Proposals for the Paris Congress Source: Taxon, Vol

Proposals for the Paris Congress Source: Taxon, Vol. 3, No. 4 (May, 1954), pp. 123-134 Published by: International Association for Plant Taxonomy (IAPT) Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1217784 . Accessed: 01/03/2014 08:50

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

International Association for Plant Taxonomy (IAPT) is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Taxon.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 212.238.12.29 on Sat, 1 Mar 2014 08:50:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions - 9551 Haenselera Boiss. ex DC. Prodr. 7: Haenselera Lag. Gen. Sp. P,. 13. 1816. 83. 1838. T.: T.: H. granatensisBoiss. ex DC. Rothmalera Font-Quer in Font-Quer et Rothm. Broteria. 9: 151. 1940.

V o t es: In favour of conservation 1; Against conservation 10; Abstention 0.

9594 - Mulgedium Cass. Dict. Sci. Nat. 33: Cicerbita Wallr. Sched. Crit. 433. 1822. 296. 1824. T.: C. alpina (L.) Walr. T.: M. lyratum Cass. [= M. floridanum (L.) DC.].

V o t e s: In favour of conservation 1; Against conservation 9; Abstention 1.

The Secretary of the Subcommittee RODOLFOE. G. PICHI-SERMOLLI

Proposals for the Paris Congress*

Proposal no. 182 etc.; and Rec. 82 C, 82 D, 82 E, 82 F give detailed advice on how to coin Proposed by: Harold St John, Honolulu epithets by latinizing names of men, or women, or Art. 33 geographic names, or how to form compound Add as the second (after words from two or more Greek or Latin paragraph words. All this instruction and is Adiantum capillus-veneris): "Epitl'.ts of counseling or of subdivisions of be good, and should be heeded in the future, but species species may there is needed an article taken from any source whatever, and may stating clearly the full of choice, in the and in even be composed arbitrarily. liberty past the future, of from E x a m e s: koa." coining epithets any p danielis, paysonorum, source, whether non-classic languages or Arg u ment: Actually a botanist has even from an arbitrarilyinvented word. complete liberty of choice in coining new names or epithets. As to generic names this Art. 59 is confirmedby Art.30, "It be taken liberty may Add the following: "If an author publishing from any source whatever, and even be may previous to 1953 did not state a basinym, but in an arbitrarymanner." composed absolutely his published name or epithet was evidently Rec. 30 A then gives good advice on how based the same name or to coin or to latinize names to be upon epithet published previously published in a group considered for new genera. then the second was For of and their sub- synonymous, publication epithets species a new combination and the infered original divisions, there is no Article covering the author'sname is cited enclosed in braces { }. manner of their formation.Sound admonitions are given in Rec. 33 C concerning publishing E x a m p 1 e: Kalmia polifolia Wang, var. epithets that are long, similar, unauthorized, rosmarinifolia{Pursh} Rehder in L. H. Bailey, Cyclop. Am. Hort. 2 : 854, 1900; Rehder, Cult. Trees Shrubs, xii, 525. 1949." *) Proposals 180-181 (see above) and 182- Bibliog. pp. 185 were received after 1 December 1953. Argument: It has long been trouble- They could not be included in the Recueil some to know how to cite the authorities Synoptique and the Section of Nomenclature for a combination for which the second will have to decide whether they will still author did not cite any basinym or reference, be taken into consideration. The proposals blut for which it is perfectly obvious that he 166-175 and 178-179 were formally published was adopting a name or epithet previously at an earlier date, the present publication used for an earlier synonym. gives further documentation. By inference his name is a transfer.If today 123

This content downloaded from 212.238.12.29 on Sat, 1 Mar 2014 08:50:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions we cite it with an original parenthetical secundarium.Diploschistes scruposus (Schreb.) author, we indicate a positive reference that Norm. var. bryophilus (Ehrh.) Miill. Arg. ter. we cannot prove. Rehder (Bibliog. Cult. secundarium receptaculi. Ochrolechia parella Trees Shrubs p. xii, 1949) has proposed that (L.) Mass. ter. secundariumrosodisci." such infered be indicated basinyms by placing Bemerkungen: Die Proposition ist their author's name in square brackets. He in meiner Arbeit 'Uber eine einheitliche has used this device his throughout large Benennung von Bildungsabweichungen bei bibliography here cited. It distinguishes the den Flechten' (Ber. D. Bot. Ges. 67:59-68. infered from the clearly cited basinyms. 1954) naher und im einzelnen brackets are authorized in begriindet However, already praktisch ausgefiihrt worden. Als teras - the code, (Art. 59) for indicating the first auf das Grundwort des Ter- author of a such as zuruckgehend pre-starting-pointname, minus Teratologie - wird das bezeichnet, the genus Polygonum [Tourn.] L., or the was von manchen (!) Autoren durch die species Agaricus elegans [Pers.] Fries. Termini Aberration, Abnormitit, Anomalie, Rehder's use of brackets to indicate a second lusus, Modifikation, kind of is It is that Bildungsabweichung, thing confusing. proposed Monstrositit, pathologischer Fall, status mor- a new or be that a symbol sign used, pair bosus und teratologischer Fall bezeichnet of braces { } be used to enclose the infered wurde. Begriffsdefinition: Terata sind mor- first author's name. phologisch-anatomische Wachstumserschei- nungen, die nicht erblich sind und also nur Art. 79 (3) das einzelne Individuum (praktischnur Teile des Individuums) betreffen und nicht zum Delete the phrase, "with or without the addition of a transcribed With this normalen Entwicklungsgang geh6ren, und symbol." deren Merkmalenicht zu denen die deletion it will read, are geh6ren, "epithets illegitimate, das Taxon zu dem das Indivi- ..... (3) When the umschreiben, they exactly repeat generic. duum name (tautonym)." gehort. Delete from the examples under (3) Proposed by: V. J. Grumman,Berlin. Nasturtium nasturtium-aquaticum. Argument: This extension of the Proposal no. 184 tautonym rule to epithets with transcribed symbols was new in 1950. Such Linnaean Proposalfor the conservationof the generic epithets as nasturtium-aquaticum(L.) Karst. name Garuga Roxburgh (1814) of the have always been legal and accepted. The Burseraceae, versus Katoukalesiam Adanson epithet nasturtium-aquaticumdoes not exactly (1763). duplicate the generic name Nasturtium. It is Garuga Roxburgh, Hort. Bengal 33. 1814; even less similar to the generic name than the Roxburgh, P1. Corom. 3: 5. 1819; Roxburgh, epithets of Gossypium. gossypioides, and Fl. Ind. 2: 400. 1820; DeCandolle, Prodr. 2: Matricaria matricarioides which are given 80. 1825; Endlicher, Gen. plant. 1137. 1839; in the Code as examples of acceptable Blume, Mus. bot. Lugd.-Bat. 1. 15: 227. 1850; epithets, (see Arts 81, 65) or than Samanea Miquel, Fl. Ned. Ind. 1. 2: 654. 1859; saman, or Cajanus caian. As proposed above, Bentham & Hooker, Gen. plant. 1: 323. 1862; the section dealing with transcribed symbols Baillon. Hist. pl. 5: 313. 1874; Hooker, Fl. should be repealed. Then the Art. 79 (3) will Brit. Ind. 1: 528. 1875; Engler in DC, Mon. apply to tautonyms, as stated, and it will not Phan. 4: 4. 1883; Engler in Engler & apply to numerous other epithets that are Prantl, Nat. Pfl. fam. ed. 1. 3(4): 256. 1896 quite different in spelling from the generic and ed. 2. 19a: 416. 1931; Lam. Bull. Jard. names, and hence are not tautonyms. Bot. Buitenz. 3. 12: 325. 1932; Kalkman, Blumea 7 (2): 459. 1953. Proposal no. 183 Type species: Garuga pinnata Rox- New Art. 77 bis burgh, I.c. "Teratologische Fille werden hervorge- Size and area: 4 species in Continen- hoben durch teras in der Abbreviaturter. mit tal South East Asia, Northern and Eastern einem nachfolgenden Namen fur den betref- Malaysia,Northern Australia, Western Pacific. fenden Fall der Abweichung; ein zweiter KatoukalesiamAdanson, Families des Plan- Name kann den ersten Namen unterteilen. tes 2: 510, 531. 1763 (Katou. Kalesiam on Beispiel: Lecanora subfuscata Magn. ter. p. 510). 124

