Home Rubiaceae
Home
Name Search
Generic List
Nomenclature Notes on Rubiaceae
Rubiaceae Morphology
Discussion and Comments
*Anotis DC. Search in The Plant ListSearch in IPNISearch in Australian Plant Name IndexSearch in Index Nominum Genericorum (ING)Search in NYBG Virtual HerbariumSearch in JSTOR Plant ScienceSearch in SEINetSearch in African Plants Database at Geneva Botanical GardenAfrican Plants, Senckenberg Photo GallerySearch in Flora do Brasil 2020Search in Reflora - Virtual HerbariumSearch in Living Collections Decrease font Increase font Restore font
 

Published In: Prodromus Systematis Naturalis Regni Vegetabilis 4: 431. 1830. (Prodr.) Name publication detailView in BotanicusView in Biodiversity Heritage Library
 

 

Project Name Data (Last Modified On 5/13/2020)
Acceptance : Synonym
Project Data     (Last Modified On 5/13/2020)
Notes:

The identity of Anotis has been confused, due in large part to the general confusion over the systematics of the "Hedyotis group" of Rubiaceae but also due to nomenclatural irregularities. Anotis was published to include, basically, most of the American species of the "Hedyotis Group" of genera, and later expanded to include Asian species as well. It included one previously published name, Panetos Raf., with that group treated as the third section of Anotis.This earlier name should have been adopted for this group under current nomenclatural rules, however, so Candolle's name Anotis is an illegitmate superfluous name and the type of his genus is the type of the previous name, Panetos rotundifolia (Art. 52.1, 52.2).

Anotis was reviewed in detail both taxonomically and in light of palynological characters by Lewis (1966). His note there that Anotis was an illegitimate replacement name for Panetos has often been overlooked. He clarified the identities of all the taxa named in Anotis, but also produced some nomenclatural irregularities due to the taxonomic and nomenclatural procedures in use at that time. 

Candolle separated three sections of Anotis. The first, Anotis sect. Ereicoctis, corresponds to today's Arcytophyllum and was later treated as a separate genus by Kuntze; because this was listed first, it has often been assumed inaccurately that Anotis corresponds to Arcytophyllum. Anotis sect. Amphiotis included one species from warm temperate North America, now treated as Houstonia lanceolataAnotis sect. Panetos included three small, often creeping species from North and South America; Anotis rotundifolia, its type, is now treated as Houstonia procumbens

Anotis was then treated very differently by Hooker in the Genera Plantarum (1973): he used this name for 20 Asian species plus one American one, the poorly known Hedyotis serpens that was included by Candolle in his Anotis sect. Panetos. Hooker thus completely changed the application of Anotis; he included the Arcytophyllum species of Anotis sect. Ereicoctis in Mallostoma.

Lewis (1966) noted this and subsequent changes in the circumscrription of the genus, and the problem of genus circumscription and identity in general in the "Hedyotis Group". He separated most of the Asian species included there by Hooker in a new genus, Neanotis. Lewis clarified the identities of Candolle's Anotis species, but some of these are now treated differently than in his citations due to later changes in genus circumscriptions in this group. 

Author: C.M. Taylor
The content of this web page was last revised on 13 May 2020.
Taylor web page: http://www.mobot.org/MOBOT/Research/curators/taylor.shtml

References:

 
 
© 2024 Missouri Botanical Garden - 4344 Shaw Boulevard - Saint Louis, Missouri 63110