3i;i 



PLANT NOMENCLATURE. 



Dn. BAi^MTAirr's views deserve special attention, on account of 

 his long exj)urienee in bibliograpliy and nomenclature. 1 liud not 

 intended to take any further part in tlie discussion, but a few of his 

 remarks (Journ. Hot, 1922, 2.jG-2G'3) invite rejoinder. 



1. lievocation of Art. Sij (requirinr/ Latin di(igiioses). — He con- 

 siders that Art. 3(3 lias been misunderstood, because most botanists who 

 have conformed to it have written Latin </e5c;7};//o;is instead of Latin 

 diagnoses accompanied by descriptions in the language of their choice.) 

 He apparently does not realize that Latin was deliberately chosen in 

 most cases, if not in all. 



2. Ridiculous names. — His citation of "a manly man" as a 

 parallel of Cerastium cerastioides might suggest that he did not 

 appreciate the distinction between *' manly " and " man-like." The 

 most ridiculous generic name known to him is ScJitschuroivskia. I 

 confess it does not strike me as ridiculous : uncouth it certainly is, 

 owing to the cumbrous method of rendering the twentj^-sixth letter 

 of the Russian alphabet by " schtsch " instead of by "shch," but the 

 spelling indicates the pronunciation (except that the *'w" should be 

 a "v"), which is the main point. Lorantlius tscliiiitschochcnsis 

 from Chinchoxo, French Congo, is worse ; as the name is of Portu- 

 guese origin, there is even less justification for the method of trans- 

 literation : to latinize a Romanic word by spelling it in a Teutonic 

 manner is an idea which would not have occurred to everyone. 



(>. Rejection of specif c liomoni/ms. — Dr. Barnhart thinks that 

 Mr. Rehder would find it difhcult to discover a parallel to Quercus 

 lanuginosa Lam. (1778), a mere re-naming of Quercvs Cerris Linn. 

 (1753). Is he not acquainted with E. H. L. Krause's edition of 

 Sturm's Deutschlands Flora ? In that edition, which contains about 

 750 superfluous new names (many of them homonyms), all mono- 

 typic genera are given the trivial generalis, on the ground that the 

 species in such cases has the value of a genus ! Can Dr. Barnhart 

 seriously contend that such names as Glaux generalis and Ilippuris 

 generalis are liable to be revived ? Among other peculiarities of 

 Krause's nomenclature are the replacement of the tri vials intermedius, 

 duhius, and Jigbridus wherever they occur. Thus Urosera inter- 

 media becomes D. media, Vicia hyhrida is renamed V. tollenda, and 

 Rapaver duhium is replaced by P. agreste: the names hybrid us and 

 duhius being reserved by Krause for hybrids and doubtful plants 

 respectively. Krause's names have been — perhaps rightly — ignored 

 by most German botanists, but O. E. Schulz cites them in the 

 Cruciferce of the Rfanzenreicli. They w^ere not included in Index 

 Kewensis, Suppl. 2-4, owing to no copy of the edition being avail- 

 able at the time, but have recently been extracted from a set kindly 

 lent by Mr. C. E. Salmon, and will appear in Suppl. G. 



7. Treatment as a ^' nomeji delendum'''' of a neiv combination 

 associated by its author in the original place of publicatian with 

 specimens belonging to a different species. — Art. 3 (c) of the 

 American Type-basis Code leads to some amusing results. According 

 to ii, Ilelosciadium Ammi Britton (Fl. Bermuda, 279; 1918) is 

 JouiiNAL or Botany. — Vol. GO. [Noyemojer, 1922.] y 



