175 



Miscellany 5: 225-229, 1853), on page 22S, may be found a 

 description of a new genus, Stangeria, named in honor of Dr. 

 Stanger.* Subsequently Stevens altered the spelling of the name 

 to Stanggeria (Proc. Linn. Soc. 2: 340. 1854J and, later still, A. 

 Voss changed it to Stangera ("Vilmorin's Blumengartnerei " 

 ed. I. 3: 1244. 1896). 



Stevens' name, Stanggeria has, of course, no standing in 

 nomenclature and need not be further considered ; but the ques- 

 tion may possibly be raised whether Stangera Voss should be 

 substituted for Stangeria Moore? 



A somewhat similar question also arises in connection with 

 the fossil genus Strangerites Borneman ("Ueber OrganischeReste 

 der Lettenkohlengruppe Thiiringens" 59. 1856), which he 

 founded to include certain hitherto supposed fossil ferns, with 

 the expressed intention of indicating, in the name, their probable 

 relationship to the genus Stangeria. The spelling of his new 

 generic name was so obviousl}^ due either to carelessness or to 

 a typographical error that, apparently, all subsequent writers 

 ignored it, beginning with Oldham and Morris ("Paleont. 

 Indica, Foss. Fl. Rajmahal Ser." 32. 1862), who wrote it 

 Stangerites, but credited it, in the amended form, to Borneman. 



The question is, therefore, whether Stangerites Oldham and 

 Morris should be substituted for Strangerites Borneman, or 

 whether the latter name should be regarded as representing a 

 typographical error and be corrected to Stangerites Borneman? 



Arthur Holltck. 



* One species, paradoxa, was included in the genus, and this specific name, also, 

 has an interesting history. The species was known to other botanists previous to 

 the date of Moore's publication and was generally regarded as a fern, the fructifica- 

 tion not having been found and the nervation of the leaves (pinnately arranged 

 and forking) strongly suggesting a fern rather than a cycad. G. Kunze (Linnaea 

 10: 506. 1836) referred it to Lomaria coriacea Schrad., but later {Ibid. 13: 152. 

 1839) described it as a new species under the name L. eriopus. Moore appears 

 to have been the first to suspect that it might be a cycad and says (loc. cit.) that it 

 "would seem to be either a fern-like Zamia or a zamia-like fern," and renamed it 

 Stangeria paradoxa. Subsequent discovery of the fructification proved that Moore's 

 suspicions were well founded and that it was a cycad and not a Lomaria. Kunze's 

 specific name, however, having priority over that of Moore, required that the 

 latter be dropped and the binomial Stangeria eriopus be adopted (Nash, Journ. 

 N. Y. Bot. Gard. 9: 202. 1908; 10: 164. 1909). 



