Some Matters of Nomenclature 
T. D. A. CocKERELL 
In the admirable and exhaustive studies of the Umbelliferae 
by Mildred E. Mathias, published in the Annals of the Missouri 
Botanical Garden, there is, (vol. XVII, p. 294) the enunciation 
of what seems to me a very dangerous doctrine. Dangerous be- 
cause, as the author can hardly have realized, its general adop- 
tion would create great and useless confusion in our nomencla- 
ture. The generic name Lomatium of Rafinesque was supplanted 
by Cogswellia Sprengel, because Robert Brown had earlier 
named a genus of Proteaceae Lomatia. It is argued that the re- 
tention of Lomatia ‘‘would be a source of permanent confusion”. 
Macbride in 1918 refused to accept this view, and restored 
Lomatium, I think quite correctly. No intelligent person could 
be so careless as to confuse these names, especially as they refer 
to totally different kinds of plants, inhabiting totally different 
regions. I have long been a student of bees and mollusca, but 
it has never occurred to me to confuse Ancyla (in bees) with 
Ancylus (in mollusca), or Trigona (in bees) with Trigonia (in 
mollusca). A really difficult case is that of Ferrissia (mollusca) 
and Ferrisia (a mealy-bug). These names differ by a letter, but 
it is impossible to pronounce them differently. There is a botan- 
ical example which is rather confusing, that of Euphorbia peplis 
and E. peplus. The names are due to Linnaeus, and no one 
would now think of changing them. 
There are two reforms in botanical methods which I believe 
would be advantageous. 
(1) The explicit recognition of subspecies, as distinct from 
varieties, forms or mutations. While it is not always easy to de- 
cide about the rank of a plant, every botanist recognizes the 
existence of minor types which can be grouped under so-called 
innean species. There is a distinct disadvantage in treating all 
of these as full species, as is done by some authors. If they are 
called varieties, they are confused with mutations and forms, 
the application of the term variety being ambiguous. The recog- 
nition of the subspecific category, as in ornithology, appears to 
bea step toward clarity, and without any disadvantages. 
A further consequence in nomenclature follows. In any 
senus, duplicate names of specific or subspecific rank cannot be 
Permitted. Thus, if a name has been used for a subspecies, it 
13 
