Alexander B. Doweld

The carpology and taxonomic relationships of Davidsonia (Davidsoniaceae)

The fruit of Davidsonia pruriens F. v. Muell. drying and splitting at maturity into two indehiscent mericarps is re-defined as a schizocarpic didrupe. The sclerified mesendocarpic construction of the whole pericarp supports its classification as a drupe. The peculiar fimbriate surface of the mericarp is caused by the destruction of parenchymatous exocarpic and mesocarpic tissues exposing radially elongated mesendocarpic osteosclereids. The seed coat is described as diffusive exotegmic with expanding pachychalaza substituting the two integuments in the chalazal half of the seed. The diffusive exotegmy of the spermoderm supports a close relationship with Cunoniaceae, but refutes any relationships with Saxifragales or with Staphyleaceae or any Hamamelidae. The seed-coat structure indicates advancement and specialization of Davidsonia among Cunoniales; its origin could trace back possibly to Rosales, but never to hamamelidalean stock.

Report of the Special Committee on Registration of Algal and Plant Names (including fossils)

The Special Committee on Registration of Algal and Plant Names (including fossils) was established at the XVIII International Botanical Congress (IBC) in Melbourne in 2011, its mandate being to consider what would be involved in registering algal and plant names (including fossils), using a procedure analogous to that for fungal names agreed upon in Melbourne and included as Art. 42 in the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants. Because experience with voluntary registration was key to persuading mycologists of the advantages of mandatory registration, we began by asking institutions with a history of nomenclatural indexing to develop mechanisms that would permit registration. The task proved more difficult than anticipated, but considerable progress has been made, as is described in this report. It also became evident that the Nomenclature Section needs a structure that will allow ongoing discussion of registration and associated issues. Simultaneously with this report we are submitting four proposals that would provide such a structure.

The systematic relevance of fruit and seed structure in Bersama and Melianthus (Melianthaceae)

Abstract. The fruit and seed anatomy and morphology of the two genera Bersama and Melianthus (Melianthaceae, Sapindales) have been studied in an effort to clarify their systematic position. On the basis of the differences in pericarp and seed anatomy as well as in other exomorphic characters the segregation of Bersama into a distinct family Bersamaceae is supported. Evidence mainly from seed anatomy and morphology emphasizes the anomaly of the traditional inclusion of Bersama and Melianthus in the Sapindales, since they have a distinct seed-coat structure and seed vascularization. The fruit and seed anatomy does not confirm any relationships with alternatively suggested exo-mesotestal Lardizabalaceae. The exotestal seed coats of Bersama and Melianthus with a differentiated palisade of Malpighian cells in the exotesta, dimerous raphal vascular skeleton, abundant endosperm, and a small differentiated straight embryo show a resemblance with the exotestal albuminous seeds of Rhamnaceae and Elaeagnaceae. Using also additional data on fruit, floral and vegetative morphology it is suggested that Bersamaceae with Melianthaceae and Rhamnaceae/Elaeagnaceae constitute a distinct relict side-branch of exo-mesotestal rosidaceous ancestry, the new order Melianthales in the superorder Rhamnanae (Rosidae). The formerly suggested relationship of this side-branch to exotegmic Malvales is not supported by seed anatomy. The affinity with exotegmic Celastrales, which are considered as a possible connecting link between archaic exo-mesotestal Rosales and exotestal Rhamnales/Elaeagnales, is also found untenable.

Ficus changii, Ficus fengkaiensis, Ficus obtusatoides and Ficus tethyca (Moraceae), new replacement names

SummaryThe name Ficus changii Doweld nom. nov. is proposed here as a replacement name for the extant Ficus ovatifolia S. S. Chang (1984), a later homonym of the fossil name Ficus ovatifolia E. W. Berry (1909). The name Ficus fengkaiensis Doweld nom. nov. is published for the illegitimate name Ficus undulata S. S. Chang (1984), a later homonym of Ficus undulata Buch.-Ham. (Buchanan-Hamilton 1827). The name Ficus obtusatoides Doweld nom. nov. is proposed here as a replacement name for the fossil Ficus obtusata Heer (1856), a later homonym of the extant name Ficus obtusata Link (1822). The name Ficus tethyca Doweld nom. nov. is proposed as a replacement name for the fossil Ficus lucida M. Chandler (1962), a later homonym of the extant name Ficus lucida Dryand. (Dryander in Aiton 1789).