This content downloaded from 212.238.12.29 on Sat, 1 Mar 2014 08:50:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Discussion: When publishing the Proposal no. 166 * the name Katoukalesiam under the heading Holomitrium Endlicher, Genera Plantarum "Genres Adanson the nouveaux", legalized 48. 1836, versus OlomitriuwmBrid., Bryol. vernacular name "Katou-Kalesjam",given by univ. 1: 226. 1826 [See also Taxon 3 (2): 75]. Van Rheede tot Draakenstein, Hort. Ind. Holomitrium Endl. Malabar. 4: 69. t. 33, 1673. Adanson did not Hornschuch, Fl. bras. mention a name. Adopted by: specific 1(2) :17 (1840); C. Miiller, Syn. musc. 1: 349 51 years later Roxburgh based his Garuga (1849); Dozy & Molkenboer, Musc. frond. pinnata on the same figure of the Hortus Arch. Ind. 18 (1854); Dozy & Molkenboer, Malabaricus, without mentioning Adanson's Bryol. jav. 1 :86 (1858); Jaeger & Sauerb., name, which has never been used again. The Gen. spec. m. adumbr. 1 :150 (1871), 2: 761 name Garuga Roxburgh however, has been (1878); Mitten, J. Linn. Soc. Bot. 12:56 generally accepted in all taxonomic and other (1869); C. Miiller, Gen. m. fr. 253 (1901); publications. Brotherus in Engl. - Pr. Nat. Pfl. f. ed. 1. To avoid four new combinationsand altera- 1(3): 320 (1901), ed. 2. 10: 201 (1924); tion of a wellknown into an unknown and Fleischer, Musc. Fl. Buitenz. 1 :129 (1902); unpronounceable name, it is proposed to Bailey, Compreh. Cat. Queensl. P1. 656 (1913); conserve Garuga Roxburgh over its earlier Herzog, Geogr. Moose 84 (1926); Bartram, synonym KatoukalesiamAdanson. Philipp. J. Sc. 68:51 (1939); Bartram, Fieldiana, Bot. 25:59 (1949). Proposed by: C. Kalkman, Rijks- herbarium, Leiden. Number of species: 35 (Brotherus 1924), tropics. Holomi- Proposal no. 185 Type-species (lectotype): trium perichaetiale (Hooker) C. Miiller. Syn. musc. 1: 351. based on Trichostomum for the conservationof the 1849, Proposal generic Musc. exot. 1: t. 73. name Orthothecium Br. eur. see perichaetiale Hooker, (Musci; 1818. also Recueil Synoptique, Paris p. 118). Olomitrium Brid. Adopted by nobody. Nom. cons.: Orthothecium Br. eur. 1851. A r u m e n t: Olonitrium and Holo- 0. ex g Type spec.: rufescens (Brid. Sm.) mitrium are different names in the Rules, Br. eur. as can be concluded from Rec. 82A. Nom. rejic.: Holmgrenia Lindb. in Ofvers. The first name has priority; the latter has K.V.A. Forh. 1862, No. 10 (printed in 1863). been in constant and general use from 1836 Argumentation: Orthothecium Br. and ought to be conserved. eur. is illegitimate because it is a later Proposed by: W. D. Margadant, homonym to the Sterculiaceous genus Ortho- Wageningen. thecium Schott & Endlicher, which was described and validly published in Melet. Proposal no. 167 Bot. 31 with a 0. (1832) single species & therefore introduced Amblyodon Bruch, Schimper Giumbel, Ihotskyanum. Lindberg 10 t. 1. versus This name has been little Bryologia europaea :5, 1841, Holmgrenia. very Palisot de enc. ix used and I think most do not Amblyodum Beauv., Mag. bryologists Ann. 5:323. 1804 Taxon know about it. Grout's Flora of North Ame- [see also 3(2): 75]. Amblyodon Br. & Sch. rica is the only handbook, where I have musc. found the genus called Holmgrenia. For all Adopted by: C. Miiller, Syn. 1 :126 brit. 267 that North American bryologists use the (1849); Wilson, Bryol. (1855); m. eur. ed. 1: 404 ed. wellknown Orthothecium Br. eur. (e.g. Schimper, Syn. (1860), Steere in Polunin: Botany of Canadian E. 2:496 (1876); De Notaris, Epil. bri. it. 440 Arctic 2: 469-470. 1947). (1869); Jaeger & Sauerbeck, Gen. spec. m. Orthothecium Schott & Endlicher now *) The (166-175, 178- seems unanimously sunk under the genus following proposals Helicteres and has been dormant for over 100 179) were published either in Taxon 3(2) or in the Recueil (Paris) or in years. Synoptique both. Since they were received after 1 Dec. In my opinion Orthothecium Br. eur. is a 1953 it was to the docu- sound candidate for conservation. impossible provide mentation together with the formal publica- P r o p o s e d by: 0. MArtensson,Uppsala. tion. See also Taxon 3(2): 75. 1954.

