StudiesThe genus Clarisiain RuizMoraceaeet Pavon andII.its synonyms, with a discussion of the generic name by J. Lanjouw (Utrecht). (With Tab. IX—XI) de las absoluta- Las descripciones exactas plantas son necesarias el verdadero conocimiento de mente para ellas* los y caracteres tornados de sus partes; son el medio para distinguirlas bien. (Pedro Ahat in Mem. Acad. Soc. Med. Sevilla, X (*79*) P■ 4*8.) 1. Clarisia Ruiz et Pavon and Clarisia Abat. The Moraceous Clarisia described Ruiz genus was by et Pavon in in ”Florae et Chilensis Prodromus” 1794 Peruvianae, 128. This be if it is not p. generic name must rejected, placed on list of Nomina Generica in there had the Conservanda, as 1792 been of this Pedro Abat already published a genus name by the of recommended for the list of Nomina In list genera placing on Conservanda Bulletin Generica (Kew 1935 pp. 341-544). Mr. Weatherby mentions Clarisia R. et P. I quote here what he L. writes on Clarisia Abat: „Placed by Sprengel, Gen. Pl. ed. I. in under Anredera 9, 202 (1830) synonymy Juss. (1789). He has apparently been followed by all subsequent authors who have noticed the name at all. I have not seen Abat’s publication. If the date is correctly given by Dalla Torre & Harms and Clarisia R. & P. must be the genus adequately published, if be retained. far be from conserved it is to ”As as can judged literature botanists have Abat’s is no seen publication. This be Abat’s in not to wondered, as paper was published a scarcely spread periodical. I have tried to obtain this periodical in the London and but I could hold of it. Netherlands, in Paris nowhere get Thanks to the kind assistance of Prof. Cuatrecasas of Ma- 255 drid could receive of this and of I a copy paper a photograph the plate from the original in the library at Sevilla. Abat’s de la Real Sociedad de Medi- paper was published in ”Memorias Demas Ciencias de Tomo Decimo. cina, y Sevilla, 1792. pp. 418- 438”. The name of the periodical was cited by Sprengel as ”Acta etc.” The word ’Acta’ does not occur in the completely copied title of the periodical which I received from Prof. Cua- trecasas, so apparently Sprengel must have been mistaken. The publication is a communication made by Pedro Abat, del Real Botánico de Socio Correspondiente Jardín Madrid, y the title of the Botanico, to the Society mentioned in periodical. his with of the of Abat begins paper a statement necessity in the of which is of great exactness decription plants course this still true and especially for the plants we are dealing with in Therefore I have started with the paper. my present paper same words Abat did In the first of as nearly 150 years ago. part his Abat of the literature with paper, gives an account dealing his plant. He quotes the words of Hans Sloane on Fagopyrum scandens and concludes from Sl oane’s description that it is the he demonstrated the Then same species as (Abat) before Society. he writes extensively on Linné’s Polygonum scandens L. His conclusion from the description of Linnaeus is that Polygonum L. oane’s scandens is not Sl Fagopyrum scandens, though Linné the latter under his scandens. placed in synonymy Polygonum Sloane’s plant of which he shew a living specimen, is ac- L. cording to him quite different from Polygonum scandens from herbarium which he had brought a specimen. It is surprising that Abat concluded from the few lines in Linnaeus’ Species Plantarum on this; plant, that Polygonum scandens L .must be true As be from the a Polygonum. may seen quotation of A b a t’s conclusion, he thought it inconceivable that botanist would take his for I a plant a Polygonum. However, with Abat that the and the can not agree description plate Sloane Isl. Barba- given by Hans (A voyage to the Madera, dos, Nieves, S. Christophers and Jamaica with the Nat. Hist. vol. tab. clear that I. 1707. p. 138, 90 fig. 1) are so one can recognise the without doubt. He is to be admired much the plant any so for his I think he far in more doing so, but, has gone too his criticism of Linnaeus, while it can be understood from the rather of this Sloane that the poor description plant by great Swede failed to identify it. As will be discussed below, it could be the proved that L i n n a e u s’ plant really belongs to genus Polygonum. Going through the literature one observes that those 256 botanists working on Polygonaceae always have treated Polygo- whilst those num scandens L. as a true Polygonum, working on Basellaceae cite this in with scandens