IV 23F (Heft 73): 151 (1920). Type: A. Japonica Schott, Prodr. Syst. Aroid.: 26 & 38 fimbriatum Mast. (1860). Type: A. thunbergii Blume. = A. [unranked] Barbata Engl., Pflanzenr. = A. [sect. Pedatisecta] [unranked] (**§c.) (Engler) IV 23F (Heft 73): 150 &162 (1920). Boleari-americana Schott, Prodr. Syst. Aroid.: Type: A. barbatum Buchet. 26 & 38 (1860). Type: Not designated. = Muricauda Small, Fl. S.E. U.S.: 227 44 植物研究雑誌 第 88 巻 第 1 号 2013 年 2 月

(1903). Type: Muricauda dracontium (L.) Small Aroid.: 27 & 48 (1860), nom. nud.] (≡ Arum dracontium L.). = A. sect. Exappendiculata H. Hara, Univ. = Heteroarisaema Nakai in J. Jpn. Bot. 25: Mus. Univ. Tokyo Bull. 2: 353 (1971). ≡ A. 6 (1950). Type: Heteroarisaema heterophyllum subsect. Exappendiculata (H. Hara) J. Murata, J. (Blume) Nakai (≡ A. heterophyllum Blume). Fac. Sci. Univ. Tokyo. Sect. III 13: 475 (1984). Type: A. exappendiculatum H. Hara. 9. Sect. Clavata (Engl.) H. Ohashi & J. Murata, J. Fac. Sci. Univ. Tokyo. Sect. III 12: 14. Sect. Pistillata (Engl.) Nakai, Bot. 283 (1980). ≡ A. [unranked] Clavata Engl., Mag. (Tokyo) 43: 525 (1929). ≡ A. [unranked] Pflanzenr. (Engler) IV 23F (Heft 73): 171 Pistillata Engl., Pflanzenr. (Engler) IV 23F (Heft (1920). Type: A. clavatum Engl. 73): 199 (1920). Lectotype (designated by Nakai 1950): A. serratum (Thunb.) Schott. 10. Sect. Decipientia (Engl.) H. Li, Fl. = [A. sect. Pedatisecta Schott, Prodr. Syst. Reipubl. Popul. Sin. 13(2): 166 (1979). ≡ Aroid.: 34 (1860), nom. nud.] ≡ A. [unranked] A. [unranked] Decipientia Engl., Pflanzenr. Pedatisecta Engl., Monogr. Phan. (A. DC. & (Engler) IV 23F (Heft 73): 195 (1920). Type: A. C. DC.) 2: 541 (1879). ≡ A. sect. Pedatisecta decipiens Schott. (Engl.) J. Murata, Kew Bull. 46: 127 (1991). Lectotype (designated by Murata 1991): A. 11. Sect. Nepenthoidea (Engl.) Gusman & japonicum Blume. L. Gusman [The Genus Arisaema: 61 (2002), = A. subsect. Japonica Schott, Prodr. Syst. comb. nud.] ex J. Murata, Arisaema in Japan: Aroid.: 25 & 31 (1860). Lectotype (here 63 (2011). ≡ A. [unranked] Nepenthoidea Engl., designated): Arisaema ringens Schott. Pflanzenr. (Engler) IV 23F (Heft 73): 208 = A. [unranked] Ringentia Engl., Pflanzenr. (1920). Type: A. nepenthoides (Wall.) Schott. (Engler) IV 23F (Heft 73): 209 (1920). ≡ A. = A. [unranked] Auriculata Engl., Pflanzenr. sect. Ringentia (Engl.) Nakai, Bot. Mag. (Tokyo) (Engler) IV 23F (Heft 73): 163 (1920). Type: A. 43: 526 (1929). Type: A. ringens Schott. auriculatum Buchet. = Ringentiarum Nakai, J. Jpn. Bot. 25: 6 (1950). Type: A. ringens Schott. 12. Sect. Franchetiana (Engl.) H. Hara, = A. [sect. Trisecta] [unranked] (c.) Boreali- Univ. Mus. Univ. Tokyo Bull. 2: 326 (1971). ≡ americana Schott, Prodr. Syst. Aroid.: 25 A. [unranked] Franchetiana Engl., Pflanzenr. ‘Borealia Americana’ & 32 (1860), p.p. Type (Engler) IV 23F (Heft 73): 184 (1920). Type: A. (here designated): A. atrorubens Blume. franchetianum Engl. = A. [sect. Pedatisecta] [unranked] (**§§b.) Japonica Schott, Prodr. Syst. Aroid.: 26 & 40 13. Sect. Sinarisaema Nakai, J. Jpn. Bot. (1860). Type: Not designated. 25(1): 6 (1950). Type: A. formosanum Hayata. = A. [sect. Pedatisecta][unranked] (**§§c.) = [A. sect. Radiatisecta Schott, Prodr. Syst. Boreari-americana Schott, Prodr. Syst. Aroid.: Aroid.: 26 & 42 (1860), nom. nud.] ≡ A. 26 & 41 (1860). Type: A. quinatum Schott. [unranked] Radiatisecta Engl., Monogr. Phan. = A. sect. Colocasiarum Nakai, J. Jpn. Bot. 25: (A. DC. & C. DC.) 2: 550 (1879). Type: Not 6 (1950). Type: A. ternatipartitum Makino. designated. = A. sect. Lobata Gusman & L. Gusman = A. [sect. Radiatisecta] [unranked] (*§§a.) [The Genus Arisaema: 215 (2002), nom. nud.] Indica Schott, Prodr. Syst. Aroid.: 26 & 44 ex Gusman & L. Gusman, The Genus Arisaema, (1860). Type: Not designated. ed. 2: 260 (259) (2006). Type: A. lobatum Engl. = [A. sect. Peltatisecta Schott, Prodr. Syst. February 2013 Journal of Japanese Botany Vol. 88 No.1 45