Nomenclatural notes on Notocactus and on Alwin Berger's "Kakteen"

Notocactus, a name first published by Fric in 1928, was clearly, if implicitly, based on Schumanns Echinocactus subg. Notocactus. The first type designation for the generic name and its subgeneric basionym was by Backeberg in 1938. It conforms to current usage and to the provisions of the Code and must stand. A later designation, based on the assumption that Fric had described a new genus, has no standing; it would have made Notocactus a homotypic earlier synonym of Eriocactus Backeb. (nom cons. prop. against Eriocephalus Backeb.). More than 70 new combinations and at least three generic names published by Berger in 1929 under a narrow generic concept, differing from the wide concept he adopted in the main body of his book, are to be considered as alternative names accepted and validly published by him in the index to his book. They include 13 new combinations under Notocactus.

1551) Proposal to conserve the name Pitys Witham (Fossil Plants) with that spelling

Witham proposed Pitus for two species of fossil trunks found in the Lower Carboniferous strata of Scotland. The genus is now held to consist of four or five species and is usually treated as the only representative of Pityaceae D. H. Scott (Stud. Foss. Pl., ed. 2, 2: 514, 651. 1909. ‘Pityeae’). Although traditionally considered a family of Cordaitales D. H. Scott, today the family is assigned to the order Lyginopteridales Havlena (= Lagenostomatales Seward ex A. G. Long). The genus was largely ignored until Göppert (in Bot. Centralbl. 5: 403. 1881) revived the name and altered its spelling to Pitys, following the orthography used in other contemporary genera with this Greek stem (e.g., Pityopsis Nutt., Pityoxylon Kraus, Prumnopitys R. A. Philippi, PalaeopitysMcNab). In 1837, Endlicher proposed Pytys (Gen. 263. Oct 1837) for Tertiary fossil foliage and cones that are now assigned to Pinaceae. Five years later, he (Endlicher, Gen. Suppl. 2: 26. Mar–Jun 1842) altered the orthography to Pitys and proposed a new but superfluous name, Pissadendron, for Pitus Witham possibly thinking the 1833 Witham name was, in some way, a homonym of his 1837 name Pytys or perhaps its 1842 correction to Pitys. Pitys Endl. was frequently cited (Unger, Chlor. Protog.: 73. 1843; Syn. Pl. Foss.: 196. 1845; Gen. Sp. Pl. Foss., ed. 2: 377. 1850; Endlicher in Syn. Conif.: 285. 1847; Pfeiffer, Nomencl. Bot. 2(1): 735. 1873) prior to 1881. Following Göppert’s transformation of Pitus Witham into Pitys and the application of the name to Carboniferous rather than Tertiary fossils, the use of the latter name rapidly increased (e.g., by D. H. Scott in Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb. 40: 357. 1902 and Stud. Foss. Pl., ed. 2, 2: 515. 1909; Seward, Foss. Pl. 3: 285. 1917; W. T. Gordon in Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb. 58: 301. 1935; Hirmer in Wettstein, Handb. Syst. Bot., ed. 4: 497. 1935; Takhtajan, Telomophyta 1: 328. 1956; Nì mejc, Paleobot. 2: 111. 1963). With the realization that Pitus was the original orthography, some authors took it up (Radczenko in J. A. Orlov, Osnovy Paleontol. [15]: 158. 1963; C. A. Arnold in Boureau, Traité Paléobot. 4(1): 444. 1970; Galtier in C. B. Beck, Orig. Gymnosp.: 159. 1988; S. V. Meyen, Cat. Foss. Pl. Gen.: 18. 1990) whereas others retained Pitys (W. N. Stewart & G. W. Rothwell, Paleobot. Evol. Pl., ed. 2: 274. 1993). Pitys is the orthography used in textbooks (e.g., C. A. Arnold, Intr. Paleobot.: 280–287. 1947; Darrah, Princ. Paleobot., ed. 2: 157–158. 1960; Bierhorst, Morphol. Vasc. Pl.: 413–415. 1971) and in popular publications (e.g., Encycl. Brit. Micropaedia 3: 144. 1974 and its online version at http://britanica.com/bcom/ eb/article/9/0,5716,26679+1+26255,00.html). Prior to the 1960s, Pitus was mentioned only once (Hartig in Bot. Zeit. 1848: 137. 1848). In 1955, H. N. Andrews (in Bull. U.S. Geol. Surv. 1013: 212. 1955) designated P. antiqua Witham as lectotype. Given the persistent confusion and the need for nomenclatural stability, we propose conservation of Pitys to coincide with the botanical tradition of transliterating the Greek upsilon (or ypsilon) to a “y”. Nicolson (pers. comm.) is of the opinion that “Pitus” was a faulty transcription of the Greek word “pitys” which means “pine” in English and “pinus” in Latin. Witham made no indication that he intended to propose a generic name based on anything other than “pine.” Adoption of Pitys will allow retention of the established orthography of Pityaceae and Pityidae Nì mejc ex Novák (Vy1 1 . Rostl. 119. 1961). To our knowledge no one has corrected the orthography of the suprageneric names to a form based on Pitus. Finally, Nicolson strongly encouraged us to conserve the orthography Pitys so as to avoid the “stupid-looking Pitaceae!”