125

This content downloaded from 212.238.12.29 on Sat, 1 Mar 2014 08:50:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions adumbr. 1 :515 (1874), 2:698 (1878); Les- Listed as a nomen rejiciendum in the case quereux & James, Moss. N. Am. 211 (1884); of the conservation of Panus (Fungi), Stock- Limpricht, Rabenh. Krypt. fl. ed. 2, 4(2) : 502 holm Code p. 77, 1952. (1893); Braithwaite, Br. Mossfl. 2 :125 (1895); Palamocladium C Miiller Flora 82: 465, C. Miiller, Gen. musc. fr. 328 (1901); Brothe- nomencl. syn. of Pleuropus Griff.; however, - rus in Engl. Pr. Nat. Pfl. f. ed. 1. 1(3): 627 type-species Pl. neilgheriensis (Mont.) C. M. (1904), ed. 2. 10 :444 (1925); Fleischer, Musci Adopted by: Brotherus, Bot. Fl. Buitenz. 2:494 4: xxviii Engl. (1904). (1923); J. 24:280 (1897); Paris, Index Bryol. ed. 2. Fl. Fenn. 1:343 Monke- Brotherus, (1923); 3:348 (1905). meyer, Rabenh. Krypt. fl. ed. 2. Erg. b. 4: A r u m e n t: [Pers. ex] Gray 570 (1927); Gams, K1. Krypt. fl. Mitteleur. ed. g Pleuropus is for a formal 2. 1 :126 (1948); Richards & Wallace, Trans. rejected Panus, leaving only the use of Br. Bryol. Soc. 1(4) : xviii (1950). objection against Pleuropus Griff., which can be removed by conserving this Number of species: 1, widely name. It has been in constant use from 1908. distributed in the Northern hemisphere. Proposed by: W. D. T e - s e c i e s: dealbatus Margadant, y p p Amblyodon Wageningen. Br. & Sch., I.c., based on Meesia dealbata Hedwig 1801. Proposal no. 169 Amblyodum P. Beauv. Saccogyna Dumortier, Commentationes by: P. Beauv. Prodr. 5me 6me Adopted botan. 113. 1822, versus Lippius Gray, Nat. fam. 33 (1805); P. Beauv., M6m. aeth6ogamie Arrang. Br. P1. 1 :679, 1821, and versus Soc. Linn. Par. 1: 462 (1882). Sykorea Corda, Beitr. Naturgesch. 12 :653 Number of species: in present (1829). circumscription 1. Saccogyna Dum. T y p e - s p e c i e s: Amblyodum dealbatum A d o p t e d by: Endlicher, Gen. P1. 1343 P. Beauv., I.c., based on Meesia dealbata (1839); Gottsche, Lindenb. & Nees, Syn. Hep. Hedwig 1801. 194 (1844); Schiffner, Hepat. Fl. Buitenz. 208 (1900); 3:266 A r g u m e n t: The names Amblyodum Stephani, Spec. Hep. (1908); K. Miiller, Rabenh. Fl. ed. 2. : 853 and Amblyodon are considered different Krypt. 6(1) (1911); Moose 498 names in the Rules, as can be seen by the Herzog, Geogr. (1926); MacVicar, Stud. Handb. Br. ed. 2:255 example (Art. 82) Phoradendron Nutt. vers. Hep. Buch, Evans & Ann. Phoradendrum. The name Amblyodum has (1926); Verdoorn, Bryol. 6:317 (1922), 10: 4 (1938). priority; Amblyodon, however, is widely and only used from 1841 up till now. Therefore, Number of species: 14 (Stephani this name ought to be conserved. 1922), chiefly tropical; when united with Geocalyx Nees (1836) eventually 17. Proposed by: W. D. Margadant, Wageningen. Type-species: Saccogyna viticulosa (L.) Dum., based on Junger.mannia viticulosa Proposal no. 168 L. Sp. pl. 1131, pro parte typica (cit. Griffith, Notulae ad Micheli). Pleuropus plantas I.c. 706. asiaticas 2 :468. 1845 versus Pleuropus [Pers. Lippius Gray ex] Gray, Nat. Arrang. Br. P1. 1: 615. 1821. Adopted by: Carruthers, Journ. of Pleuropus Griff. Bot. 3: 297-302. 1865. s: Adopted by: Brotherus, in Engl.-Pr. Type-specie Lippius viticulosus Nat. Pfl. f. ed. 1. 1(3) :1136 (1908), ed. 2. 11: Gray, l.c. based on Jungermannia viticulosa L. 355 (1925); Fleischer, Musc. Fl. Buitenz. 4: Sykorea Corda. 1.543 (1922); Herzog Geogr. Moose 165 (1926); Adopted by: Corda in Sturm, Fl. Briihl, Rec. Bot. Survey India 13(1) :94 (1931); germ. 2 (19-20): 41 (1833). Bartram, Sc. 68:297 Philipp. J (1939); Type-species: S. viticulosa (L.) Fieldiana Bot. 25: 351 Bartram, (1949). Corda, based on Jungermanniaviticulosa L. Number of species: 15; 1 tropics, Argument: The name into Asia. Lippius Gray extending temperate has been discarded by all authors after 1865 Type-species: Pleuropus fenestratus because of the existence of Lippia L. Sp. pl. Griff. 2:133 (Verbenaceae). However, these names Pleuropus [Pers. ex] Gray. are considered different in the Rules. To

126

This content downloaded from 212.238.12.29 on Sat, 1 Mar 2014 08:50:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions retain this widely used name, Saccogyna T y p e - s p e c i e s: Mannia raddii Opiz Dum. ought to be conserved. I.c., nomenclatural synonym of Grimaldia Proposed by: W. D. Margadant, dichotonla Raddi. Wageningen. CyathophoraGray non P. Beauv. Fl. Oware Benin Afr. 1805. Proposal no. 170 A d o p t e d by: Carruthers, Journ. Bot. Grimaldia Raddi, Opusc. Sc. Bologna 2: 3: 297 (1865). 356. 1818 versus Grimaldia Schrank, Allg. Bot. Type-species: C. angustifolia (L.) Biblioth. 4 :185. 1805 and Mannia (or Opitz Gray, syn. of Marchantiaangustifolia L. Opiz) in Corda, Beitr. Naturgeschichte 12: 646 (1828). Discussion: The two criteria for Grimaldia Raddi. nomina conservanda mentioned in Art. 24 are fulfilled for the name Grimaldia Raddi: Adopted by: Corda, Beitr. Naturg. in general use in the 50 years following their 12:646 (1829); Lindenberg, Flora 16:161 publication (it may be said 100 years: 1833- (1833); Endlicher, Gen. pl. 44 (1836), 1337 1934) and (instead of: or) used in monographs (1839) (error Grimmaldia); Nees, Hep. eur. 4: and important floristic works up to 1890. This 221 (1838); Gottsche; Lindenb. & Nees, Syn. being the case there would have been no Hep. 549 (1846); Rabenhorst, fl. Kryptog. objection conservation before 1930. Sachsen 1: 303 (1863); Schiffner in - against Engl. In this year Grimaldia Schrank was taken Pr. Nat. Pfl. f. 1(3) : 31 (1893); Stephani, Spec. up for a segregate of Cassia L. and Hep. 1:89 (1898); K. Muller, Rabenh. validly the name Mannia afterwards for the genus Kryptog. fl. ed. 2, 6(1) : 259 (1907); Meylan, of Hepaticae. Things could have been left Beitr. fl. Schweiz 6(1): 87 Kryptog. (1924); at that. However, K. Muller Moose 184 Fl. (1940) explicitly Herzog, Geogr. (1926); Zodda, treats Grimaldia Raddi as a nomen conser- It. 4(1): 74 (1934); K. Rabenh. Crypt. Muller, vandum. This is made a here in fl. b. 6.227 proposal Kryptog. Erganz. (1940); Gams, order to reach a decision. If this be K1. fl. Mitteleur. ed. 2. 1 26 proposal Kryptog. :25, the 15 of the of (1948). accepted species segregate Cassia will have to be renamed. Tradition Number of in species: 5, chiefly of 100 years use of the name in Hepaticae the Northern hemisphere. pleads for acceptance. Grimaldia dichotomna Type-species: Proposed by: W. D. Margadant, Raddi a taxonomical of Mar- l.c., synonym Wageningen. chantia androgyna L. Sp. pl. 1138. 1753. Grimaldia Schrank (Leguminosae). Proposal no. 171 A d o pt e d by: Schrank, Denlschr. Ak. Proposal for the conservation of the generic Miinch. 113 (1808); Link, Handb. 2:141 name Conocephalus of the Moraceae: 1964. (1831); Steudel, Nomencl. bot. ed. 2. 1: 707 Conocephalus Blume, Bijdragen Flora Ne- (1840). derlandsch Indie 483. 1825, versus Cono- Commentationes botani- A d o p t e d as a segregate of Cassia L. by: cephalus Dumortier, cae 115. 1822 and versus Britton & Rose in Bailey, Gent. Herb. 2 :203 Conocephalus (1930); Britton & Rose N. Am. Fl. 23:299 Necker, Elementa Botan. 3: 344. 1791 (unitary (1930); Britton & Rose Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sc. name). 35 :187 (1936); Pittier, Cat. Fl. Venez. 1: 375 Conocephalus Blume. (1945). Adopted by: Lindl. Bot. Reg. 14 : t. 1203 Tr6c. Ann. Sc. Nat. Number of species: 15, in the New (1828); 3(8):88 World. (1847); Miq. Ann. Mus. B. Lugd. Bat. 3: 210 Benth. & Hook. Gen. Plant. 3:380 Grinmldia (1.867); Type-species: opifera Hook f. Fl. Br. Ind. 5:545 Schrank. (1883); (1888); Durand, Ind. Gen. Phan. 377 (1888); Engler Mannia Opitz (or Opiz). in Engl. - Pr. Nat. Pfl. f. ed. 1, 3(1): 93 A d o t e d b 37: p y: Wheeler, Bryologist (1889); Warburg, Bot. Jahrb. 18: 189 (1894), 87 & Univ. Wash. Publ. (1934); Frye Clark, transfer of the type-spec. of Poikilospermum Biol. 5: 60 Buch, Evans & (1937); Verdoorn, Zipp. to Conocephalus Blume; C. H. Wright, Ann. 10:8 Chronica Bryol. (1938); Evans, J. Linn. Soc. 26: 471 (1900); Perkins, Frag. Bot. 4: 223-225 (1938). Fl. Philipp. 167 (1905); Barg., Nuov. Giorn. Number of species: 5, in the B. It. n.s. 9:218 (1902); Merrill, Phil. Gov. Northern hemisphere. Lab. Bur. Bull. 27: 80 (1905); Renner, Engl. 127

