INTRODUCTION 



iomenclatural compilation for ongoing revisionary and floristic studies 

 1 Rubiaceae, including treatments for the Flora Mesoamericana, Flora 

 of Chiapas, Flora de Oaxaca, and Flora de Veracruz projects. Its primary purpose is to provide a 

 comprehensive nomenclarural index of the published names of Rubiaceae from all of Mexico and the 

 countries comprising Central America, and to indicate their current taxonomic and nomenclarural status. 

 Names of taxa described from other areas, principally South America, the West Indies, and the southwest 

 United States, have also been included if authentic records of their occurrence in Mexico or Central 

 America exist. Names that have been erroneously applied to taxa in this region are also included. Taxa 

 that are known from cultivation, have become naturalized, or have escaped from cultivation in the region 

 are also included, and their status is noted. This work includes ca. 2341 entries of specific and mfraspecific 

 names published during the period from 1753 through 1997, plus several more published to mid- 1998. 



The following herbaria were inventoried for Rubiaceae types from the region: ENCB, F, MEXU, MO, 

 P, US, and XAL. In addition, type material of selected taxa was borrowed from a number of other herbaria 

 including: CAS, GH, K, TEX-LL, UC, and WIS. Black and white photos have been taken of most types 

 and sets of duplicate prints deposited at MEXU, PTBG, and US. The original literature sources in which 

 the names were published have been checked in nearly all cases. 



All type collections have been seen by the author, unless indicated by "n.v." (non visi). Article 9.1 of 

 the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature [Tokyo Code] (Greuter et al, 1 994) states "A holotype 

 of a name of a species or infraspecific taxon is the one specimen or illustration used by the author, or 

 designated by the author as the nomenclarural type." Names published prior to the Code, however, are 

 frequently associated with typification problems. It was often the practice of various authors (e.g., Ruiz 

 Lopez and Pavon, or Sesse and Mocino) to base their descriptions and sometimes also their illustrations 

 primarily or entirely on plants studied in the field, or even on a mixture of specimens of the same taxon. 

 In these cases a type was not designated and apparently does not exist, which I have noted in the text. 

 Alternatively, authors would sometimes cite a locality (usually a country or island) and collector's name, 

 suggesting that they were referring to a single specimen, although this is difficult to prove. 

 Recommendation 9A.4 of the Code states that if a single specimen is cited in the protologue, without 

 mention of a specific institution housing it, a specimen at the author's home institution can be regarded 

 as the holotype until it can be proven that more than one specimen exists. In these cases I have cited 

 locality and collector information from the protologue and simply noted "type," followed by the probable 

 herbarium in which the type material may be sought, usually the author's home institution. Monographic 

 or revisionary studies may be required to determine the status of any original collections and whether or 

 not designation of a lectotype or neotype is necessary. 



The Sesse and Mocino herbarium is housed at Madrid (MA) with duplicates in several other herbaria. 

 Sesse and Mocino had a large set of colored plates drawn from living specimens in Mexico and Puerto 

 Rico, the majority of which are now at the Hunt Institute for Botanical Documentation (HU). They were 

 copied while on loan to A. P. de Candolle, and sets of these outlines or "caiques" were distributed to at 

 least 12 herbaria, including G-DC. For further information, see Taxonomic Literature (TL-2) by Stafleu 

 and Cowan (5: 525-528. 1985). I have not seen type material for most names published by Sesse and 

 Mocino, and the published diagnoses are usually too brief to permit accurate identification of the species. 

 Consequently the status of many Sesse and Mocino names must remain uncertain pending study of the 

 type material and original illustrations, which is beyond the scope of this work. Types of the taxa 

 described by A. P. de Candolle based on Haenke collections are deposited at PR rather than at G-DC (see 

 Stafleu & Cowan, 1976: 438). 



All cited locality data have been taken directly from the labels of the type specimens. In cases where 

 the type — or a photo or microfiche of it— was not seen, locality information was taken directly from the 