Validation of some suprageneric names in Magnoliophyta

Eight superordinal and twelve ordinal names not validly published by A. L. Takhtajan in 1997 are formally validated. One name proposed by Cronquist in 1980 is validated. In addition, three names not properly validated by J. L. Reveal are included. A new family name, Exbucklandiaceae, is proposed for the illegitimate family name Bucklandiaceae. Engelhardtiaceae is validated to accommodate Engelhardtia, Alfaroa, Alfaropsis, and Oreomunnea, all distinct from the Juglanda-

Paravojnovskya, a new substitute name for Gaussia (Vojnovskyales) based on fossil female fructifications

A new generic name Paravojnovskya Doweld is established for Carboniferous/Permian umbellate strobili of Angaraland pteridospermous plants replacing the illegitimate Gaussia M. F. Neuburg, 1934, which is a later homonym ofGaussia H. A. Wendland, 1865, used for recent palms. Three new combinations are made to transfer all described species of Gaussia to Paravojnovskya: P cristata (M. F. Neuburg) Doweld, P scutellata (M. F. Neuburg) Doweld and P imbricata (Naugolnykh) Doweld.

Corsinopteris, a new substitute name for Orthotheca (Marattiales-Marattiopsida)

Maramopstau). Fuxon 30: 1097-1099: 2001: ISSN 6610-6202 The later homonym Orthotheca P. Corsin, 1951 [fossil foliage] (non S. E. Bridel, 1827 [Musci] nec Pichon, 1946 [Bignoniaceae]) is replaced by a new generic name Corsinopteris. All four species described under Orthotheca P. Corsin. are transferred to the new genus.

Nomenclatural notes on Ancistrocactus (Cactaceae)

Ancistrocactus, a name first published by Britton and Rose in 1923, is best treated as based on Schumanns Echinocactus subg. Ancistrocactus, not as the name of a new genus. Consequently, Britton and Roses original type designation cannot stand, nor can the next subsequent published choice by Taylor in 1979, as neither is of an element included in Schumanns protologue. Echinocactus scheeri Salm-Dyck is here proposed to provide the type of both the subgeneric and generic name. This choice conforms to the provisions of the ICBN and does not impinge on the application of the name Ancistrocactus, which, under the narrow generic concept currently again accepted by some, remains correct for Britton & Roses genus.