This content downloaded from 212.238.12.29 on Sat, 1 Mar 2014 08:50:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Bot. Jahrb. 39 :409 (1907); Elmer, Leafl. Phil. after 1753 who used the name listing it Bot. 1:278 (1908); 8:2770 (1915); H. under "Spec. nat. Athrosophytorum" as a Winkler, Engl. Bot. Jahrb. 49:359 (1913), unitary name. According to the Stockholm 57:598 (1922); Merrill, Phil. J. Sc. 9:359 Code, Art. 78(3) it is illegitimate. The next (1914), 18 :51 (1921); Merrill, Enum. Phil. P1. author using the name in the exact spelling 2:70 (1923); S. Moore, Journ. Bot. 63 Suppl.: Conocephalus was Dumortier 1822, again for 112 (1925); Gagnep. Bull. Soc. Bot. France a taxon in Hepaticae, the species C. conicus 73:107 (1926); Ridley, Kew Bull. 1926: 81 clearly to be regarded the type-species. (1926); Furtado, Gard. Bull. Str. Settl. 9 :252 Blume's name in Urticaceae (Moraceae) 1825 (1937). is invalid, unless it is conserved. Number of about 35, The situation in Hepaticae does not afford species: serious this conservation chiefly in S. E. Asia, also in New Guinea. objections against of Conocephalus Blume. Two earlier names suave- Type-species: Conocephalus are available: Conocephalum Wiggers, Prim. olens Blume, I.c. F!. Holsat. 82, 1780 and Raddi, Dum. Fegatella Conocephalus Opusc. sc. Bologna 2: 356, 1818. Now there Adopted: Hiibener, Hep. Germ. 9 is a marked tendency in Hepaticology to use (1834); Bischoff, Nov. Act. Ac. L.-Car. 17: Conocephalum Wigg. However, the descrip- 977 (1835); Schiffner, in Engl.-Pr. Nat. Pfl. tion of this genus clearly excludes Marchantia f. 1(3) :34 (1893); Horikawa, Sci. Rep. conica L., cited as a synonym after the type- Tohoku Imp. Un. Biol. 4: 395 (1929). species Conocephalum trioicum Wigg. If, Number of 2 in the therefore, Conocephalumshould be abandoned species: (as is the of the Northern hemisphere. opinion proposer), Fegatella is the correct name, a perfectly unambiguous T e - s e c i e s: conicus y p p Conocephalus name. If not, Fegatella were worth a proposal Dum. based on Marchantiaconica L. (L.) Sp. for conservation. In each case Conocephalus pl. 1138, Hepaticae. is out of the question for the genus of Hepa- PoikilospermumZipp. ex. Miq. Ann. Mus. ticae. Bat. 1 :203. 1864 is treated a Lugd. as The situation in Phanerogamsis considered taxonomical of synonym Conocephalus Blume to afford no objection conservation Merrill. against by either. Conocephalus Blume has been in A d o p t e d taxonomically different or general use up to 1934, with a few exceptions. doubtful by: Bentham & Hook. Gen. P1. The name Poikilospermum,taken up for it, 3: 389 (1883); Durand, Ind. Gen. Phan. 378 is not invalid; however, it is not the correct (1888); Engler in Engl.-Pr. Nat. Pfl. f. 3(1): name for the taxon of Blume, as two earlier 114 (1889); Dalla Torre & Harms, Gen. Siph. names are available, Conocephala and Coro- 124 (19,07),no. 2002; cephalus. The last name might be due to a.n the first not. one of as correct name for Cono- error; Taking up Adopted these names will mean that a number of new Blume b Contr. Arn. cephalus y: Merrill, combinations should be made. This and the Arb. 8 :48 35 transfers from Cono- (1934), confusion from it can be avoided Bekn. Fl. 6 arising by cephalus Blume; Backer, Java conservation either of or (fam. 129, gen. 15) (1948). Conocephalus Poikilospermum.Conocephalus Blume clearly Number of species: as Conocephalus fulfills the criteria of Art. 24. Blume. Proposed by: W. D. Margadant, - T y p e s p e c i e s: Poikilospermum am- Wageningen. boinense Zipp. & Miq. I.c. Other synonyms available for Conocephalus Proposal no. 172 Blume: CorocephalusD. N. F. Dietrich, Syn. Proposal for the conservationof the generic pl. 1:425, 540, 1839; Conocephala Hasskarl, name Woodsia R. Br. of the Polypodiaceae Catal. Bogor. alt. 78, 1844; Conocephalopsis (see also Taxon 3(2): 76 and Recueil Synop- O. Kuntze, Rev. gen. pl. 3(1) : 136, 1893, nom. tique, Paris p. 119, erroneously listed under prov. These three names are based on Apocynaceae). Conocephalus suaveolens Blume. They are Woodsia Robert Brown (1810) 158 obs. 4 not found adopted anywhere. corr. R. Br. (1815) 173. D i s c u s s i o n: The name Conocephalus T y p u s: Woodsia ilvensis (L.) R. Br. has been used in Moraceae as well as in Die Gattung Woodsia wurde von Robert Hepaticae. Necker 1791 was the first author Brown zuerst in seinem Prodromus Florae

