Persicaria densiflora (Meisn.) comb. nov. 



Polygonum densiflorum Meisn. in Mart. II. Bras. 5' : IS 14. 



1855 

 Polygonum acuminatum Meisn. Monog. Gen. Polygon. Prod. 



78, p.p. (1826), apud Meisn. in Mart. Fl. Bras. 5': 14. 



1855 [not P. acuminatum H. B. K. Nov. Gen. & Sp. PI. 



2: 178. 1817]. 

 Polygonum densiflorum a imberbe Meisn. in DC. Prodr. 



14: 121. 1856. 

 Polygonum portoricense Bertero ex Meisn. Monog. Gen. 



Polygon. Prod. 78, nomen nudum. 1826; Small, Mem. 



Dept. Bot. Columb. Coll. 1: 46, pi. 10. 1895. 

 Persicaria portoricensis Small, Fl. SE. U. S., ed. 1, 377 iS: 



1330. 1903. 

 Polygonum eciliatum Stone, Rep. N. Jersey State Mus. 



1910: 423 (1911), fide Weatherby, Rhodora 25: 20. 1923. 

 Pleuropterus cuspidatus (Sieb. & Zucc.) comb. nov. 



Polygonum cuspidatum Sieb. & Zucc, Abh. Akad. Muench. 



4-: 208. 1846. 4 

 Polygonum pictum Sieb., Jaarb. Koninkl. Nederl. Maats. 



Aanmoed. Tuinb. 1848: 44. 1848. 

 Polygonum Sieboldi Rwdt. ex De Vriese, Jaarb. Koninkl. 



Nederl. Maats. Aanmoed. Tuinb. 1849: 31. 1850. 

 Polygonum Zuccarinii Small, Mem. Dept. Bot. Columb. 



Coll. 1: 158, pi. 66. 1895. 

 Polygonum Sieboldi De Vriese apud Bailey, Cycl. Am. Hort. 



3: 1393, fig. 1880. 1901. 

 Pleuropterus Zuccarinii Small in Britton & Br. 111. Fl. 1: 

 _ 676, fig. 1655. 1913. 



3 The use of densiflorum as the valid specific designation for this species is 

 not precluded by the "Polygonum densiflorum Blume" recorded by Jackson in 

 the Index Kewensis (1894), because this name was apparently never published 

 before that time, since in the reference cited by Jackson, Blume proposes it as 

 a variety of P .corymbosum Willd. [ = P. chinense L.] and it was apparently never 

 elevated to specific rank until Jackson inadvertently did so — long after Meis- 

 ner had proposed the same name for an entirely different plant. Vid., C. A 

 Weatherby, Rhodora 25: 20-21. 1923. 



4 The use of cuspidatum as the valid specific designation for this species is 

 not precluded by the Polygonum cuspidatum of Willdenow as claimed by 

 Small, De Vriese, and Bailey, because the use of this name by Sprengel in 1825 

 was in synonymy only and did not constitute valid publication.- Vid., A. X. 

 Steward, Rhodora 32: 223-225. 1930. 