species synonymy Anredera (L.) Moq. I have found only one recent publication where Poly- L. cited mixture of viz. gonum scandens was as a two species American vol. Percy Wilson, who in North Flora 21. part 4 cites under Anredera vesicaria Gaertn. (1932) p. 337, (Lam.) (= Anredera scandens Moq.) Polygonum scandens L. in part. Wilson does not mention to what species belongs the remaining scandens. have cited: part of Linne’s Polygonum He ought to scandens Sloane. Polygonum L. quoad syn. Fagopyrum scandens Fawcett R 1 Only in the Flora of Jamaica by and e n d e (Vol. there reference the of III. part i. 1914. p. 174) is a to type Linnaeus. In the paragraph on the literature of Anredera scandens (L.) Moq. they write: ’’Type in Herb. Linn.” But, there are no further statements that they have compared S1 o a n e’s plant, which with L i e’s Mr. T 1 is cited, n n type. a y o r (London) that L scandens the kindly informed me i n n e’s Polygonum in Linnean Herbarium is totally different from S 1 o a n e’s specimen the herbarium of the Nat. Hist. Mus. and be in appears to a that clinode Mich, true Polygonum. Mr. Taylor states P. appears to be a good match of the Linnean type. This tallies exactly with the conception given in the American Floras, where P. scandens L. is described as closely related to P. clinode Mich. u’s Next A b a t discussed J u s s i e publication of Anredera. He out that noted well that this pointed Jussieu very plant the fact that belongs to a new genus, though owing to Jussieu had heiBarium material only, his description is rather incomplete. Therefore b of this with A a t gave a very good description plant the Clarisia a plate (see Tab. IX) under name Abat, citing In Anredera synonymy Fagopyrum Sloane, Polygonum L., Juss. b ends with which I will cite here A a t’s paper a conclusion, critical L at length as there are some remarkable lines on i n n e’s he stated there he the work and especially as why gave genus a new name. CONCLUSION. de Vistos los caracteres genericos las partes de la fructificación de esta el orden planta, resulta su colocación en la clase PENTANDRIA, y en _ MONOGYNIA del metodo sexual de Lineo. Falta ahora su <Jenominacion generica. Hasta la impresión del Genera plantarum del mencionado Jussieu fué supuesta esta planta por una especie del género POLYGONUM, pero habiendo examinado las partes de su fructificación, aunque en esqueleto, la determinó este dandola a conocer con el nombre de por un género nuevo, 257 A. ANRBDERA: y en efecto habiendo hecho el un examen mas prolixo de la misma de la planta, por la proporción tenerla viva, y comparación com- petente, conviene con el sabio botanico frances, en que es un género distincto. A la verdad botanico atrevera determinar POLYGONUM ningun se a por nuestra planta, la quäl consta de caliz y corola, hallandose solamente en aquella unu u otro: el caliz de la nuestra consta de dos hojitas aquilladas, la carina de cada ad vierte membrana la y en una se una que circuye; quando en el género POLYGONUM el caliz es de una pieza hendida en cinco ni partes, sin quilla membrana alguna: caracteres todos que denotan diferente bastantes una extructura singulär y para distinguir las plantas mencionades. El anade el que se quiera cerciorar, Sr. Abat, con quan menos motivos ha Lineo Genera formado algunos generos nuevos, registre su plan- vivas tarum haciendo el examen de las plantas de sus especies, y hallara el de diferentes de valió el sabio numero notas singuläres y que se algunas veces Sueco. Sien<k> pues tan distintos muchos de los caracteres de las partes de la fructificación de debe nuestra planta, se determinar precisamente por genero Lineo: nuevo, segun los preceptos del citado con arreglo a los quales no se conforma el A. el nombre de deriva con ANREDERA; porque no se este -de los idiomas griego o latino, precepto tan recomendado en el aforismo advierte el Sr. sino del 229, pero no viniendo, como Abat, verbo espanol termino enredar, sincopado el enredadera en enredera, mudada la en en an, la segun pronunciación francesa, de que resultó el nombre genérico adoptado Jussieu; juzga el A. despreciable el tal nombre, a denominar por , por y pasa fundado motiva la su planta con otra expresión, en poderoso, que hagan sin al subsistente, que quede arbitrio de ninguno mudarla en lo sucesivo. dia literarios Son notorios en el los méritos del Dr. D. Miguel Bamades, el adelantaraientos la hijo, a quien por su singular aplicación y en Botanica, concedió S.M.