128

This content downloaded from 212.238.12.29 on Sat, 1 Mar 2014 08:50:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Novae Hollandiae, 1 :158 obs. iv. (1810) auf- N o m. c o n s.: Urostachys Hert. Beih. Bot. gestellt, allerdings unter dem Namen Woodia. Centralbl. II, 39 :249. 1922. In seiner Arbeit: "On Woodsia, a new Genus N o m. r e j.: Huperzia Bernh. in Schrad. of Ferns" in Transact. Linn. Soc. London Journ. Bot. (1800) 2 :126. 1801 pt.; Plananthus 11 :170-174 (1815) andert Brown dann den P. Beauv. Prod. Aeth. 99. 1805 pt.; Lepidotis Namen ab in Woodsia, indem er schreibt, dass P. Beauv. Prod. Aeth. 101. 1805 pt.; Stachy- er das neue Genus seinem Freund Joseph gynandrum P. Beauv. Prod. Aeth. 105. 1805 pt. Woods (1776-1864) zu Ehren nenne. Gleich- B e g r ii n d u n g: Huperzia Bemh. ist ein aber verweist Brown auch auf seine zeitig Abspaltungsprodukt der Linn6schen Gattung friihere der sich Diagnose Gattung, schweigt Lycopodium, das zwischen Osanunda und aber fiber den dort stehenden Namen aus. Struthiopteris eingeschachtelt und weitab von Da der Name Woodia wiederum in der der Gattung Lycopodium gestellt wird. Es zweiten des Prodromus Florae Novae Auflage werden keine Species genannt. Die Diagnose Hollandiae, curavit Nees Ab Esenbeck, 1:14/ kann zur Not auf 250 Urostachys-Arten 459 (1827) erscheint, so diirfte es wohl bezogen werden, die iibrigen 150 heutigen sicherer den Namen Woodsia R. Br. sein, Urostachys-Arten kamen in Bernhardis Gat- (1815) 173 dem friiheren Namen gegeniiber tung Lycopodium hinein, die im iibrigen die Woodia R. Br. (1810) 158 obs. iv. ein fur heutigen Arten der Gattungen Lycopodium alle Mal zu schiitzen. und Selaginella umfassen diirfte. Die Diagnose H. P. Fuchs, Basel. Proposed by: ist jedoch so kurz und ungenau, dass die Gattung nicht erkannt werden kann. Jeden- Proposal no. 173 falls stimmt ihre Umgrenzung nicht mit der der for the conservation of the heutigen Gattung Urostachys iiberein. Proposal generic Der Name ist daher ein Nomen name Woodia Schlechter of the Huperzia (1894) Dubium und damit zu verwerfen.- Roth- Asclepediaceae (see also Taxon 3(2): 76 and maler, Pteridoph. Stud. in Rep. 54. 1944, Recueil Synoptique, Paris p. 119). hat den Namen wieder hervorgeholt, ohne Woodia Schlechter apud Engler (1894) 30. jedoch die notwendigen Umtaufungen zu voll- T y p u s : Woodia verruculosa Schlechter ziehen und die von ihm als Familie apud Engler. Urostachydaceae angesehenen Angeharigen bereits von Robert Da der Name Woodia tder Gattung Urostachys konsequenterweise vor- Brown fur eine Polypodiaceengattung Huperziaceae zu benennen. weggenommen worden war, auch wenn dieser Palisot de Beauvois teilt die Linnesche nachher den Namen in Woodsia abanderte Gattung Lycopodium in drei Genera auf, die und auch wenn einem andern englischen jedoch in keiner Weise mit den heutigen Botaniker zu Ehren genannt (John Medley Gattungen Urostachys,Lycopodium und Sela- in Wood (1827--1915), so hatte Schlechter ginella iibereinstimmen. Plananthus enthalt 17 seiner Arlbeit: "Beitrage zur Kenntnis siid- Urostachys- und 3 Lycopodium-Arten,Lepi- afrikanischer Asclepiadaceen", ap. Engler, dotis enthalt 4 Urostachys- und 13 Lycopo- in Bot. Jahrb. 18, Beibl. No. 45: 30 (1894) dium-Arten, Stachygynandrum enthalt 2 diesen Namen nicht verwenden diirfen und Urostachys- und 6 Lycopodium-Arten.Keine der Name miisste nach Art. 74 der rules der drei Gattungen stimmt auch nur entfernt verworfen werden. Es sei jedoch der Name mit der heutigen Gattung Urostachys fiberein. Woodia Schlechter als nomen conservandum Die drei Namen sind daher ebenfalls als vorgeschlagen, da der gleichlautende Gat- Nomina Dubia zu verwerfen. Die drei Gat- tungsname von Brown eigentlich nie in Kom- tungen enthalten samtlich Urostachys- und binationen verwendet wurde, obwohl giiltig Lycopodium-Arten in buntem Durcheinander, die erst publiziert, da Brown Umtaufungen wie folgende drei Beispiele zeigen: in seiner zweiten Arbeit, in welcher er die Aus Linne's Lycopodiuln Carolinianum Cattung Woodsia behandelt, vornahm. macht er auf Seite 108 eine Lepidotis-Art, aus der dieser Art Proposed by: H. P. Fuchs, Basel. Lamarckschen Umtaufung Lycopodium Pinnatum macht er auf Seite 111 cine Plananthus-Art. Proposal no. 174 Lycopodium Gnidioides L. fil. stellt er auf Proposal for the conservation of the generic Seite 110 zu Plananthus, das Synonym Lyco- name Urostachys Herter of the Lycopodia- podium Funiculosum Lam. auf Seite 108 zu ceae (see also Recueil Synoptique, Paris Lepidotis. p. 118). Lycopodium Verticillatum Gmel. stellt er

129

This content downloaded from 212.238.12.29 on Sat, 1 Mar 2014 08:50:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions auf Seite 111 zu Stachygynandrum,auf Seite subsequent writers followed and amplified 112 zu Plananthus (Beides ist Urostachys his concept until the period of 1888 to' 1894 Squarrosus). when Baillon, Kuntze and Fritsch restored Sollte einer dieser konfusen Namen dem Gesneria to its original circumscription. Namen Urostachys vorgezogen werden, so Kuntze, Rev. Gen. P1. 2: 473 (1891), retained wiirden sich iiber 400 Umtaufungen ergeben. Gesneria L. in its broadest sense for a group of West Indian both of the Literatur: Herter, G., Index Lyco- species including Fritsch, in & podiorum, Montevideo. 1949. Daselbst original components. Engler weitere Literatur. Neuere Arbeiten in Revista Prantl, Nat. Pflanzenfam. IV, 3b :183 (1894), Sudamericana de Botanica 1950-53. and Urban, in Symb. Antill. 2:369 (1901), restricted Gesneria to include G. humilis L. Proposed by: G. Herter, Basel. and close allies and referred G. tomnentosato Rhytidophyllum. Unless rejected in favor of Proposal no. 175 Gesnera Mart. under provisions of Article 57, International Code of Botanical Nomen- Proposal for the conservation of (7887) Gesneria L. must be retained for the Rechsteineria Regel (1848) of the Gesneria- clature, ceae versus Gesneria Mart. (1829) non group of species including G. humilis L. and Gesneria L. (1753) nec Gesnera Sw. (1800), another name is required for the genus as circumscribed Martius. Reasons for not Allagophylla Raf. (1837), Megapleilis Raf. by Gesnera Mart. for conservation are (1837), Styrosinia Raf. (1837) and Tulisma proposing discussed with that name in Raf. (1837) (see also Recueil Synoptique, following para- Paris p. 119). graphs. 1 :718 Rechsteineria Regel, Flora 31: 247 (1848) Baillon, Bull. Soc. Linn. Paris (1888), noted the earliest (Apr.) nom. conserv. prop. that Rechsteineria was name that could be to the Brazilian Rev. applied Circumscription: Kuntze, and allied of Gesnera Mart. but he, Gen. P1. 2: 474 and Fritsch, in species (1891) like almost all other students, overlooked Bot. Jahrb. 50:434 (1913). Engler's four prior names of Rafinesque. These names, T y p e s p e c i e s: Rechsteineria allago- Allagophylla, Megapleilis, Stryrosinia and phylla (Mart.) Regel. Tulisma, appeared in 1837 and except for the Size and area: About 75 species first have never been recognized. Post and 18 centered in Brazil and extending northward Kuntze, Lexicon Gen. Phanerog. (1904) to Mexico. accepted Allagophylla and reduced the three names of to in Bull. Soc. remaining Rafinesque Recognition: Baillon, with three later Gen. synonymy along names, Linn. Paris 1: 718 (1888); Kuntze, Rev. Dircaea Decne. 2 :474 in Bot. Corytholoma(Benth.) Decne., Pi. (1891); Fritsch, Engler's and Rechsteineria made no and beibl. 119: 36 Regel. They Jahrb. 50 :434 (1913) 54, combinations and to as Initia Flor. Venez. 646 accept Allagophylla (1916); Knuth, (1928); a name for the on the basis of strict 90 :410 genus Curtis, in Gard. Chron., ser. 3, (1931); would entail the of new in Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 29:127 priority making S6derberg, combinations for all but one species and the (1935); Hjelmqvist, in Bot. Notiser 1937 :295; loss of a more familiar name for a of Pittier, Cat. Fl. Venez. 2 :396 (1947). genus some horticultural importance. Inasmuch as Horticultural importance: A it has been common practice to reject number of species of this genus have long overlooked names of Rafinesque, one of been cultivated, for the most part under the the three later names may be considered name Gesneria or Gesnera. In the Royal Hort. for conservation. Soc. Diet. Gard. 2:886 Chittenden (1951), Of these names, Rechsteineria has priority lists 19 of which a lesser number is species by nine months over Corytholoma and actually in general cultivation today. Dircaea but for reasons to be noted, at least Discussion: In Nov. Gen. & Sp. PI. Corytholomamerits considerationas a nomen 3:27 (1829), Martius applied the name conservandumpropositum. Botll Dircaea and Gesnera (as a corrected form of Gesneria) Corytholoma appeared on the same page to a group of 12 Brazilianspecies and referred of an article by Decaisne and the former the two original Linnaean species, G. humilis was reduced to synonymy of the latter by and G. tomentosa, to the genera Conradia Fritsch in Engler & Prantl, Nat. Pflanzenfam. Mart. and Rhytidophyllum [Rytidophyllum] IV, 3b :181 (1894). Under provisions of Mart. respectively. The great majority of Article 67, International Code of Botanical 130