Literature cited Miquel F. A. W. 1856. Flora van Nederlandsch Indië, 3(2). Engler A. 1879. Arisaema. In: Candolle A. L. P. P. de, C. G. van der Post, Amsterdam. Monographiae Phanerogamarum 2: 533–560. Murata J. 1984. An attempt at an infrageneric classification Engler A. 1920. Araceae-Aroideae, Araceae-Pistioideae. of the genus Arisaema (Araceae). J. Fac. Sci. Univ. Das Pflanzenreich IV-23F (Heft 73): 1–274. Tokyo. Sect. III, 13: 431–482. Gusman G. and Gusman L. 2002. The Genus Arisaema. A. Murata J. 1991. Systematic position of Arisaema R. G. Gantner Verlag, Ruggell. nepenthoides (Wall.) Mart. and A. wattii Hook. f. Gusman G. and Gusman L. 2006. The Genus Arisaema, (Araceae). Kew Bull. 46: 119–128. second revised and updated edition. A. R. G. Gantner Murata J. 2011. Arisaema in Japan. Hokuryukan, Tokyo (in Verlag, Ruggell. Japanese). Hara H. 1971. A revision of the Eastern Himalayan species Nakai T. 1929. Conspectus specierum Arisaematis Japono- of the genus Arisaema. In: Hara H. (ed.), Flora of Koreanarum. Bot. Mag. (Tokyo) 43: 524–540. Eastern Himalaya 2 (Univ. Mus. Univ. Tokyo Bull. 2): Nakai T. 1950. Classes, ordines, familiae, subfamiliae, 321–354. tribus, genera nova quae attinent ad plantas Koreanas Hetterscheid W. L. A. and Gusman G. 2003. Three new (supplimentum). J. Jpn. Bot. 25: 5–7. Arisaema species from Thailand and some taxonomic/ Ohashi H. and Murata J. 1980. Taxonomy of the Japanese nomenclatural notes. Aroideana 26: 33–41. Arisaema (Araceae). J. Fac. Sci. Univ. Tokyo. Sect. III, Li H. 1979. Arisaema. In: Wu C.Y. and Li H. (eds.), Flora 12: 281–336. Reipublicae Popularis Sinicae 13(2): 116–194 (in Pfeiffer L. G. K. 1873. Nomenclator botanicus. Sumptibus Chinese). T. Fischeri, Cassellis. Li H., Zhu G. H. and Murata J. 2010. Arisaema. In: Wu Rye B. L. and Wilson P. G. 1999. Publication details for Z. H., Raven P. H. and Hong D.Y. (eds.), Flora of Pfeiffer’s Nomenclator botanicus. Taxon 48: 793–795. China 23: 43–69. Science Press, Beijing and Missouri Schott H. W. 1860. Prodromus Systematis Aroidearum. Botanical Garden Press, St. Louis. Vienna. Martius C. F. P. von 1831. Ueber die Art der Befruchtung Staffleu F. A. and Cowan R. 1983. Taxonomic Literature, bei einigen Aroideen und üeber die Characteristik ed. 2. IV: P–Sak. Scheltema & Holkema, Bohn. mehrerer Gattungen dieser Familie. Flora 14: 449–464.

a b c 邑田 仁 ，永益英敏 ，大橋広好 ：テンナンショウ属 （サトイモ科）の属内分類の再検討 Martius (1831) により設立されたテンナンショウ属 のために，国際藻類・菌類・植物命名規約（メルボルン （サトイモ科）には現在約 180 種が知られている．この 規約）に基づいて，原著の学名の有効性を検討し，タイ 属について Schott (1860) のモノグラフ以来、いくつも プを確定するとともに，その結果に基づいて最新の分類 の分類体系が発表されてきたが，属内分類群の扱いはま 体系 (Murata 2011) に対する正名と異名を定めた．また， だ定まったとはいえない．その原因は，分類群の生物学 Murata (2011) で提案されたが未記載であったニオイマ 的なまとまりに諸説があることにもよるが，どの学名を ムシグサ節 Arisaema sect. Odorata J. Murata を正式に 適用すべきかの判断が研究者によって異なることにも 記載した． よると考えられる．そこで本論文では，テンナンショウ （a 東京大学大学院理学系研究科附属植物園， 属の分類の歴史を見直すことにより，学名の適用につい b 京都大学総合博物館， ての議論に客観的な根拠を与えることを目的とした．そ c 東北大学植物園津田記念館）