Group:
Dicot
Rank:
species
Kind:
Name with Basionym (New Combination)
Herbarium Placement:
Bayer, 2nd, A, 147
Authors:
Published In:
Prodromus Systematis Naturalis Regni Vegetabilis 15(2): 1073. 1866. (
Prodr.)
Annotation:
From Roy Gereau, email, 26 April 2011: "It's not a question of Latin arguments or nomenclatural priority, it’s simply a matter of orthography, so it falls under ICBN Art. 60:
60.1. The original spelling of a name or epithet is to be retained, except for the correction of typographical or orthographical errors and the standardizations imposed by Art. 60.5 (u/v or i/j used interchangeably), 60.6 (diacritical signs and ligatures), 60.8 (compounding forms), 60.9 (hyphens), 60.10 (apostrophes), 60.11 (terminations; see also Art. 32.7
), and 60.12 (fungal epithets).
None of the standardizations mentioned apply here, so we have to retain the original spelling carthagenensis unless we can conclude that it’s a typographical or orthographical error. I see from Botanicus that Jacquin did indeed spell it this way and that Müller Argoviensis accepted that spelling, so that was clearly the intent of the original and combining authors. Stearn gives “Carthagena” as the Latinized form of Cartagena and “carthaginensis” as its adjectival form, so perhaps “carthaginensis” is philologically preferable, but so what? I don’t see an exact parallel to this case in Art. 60.1 Ex. 1 (examples in which the original spelling is to be retained), but in general it’s close enough, and I say that we don’t have reasonable grounds to call this a typographical or orthographical error, so the epithet should be returned to its original spelling, not changed as on TROPICOS and IPNI."
Nomenclature Reason:
orth. var.
-
Basionym:
-
!Jatropha carthagenensis Jacq.
-
Nomenclaturally Correct Name:
-
!Manihot carthagenensis (Jacq.) Müll. Arg.
Higher Taxa:
Taxonomy Browser
Concept:
details
Other names with
!Jatropha carthagenensis Jacq. as basionym:
-
!Manihot carthagenensis (Jacq.) Müll. Arg.
Projects:
VPA
Keywords:
VPA