This content downloaded from 212.238.12.29 on Sat, 1 Mar 2014 08:50:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Nomenclature, Dircaea need not be discussed On the other hand, Rechsteineria has further. priority over Corytholoma. On this basis it A number of arguments may be presented was accepted by Fritsch in his later work and for the conservation of Corytholoma and for has been used by more recent students. All that reason the following detailed information but four species have been formally trans- is provided: ferred to Rechsteineria as opposed to Cory- Corytholoma (Benth.) Decne. in Rev. Hort. tholoma in which about thirty new com- 20:466 (1848) (Dec.). binations will be needed, including one for the Three are Fritsch, in Engler type species. species currently Circumscription: listed in commerce under the name Rech- & Prantl, Nat. Pflanzenfam. IV, 3b :180 steineria. (1894) and Dalla Torre & Harms, Gen. has been more 477, no. 7887 (1904), equivalent in Although Corytholoma Siphonog. in horticultural literature all respects to the current circumscription of widely accepted Rechsteineria. than Reichsteineria, both generic names are used for about an equal number of species The was based Type-species: genus in general commerce and a similar number of on Gesneria sect. Benth. in Plant. Corytholoma species referable to the genus are listed in 230 (1846) which included a Hartweg. single catalogs as species of Gesneria. Siebert & G. Benth. This species, stachydifolia species Voss and Bailey together listed a total of only must stand as of the but has not type genus nine species of primary horticultural interest yet been transferred to Corytholoma. Decaisne while some nineteen were listed und'er discussed those cultivated in only species Gesneria as recently as 1951 by Chittenden. Europe at the time and omitted any direct There seems to be neither sufficient uni- reference to G. stachydifolia. formity of treatment nor sufficient pre- Size and area: As for Rechsteineria. ponderance of horticultural usage to warrant for conservation when Recognition: Fritsch, in Engler & proposing Corytholoma one takes account its lack of and Prantl, Nat. Pflanzenfam. IV, 3b : 180 (1894); into priority the number of new combinations that Siebert & Voss, Vilmorin's Blumengartnerei large would become if it were to be 1:787 (1894); Kuntze, Rev. Gen. P1. 3:240 necessary conserved. (1898); Fritsch, in Bihang till Svensk. Vet. - Akad. Handl. 24, afd. 3, no. 5:19 (1898); Recommendation: A similar dis- Fritsch, in Engler's Bot. Jahrb. 29, beibl. cussion under Gesnera points out reasons for 65:18 (1900); Dalla Torre & Harms, Gen. not conserving that name and following more Siphonog. 477 (1904); Fritsch, in Engler's recent botanical treatments, Rechsteineria is Bot. Jahrb. 37: 497 (1906); Sprague, in Kew pIoposed for conservation. Bull. 1908: 20 and in Bot. Mag. 134: t. 8228 Gesinera Mart., Nov. Gen. & Sp. P1. 3: 27 (1908); Usteri, Flora der Umgebung der Stadt (1829) non Gesneria L., Sp. P1. 2: 612 (1753) Sao Paulo 238 (1911); Lofgren, Man. Fam. and Gen. P1. ed. 5: 267 (1754) nec Gesnera Nat. Phaner. Brazil 485 (1918); Bonstedt, Sw., Fl. Ind. Occ. 2 :1015 (1800). nom. Parey's Blumengirtnerei 2: 401 (1932); Bailey, rejic. prop. Hortus 179 (1930) and Hortus Second 209 Type-species: not designated. (1941); Hoehne, Kuhlmann & Handro, O Size and area: 12 Jardim Botanico de Sao Paulo 595 (1941); Originally species of the Lem6e, Dict. Descr. Gen. P1. Phan. 2:329 Brazil including representatives of all subdivisions of Rech- (1930), 8b : 736 (1943). currently recognized steineria. It will be seen from the above that Cory- tholoma has been accepted in both botanical Recognition: DeCandolle, Prod. 7: and horticultural literature. In its narrowest 526 (1838) pro max. parte; Endlich., Gen. P1. application, equivalent to a section of the 721, n. 4165 (1839); Regel, in Flora 31 :246 genus as interpreted by Fritsch, it includes a (1848); Decne., in Rev. Hort. 20 :465 (1848); large number of species (ca. 23) while Rech- Jacques & Herincq, Man. G6n. des Plantes 2: steineria in a similarly restricted sense applies 564 (1850) pro parte; Hanst., in Linnaea 26: to only two species. At least three species are 203 (1854); Hanst., ex. Mart., Fl. Bras. 8(1): currently listed in commerce in the United 349 (1864); Hanst., in Linnaea 34: 236 & 257 States and Europe under this name. A total (1865); Benth. & Hook. f., Gen. P1. 2:1003 of nine species of primary horticultural (1876); Durand, Ind. Gen. Phan. 302 (1888); interest were listed by Siebert & Voss and Nichols., Ill. Diet. Gard. 2 :65 (1885) pro by Bailey. max. parte; Bellair & St.-Leger, Plant. des 131

