Musineon of Rafinesque

Autor: J. N. Rose, John Merle Coulter
Rok vydání: 1895
Předmět:
Zdroj: Botanical Gazette. 20:258-260
ISSN: 0006-8071
DOI: 10.1086/327199
Popis: In studying some recent Mexican collections of Umbelliferwr we were led to an investigation of the genus commonly known as Musenium of Nuttall by the discovery of what seems to be a Mexican representative of it. The Nuttallian genus of i840 had been replaced by Rafinesque's Adorium of i825 in Kuntze's Revisio, and this name appears in the recent 'Check list" published under the auspices of the Botanical Club. As the validity of this substitution must rest upon a thorough examination of Rafinesque's writings, advantage was taken of the unusual facilities offered by the various libraries at Washington to examine into the matter. The result is stated in the following history: In i8i9, in 7ournal de Physique, de Climiie et d'HistoireNaturelle (89: ioi), Rafinesque established the genus Marathrum, basing it upon Seseli divaricatum Pursh. In i820, in the same journal (91: 7i), having discovered a previously described Marathrum Humb. & Bonp. (i8o8), he substituted fusineon for his Marathrurn, and as this publication seems to have escaped the notice of recent bibliographers, Rafinesque's statement is quoted in full as follows: i. Dans le prodrome de 50 nouveaux genres de plantes d'Amerique, j'ai decrit deux nouveaux genres sous les noms de marathrum et de pythagorea; je me suis aperqu depuis lors, que ces noms avaient deja ete employes, le premier par Robert Brown, et le second par Loureiro; et comme je suis convaincu de l'importance et de la necessity d'eviter des doubles emplois en Botanique, je m'empresse de rectifier cette erreur, et de proposer les noms suivans en place. Mon G. 1 marathrumn devra se nommer mnusineon. Ces deux noms sont des synonymes de fenouil. In I825 Rafinesque suggested still another name, Adorium, which was taken up by Dr. Otto Kuntze as the oldest tenable name, who states that the Alusineon Raf., referred to in DeCandolle's Prodromus (4: I46), must be an error. Dr. Kuntze certainly did not find it in the place cited in the' Revisio, for it is the citation of Marathrurn.
Databáze: OpenAIRE