Home —— Notes


any name

correct name



all names

correct names


of genera

of species




Nomenclature of the Malpighiaceae

William R. Anderson [last revised 2013]

CoverageDisagreement with other referencesOrthographyAuthors of names

Rank of infraspecific NamesProtologuesTypesTaxonomic opinions

Nomenclatural notes

Journal citations in the records follow BPH On-line (Botanico-Periodicum-Huntianum). — In the following notes, these terms are used:

• "the Code" refers to the Melbourne edition of the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature, 2012

"Jussieu" refers to Adrien de Jussieu, who published the first monograph of the family: Monographie de la famille des Malpighiacées, Arch. Mus. Hist. Nat. 3: 5–151, 255–616, pl. 1–23. 1843.

"Niedenzu" refers to Franz Niedenzu, who published the second monograph of the family: Malpighiaceae, in Das Pflanzenreich, ed. A. Engler, IV. 141: 1-870, Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann, 1928. — part 1 (Heft 91; pp. 1–246); part 2 (Heft 93; pp. 247–572); part 3 (Heft 94; pp. 573–870).

• "IPNI" is an abbreviation for the International Plant Names Index.

• "q.v." is an abbreviation for "quod vide" = "which see"

Coverage. The database includes at this time only names of genera, species, and infraspecific taxa based on non-fossil types. It attempts to be complete for generic names of the whole family. Names of species and infraspecific taxa should be nearly complete for the New World (not all the new names from Meyer's revision (2000) of Malpighia have been entered). Old World species and infraspecific names are very incompletely represented, except for a few genera, e.g., Acridocarpus. Thus, this database can be used with some confidence at the level of genus throughout the world, and at the level of species and below for the New World. There are a few names based on fossil types that are earlier homonyms for names based on non-fossil types, but they can be ignored, because the Code says (Art. 11.8) that in such cases the names based on non-fossils have priority, even if they are later.[back to top]

Disagreements with other references. Some indices and older works (especially IPNI and Niedenzu's monograph) list many misapplications of published names as if they were validly published names in their own right. For example, both IPNI and Niedenzu list Stigmaphyllon gayanum Griseb. as if it were a validly published name. Without checking the original literature the user has no way of knowing that Grisebach never published such a name; he simply misapplied the name Stigmaphyllon gayanum Adr. Juss. I have included in this database only names that were validly published according to the Code. In cases where I do not cite a "name" that is found in IPNI or Niedenzu, this will probably be the explanation. I also omit all infraspecific names with epithets like "typica" and "originalis," because according to Art. 24.3 they were not validly published. Another type of disagreement is that older references cite a number of combinations from publications earlier than the ones cited here. That is usually because the author who has traditionally been credited with the combination failed to satisfy the requirements of the Code for valid publication; in such cases, I have cited the place where publication was actually effected. Finally, uninitiated users of IPNI should be aware that the original authors did not follow the modern convention of placing the name of the author of the basionym in parentheses when they cited combinations, which therefore look just like basionyms, and only consultation of the original literature allows one to distinguish between them. All those entries were imported without correction when IPNI was compiled. [back to top]

Orthography. A number of genera with winged fruits have names ending in -pterys or
-pteris (wing). The earliest usage favored -pteris (e.g., Triopteris L., Tetrapteris Cav., and Heteropteris H. B. K.), but in his 1843 monograph Jussieu adopted the spelling -pterys for all such names, and Niedenzu did the same in 1928. Through conservation all those names that are in current use have been brought into uniformity and -pterys is now correct throughout the family. I spell all generic names ending in -pterys with a "y," regardless of how the name was spelled in the protologue. Many epithets were spelled in ways that are now out of orthographic fashion, e.g., what was originally spelled Byrsonima coccolobaefolia H. B. K. should now be B. coccolobifolia according to Art. 60.8 of the Code. I have adopted the corrected spelling of such names and have not recorded the original spelling. [back to top]

Authors of names. For the most part I follow the standard form recommend in IPNI (based on Authors of Plant Names, R. K. Brummitt and C. E. Powell, Kew, 1992) in abbreviating the authors of names, but there are a few cases where I do not. One is Adrien de Jussieu, which I shorten to Adr. Juss. rather than A. Juss. (three A. Jussieus published plant names). The other is Humboldt, Bonpland & Kunth, for which I use H. B. K., not Kunth. When the treatment of a new taxon was prepared by one author and published in a work by another author, I give both authors connected by "in" when citing the place of publication; otherwise I cite only the contributing author and delete "in" plus the author of the work. On the other hand, when the publishing author described the taxon and merely adopted a name coined by someone else, I cite only the publishing author, not both connected by "ex." These practices follow the recommendations in the Code. [back to top]

Rank of infraspecific names. A substantial number of infraspecific names were published without rank, especially by Jussieu and Grisebach. When compiling this database, I arbitrarily assigned the rank of variety to such names. I am now in the process of searching the literature for the first publication in which an author (the same or another) assigned a rank to such rankless names, and correcting the rank where necessary. When no one seems to have assigned a rank to a name, I am citing it as [var.]. That work has progressed from A through Heteropterys. From Hiraea through Z the rank of infraspecific names cannot be assumed to reflect a choice by the publishing author or a subsequent author. [back to top]

Protologues. At the end of a relatively small number of records one will find the statement, "Protologue NOT verified by W. R. Anderson." For all other names one should assume that I have examined the protologue and satisfied myself that the name really was validly published there. In the case of publications whose actual date of effective publication differs from the date on the title-page or the usually given date, I cite the actual date first, followed by the supposed but erroneous date in square brackets, e.g., 1838 ['1837']. [back to top]

Types. When there is a single type that can be cited succinctly, that is cited in the "Type" field; lectotypes are cited there when a lectotype has been designated in print, and neotypes are cited when they have been published. The absence of a citation in that field can mean several things, but most often it is because there were more than a few syntypes and no one has published a designation of a lectotype. The following abbreviations are used in the Types field: HT = holotype; IT = isotype(s); LT = lectotype; ILT = isolectotype(s); NT = neotype; INT = isoneotype(s). Herbaria are designated by their standard acronyms (Index herbariorum) ; when such an acronym is accompanied by an asterisk (e.g., NY*) that means there is an image of that type on the institution's website. B† means that a type was originally in the collection at Berlin that was destroyed in World War II. [back to top]

Taxonomic opinions. The field "correct name" represents my current best estimate of the appropriate taxonomic disposition of each name. In the many cases where the taxonomy is unresolved a placeholder "sp." is used. If the opinion given is based on someone else's publication, that source is given at the end of the record. When no such source is listed, the opinion is my own. Needless to say, many of these taxonomic judgments will change over time. [back to top]

Nomenclatural notes. The miscellaneous notes given at the end of some records most often state that a name is a later homonym, which is self-explanatory, or superfluous. The reason for saying a name is superfluous is generally not given, because it would often require lengthy explanation. Study of the protologue will usually make the problem apparent immediately. [back to top]