This content downloaded from 212.238.12.29 on Sat, 1 Mar 2014 08:50:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Serres 850 (1899); Bailey, Cycl. Amer. Hort. stability of nomenclature in horticulture. 2:641 (1901) (Gesneria); Beddome, in Journ. Allagophylla Raf., Fl. Tellur. 2: 33 (1836) Roy. Hort. Soc. 33: 87 (1908); Bailey, Stand. (1837) as Alagophyla, nom. rejic. prop. Cycl. Hort. 3 :1333 (1915) (Gesneria); Pittier, Type-species: A. Raf. Man. Plant. Usual. Venez. 155 dasyanthes (1926); based on Gesnera Mart. (as Chittenden, Hort. Soc. Diet. Card. 2: allagophylla Roy. Martens). 886 (1951) (Gesneria); Augusto, H. Rio grande Size and area: in Brazil do Sul 383 (1946). Monotypic as Illustrations: About 100. interpreted by Rafinesque. R e c o n i t i o n: Post & Kuntze, Lexicon Discussion: The history of g general Gen. 18 where Gesnera Mart. has been reviewed in Phanerog. (1904) interpreted prior in a broad sense to the discussion under Rechsteineria. Under Article comparable present of Rechsteineria with 57, International Code of Botanical Nomen- circumscription Cory- tholoma, Dircaea, clature, Gesnera Mart. be for Megapleilis, Rechsteineria, might proposed and Tulisma reduced to sectional conservation versus Gesneria L. (Gesnera Sw.). Styrosinia status or synonymy. Martius' concept has been followed by very Discussion: Under Article Inter- many writers and has gained wide acceptance 67, national Code of Botanical botanically and horticulturally. Most of the Nomenclature, the action of Post & Kuntze species now referred to Rechsteineria were presumably makes the of other names originally published as species of Gesneria rejection Rafinesque if is and the or Gesnera, the two names having been used unnecessary Allagophylla rejected is maintained. Al- more or less interchangeably for over a present circumscription this is the century. though earliest name for the genus new combinations for all but one The reasons for retaining Gesneria in the species Would be if it were and Linnaean sense and rejecting Gesnera Mart., necessary accepted an unfamiliar name would one now however, are weighty. Gesneria L., with replace known in and horticulture. upwards of 35 species, has been and is now botany Fl. Tellur. 2:57 accepted in its original sense by Swartz, Prodr. Megapleilis Raf., (1836) 89 (1788) and Fl. Ind. Occ. 2 :1015 (1800) (1837), nom. rejic. prop. (Gesnera); Baillon, in Bull. Soc. Linn. Paris Typ e - s p e cies: M. tuberosa Raf. based 1 :717 (1888); Kuntze. Rev. Gen. P1. 2: 473 on Gesnera bulbosa Ker-Gawl. in & Prantl. Nat. (1891); Fritsch, Engler Size and area: Monotypic in Brazil Pflanzenfam. 3b :183 IV, (1894); Urban, as interpreted by Rafinesque. Symb. Antill. 2:369-383 (1901); Dalla Torre Recognition: 'Reduced to synonymy & Harms, Gen. Siphonog. 477, n. 7891 (1904); of Allagophylla by Post and Kuntze. Flora Ned. West Ind. 366 (1913); Boldingh, Styrosinia Raf., Fl. Tellur. 2:95 (1836) Urban, Symb. Antill. 8: 646 (1921); Britton (1837), nom. rejic. & Wilson, Bot. Porto Rico 2: 204 (1925); prop. S. coccinea Raf. Barker & Dardeau, Flore d'Haiti 343 (1930); Type-species: based on Gesnera Lindl. and G. Morton ex Standley, Flora Costa Rica 1177 aggregata pendu- lina Lindl. which he considered (1938); Moscoso, Cat. Fl. Doming. 588 (1943). synonymous following Hooker in Bot. 54: t. 2725 To reverse the widespread acceptance of Mag. (1826). Gesneria L. during the past 60 years would have adverse and farreaching consequences Size and area: Monotypic in Brazil in floristic work. as interpreted by Rafinesque. In the name Gesneria has horticulture, Recognition: Reduced to synonymy become confused and has been attached to of Allagophylla by Post and Kuntze. species of such genera as Kohleria and Tulisma Raf., Fl. Tellur. 2: 98 (1836) (1837), Smithiantha. It has been supplanted in part nom. rejic. prop. both Rechsteineria und by Corytholoma. T y e - s e c i e s: T. verticillata (Hook.) Inasmuch as few of Gesneria L. p p very species Raf. based on Gesneria verticillata Hook. arc cultivated, and those in botanical primarily Size and area: in Brazil gardens or special collections, abandonment Monotypic of the name as it has been used in horti- as interpreted by Rafinesque. culture and the substitution of one more Recognition: Reduced to synonymy clearly circumscribed would tend to eliminate of Allagophylla by Post and Kuntze. confusion in the naming of species more Proposed by: H. E. Moore, Jr., Bailey widespread in cultivation with eventual Hortorium, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y. 132

This content downloaded from 212.238.12.29 on Sat, 1 Mar 2014 08:50:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Proposal no. 178 Proposal no. 179 Proposici6n de Conservaci6n del genero Proposal for the conservationof the generic Wilbrandia (Cucurbitaceae): 8565, Wilbran- name Lomaria Willd. (1809) of the Poly- dia Silva Manso, Enum. Subs. Catarz. Bras. podiaceae. p. 30, 1836, versus WilbrandiaPresl (Boragina- Lomaria Willd. in Mag. Natf. Freunde ceae), in Oken, Isis 21 :273, 1828 (= Cordia Berlin 3 :160. 1809 nom. gen. prop. L.) (Etiam vide Recueil Synoptique, Paris, Struthiopteris (Haller, Enum. meth. stirp. p. 119). Helv. 132. 1742) Scop. Fl. Cam. 168. 1760 Wilbrandia Silva Manso (Cucurbitaceae): nom. rej. prop. A d o p t a d o p o r: Endlicher, Gen. supl. T y p u s: Lomariaspicant (L.) Desv. (1811). 3: 91. Ann. Sc. Nat. 4a ser. 1843; Naudin, Diskussion: Spaltet man die Gattung 16 :184. Bentham Gen. 1: 1862; y Hooker, Blechnum L. (1753), Spec. pl. ed. 1. 2 :1077 831. in Fl. Bras. 1867; Cogniaux, Martius, sensu lato in zwei Gattungen auf, wie dies in 29. in 6(4): 1878; Cogniaux, DC., Monogr. neuerer Zeit des 6fteren getan wird (cfr. e.g. Phan. 3: 565. Hist. P1. 8 :449. 1881; Baillon, C. Christensen ap. Verdoorn [1938], Man. Pax in u. 1889; y Hoffmann, Engl. Prantl, Pter. 540), so muss der oben genannte Gat- Pflanzenfamilien in 4(5):15. 1889; Cogniaux, tungsname, der allgemein fur den einen Teil Engl., Pflanzenreich 4(275, 1): 69. 1916; der Blechnum L. verwendet Diet. 6 :929. Martinez Gesamtgattung Lem6e, Gen. 1935; wird, auf die Liste der nomina generica Bol. Soc. Bot. 1: 312. 1946. Crovetto, Arg. conservanda gesetzt werden. Der Gattungs- Especie lectotipo: W. hibiscoides namen Blechnum L. mit dem Typus Blechnum S. Manso. orientale L. (1753), Spec. pl. ed. 1. 2 :1077 muss im Sinne auf Distribucion geografica: Sud- eingeschrinkten diejenige am6rica austral. Gruppe von Farnen der Gesamtgattung Blechnum L. werden, deren fertiles Nimero de alrededor angewandt especies: und steriles Laub gleichgestaltet ist. *Der de 15. Lomaria Willd. um- Wilbrandia Presl Gattungsname dagegen (Boraginaceae): fasst all jene Arten von Blechnum L. sensu Adoptado por: Nadie. lato, deren fertiles Laub vom sterilen ver- W. Berl schieden ist. Als Typus der Gattung Lomaria Especie tipo: paniculata Willd. muss Lomaria Desv. an- (= Cordia paniculata Sieb.) spicant (L.) gesehen werden. Die Konservierung des Distribucion geografica: Mar- Namens Lomaria Willd. wird deshalb not- tinica. wendig, well auf demselben Typus wie bei Niimero de especies: una. LomariaWilld. bereits ein halbes Jahrhundert friiher eine worden war, Discusion: Wilbrandia Manso es un Gattung begriindet namlich Scop. Scopoli (1760), de Cucurbitaceas ha sido Struthiopteris genero que aceptado Fl. Cam. 168 entnimmt seinen Gattungsnamen los sin varios de los por autores, excepci6n, aus Haller (1742), Enum. meth. stirp. Helv. cuales se enumeran en la lista anterior, pese 132, d.h. aus demselben Verfasser, aus dem a la existencia de Wilbrandia tiene Presl, que ca. Jahre Willdenow (1809), in ocho aniosde El hecho de fiinfzig spater prioridad. suprimir Mag. Natf. Freunde Berlin 3 :160 seinen, Wilbrandia Manso obligaria a la creaci6n de eine andere nimlich no allerdings Gattung, un nuevo g6nero, ya que tiene ningun Matteuccia Todaro (1866), in Giorn. Sc. Nat. sin6nimo, y a hacer la transferencia de casi Econ. Palermo 1 :235 bezeichnenden Namen una quincena de especies, lo cual, sin entnahm. Endlich kommt noch ein dritter contribuiren nada al progreso de la Botanica, Autor hinzu, der einen, wenn auch nicht solo complicaria la sinonimia, con las dificul- so doch ausserordentlich ahnlichen trae gleichen, tades que 6sto aparejado. Ademas, por Namen, nochmals eine andere nam- el hecho de haber sido utilizado durante mas Gattung, lich Osmunda L. (1753) ed. 1. 2: de cien con las condiciones Spec. pl. afnos, cumple 1099 bezeichnend, verwendet, establecidas en el Art. 24 de las de Struthopteris reglas Bernhardi ap. Schrader (1801), Journ. f. d. nomenclatura. Creo, de consecuencia, que Bot. 2:126. Ueber den Grund dieser ver- WilbrandiaManso debe ser declarado n6mina des Haller'schen conservanda contra Wilbrandia Presl. schiedenartigen Anwendung Namens hat sich bereits Woynar (1913), in Propuesto por: Rauil Martinez Cro- Mitt. Natw. Ver. f. Steierm. 49 :188-191 vetto, Buenos Aires. (1912) ausfiihrlich geiussert. Die bei Haller 133

This content downloaded from 212.238.12.29 on Sat, 1 Mar 2014 08:50:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions (1742), Enum. meth. stirp. Helv. 132 auf- nommen worden war, d.h. die Verwendung gestellte Art, bezw. Gattung umfasst nicht von Struthiopteris (Haller) im Sinne von weniger als vier verschiedene Bestaniteile, Scopoli (1760), Fl. Carn. 168 fur die von niimlich in Bezug auf die fertilen Wedel Blechnum L. sensu stricto abzutrennende Mlatteuccia Struthiopteris Todaro und Loma- Gattung. Wie aus dem zuvor Gesagten jedoch ria spicant (L.) Desv., in Bezug auf die wohl deutlich genug hervorgeht, kann sterilen Blatter aber Dryopteris Filix-mas (L.) Struthiopteris als Gattungsnamen kaum auf- Schott und Thelypteris limbo-sperma (All.) rechterhalten werden, wie er ja auch in seiner Fuchs (- Polypodium Oreopteris Ehrh.). Anwendung auf die, nun Matteuccia Todaro Nach den internationalen Regeln fiir die genannte Gattung verworfen wurde. (cfr. Nomenklatur miisste demzufolge diejenige Taxon 3[2] :70/71). des Haller'schen Namens an- Emendierung Proposed by: H. P. Fuchs, Basel. genommen werden, die am friihesten vorge-

Cnewo and obtain information at the secretariat of the 9Coteo Laboratoire de Phanerogamie, Museum NOMENCLATURE COMMITTEES d'Histoire Naturelle, Rue Cuvier 57, Paris V. On 5 March 1954 M. Leandri from Paris Avis prealables sent in his resignation from the Special Com- The "Avis on the nomenclature mittee for Phanerogamae and Pteridophyta. pr6alables" will be in the Dr P. C. Silva, Department of Botany, proposals published June number of this Taxon. will Ilniversity of Illinois, Urbana, Ill., U.S.A. will year's They include the results of the mail replace the late Prof. O. C. Schmidt as preliminary ballot. Since, in many instances, this number member of the Special Committee for Algae. will arrive late in at its destinations, A special meeting of the Committee for June members of the Nomenclature section will Urgent Nomenclatural Needs will be convened receive an extra arrival in Paris. during the nomenclature sessions of the Paris copy upon is however, to his Congress in order to discuss the problem of Everyone requested, bring own of the "Recueil the typification of Amaryllis belladonna L. copy Synoptique" The attention of all members of the nomen- CARLOS ALBERTO O'DONELL clature committees is drawn to the circum- (1912--1954) stance that the sessions of the Section Nomen- Carlos A. O'Donell was born at Buenos clature of the Paris Congress will be held Aires, 11 October 1912, and died before the Congress itself from Monday 28 Argentina, in Tucuman, 14 1954. June (9 a.m.) until Thursday 1 1954. Argentina, February July A student in his earlier Committee meetings can be convened pharmaceutical years, during Dr O'Donell cum laude at the that period. graduated of Buenos Aires in 1937. In the PARIS CONGRESS University same year he became a member of the Section Nomenclature scientific staff of the Instituto Miguel Lillo The sessions of the Nomenclature Section in Tucuman and during these last years of of the Paris Congress will be held from his life he was in charge of the section Monday 28 June (9 a.m.) to 1 Juli 1954. All Phanerogams and curator of the herbarium. persons entitled to a vote in the sessions He was an Associate Professor of general received a copy of the "Recueil Synoptique botany at the Faculty of biochemistry, des Propositions" in the course of April 1954. chemistry and pharmacy. Dr O'Donell was They were urgently requested to return their secretary of the journal Lilloa and occupied voting papers by airmail and before 15 May many honorary positions in the Argentine 1954 to the office of the Rapporteur-General, botanical world. The International Bureau for Plant Taxonomy He played an important part in the building and Nomenclature, Lange Nieuwstraat 106, up of the herbarium of the Instituto Miguel Utrecht, Netherlands. Lillo to its present shape by means of his All persons planning to attend the sessions active policy of exchange and his web of are invited to collect their voting cards at collectors all over Latin America. Notwith- the Bureau of Nomenclature of the Congress. standing cruel physical suffering O'Donell The exact address of this Bureau will be continued to work as long as possible in communicated a few weeks before the order to reach, with a truly heroic effort. Congress but it will always be possible to at least part of his scientific goals. 134

This content downloaded from 212.238.12.29 on Sat, 1 Mar 2014 08:50:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions