How Plant Names Change 



The names of plants are not fixed in time but are 

 subject to change for various reasons. It is not 

 difficult to find examples of plants long known 

 under established names that are incorrect 

 according to the Botanical Code. Name changes 

 for some well-known woody landscape plants 

 listed in the catalog are discussed below. 



The name Plumbago auriculata Lam. is the 

 correct binary name for a now widely cultivated 

 South African species. Published by Lamarck in 

 1786, this name has an 8-year priority over the 

 name Plumbago capensis Thunb. that was long 

 used for this plant. In another example, the 

 name Cladrastis lutea (Michx.f.) K. Koch dates 

 from 1813 and is well known; but in 1811 

 Dumont de Courset had published the specific 

 epithet kentukea for the same plant. According 

 to the rule of priority, the name Cladrastis 

 kentukea (Dum.-Cours.) Rudd has date priority 

 as the correct name for yellow- wood. 



Changes in plant names sometimes may not 

 conform with the facts, causing more confusion 

 than existed before the change was made. Two 

 examples illustrate name changes too hastily 

 made. Under Magnolia in Hortus Third (Bailey 

 1976), the entries M. heptapeta (Buc'hoz) Dandy 

 and M. quinquepeta (Buc'hoz) Dandy are listed for 

 two well-known magnolias, M. denudata and M. 

 liliijlora, respectively. In 1779, Buc'hoz pub- 

 lished Lassonia heptapeta and L. quinquepeta for 

 these taxa. In 1934, Dandy transferred the 

 Buc'hoz epithets to the genus Magnolia. In a 

 paper by F. G. Meyer and E. McClintock pub- 

 lished in 1987, the evidence shows that the 

 combinations of Dandy were totally misapplied 

 and without botanical validity. The original 

 Chinese illustrations on which these names were 

 based are artist's renditions, probably of Magno- 

 lia, but the details are totally incorrect and the 

 drawings may not be properly assigned to the 

 genus Magnolia or, indeed, to any known living 

 plant. Meyer and McClintock concluded that the 

 earliest valid names for these magnolias, M. 

 denudata and M. liliijlora. were correctly pub- 

 lished by Desrousseaux in 1 79 1 and stand as the 

 correct names for these plants. 



The name Toona sinensis (Endl.) M.J. Roem. 

 applies to a tree native to eastern Asia, replacing 

 the name Cedrela sinensis Juss. This follows an 

 earlier taxonomic decision that the name Toona 

 should apply to the Asiatic species, while the 

 New World species (although closely related) are 

 correctly placed in the genus Cedrela. 



Until relatively recently, two species of Sequoia 

 were recognized. A detailed study by J.T. 

 Buchholz showed that only the coast redwood 

 {Sequoia sempervirens (D. Don) Endl.) should be 

 retained in the genus, while the giant sequoia of 

 the high Sierras of California (formerly known as 

 Sequoia gigantea Lindl.) belongs to the closely 

 related genus Sequoiadendron with the binary 

 name Sequoiadendron giganteum (Lindl.) J. 

 Buchholz. 



From time to time, various specific epithets have 

 been applied to the Douglas fir — including 

 PseudotsugadouglasiiCarr. (1867), P. lindleyana 

 Carr. (1868), P. taxifolia (Lamb.) Britton (1889), 

 and P. mucronata (Raf.) Sudworth (1895). But all 

 of these must give way to the name Pseudotsuga 

 menziesii (Mirb.) Franco (1950), based on Pinus 

 menziesii Mirb. (1825), as the valid name for this 

 well-known tree of the western United States. 



A well-known tree indigenous to the southeast- 

 ern United States, the yellow buckeye, should be 

 cited as Aesculus Jlava Sol. (1784), not A.Jlava 

 Ait. (1789). This may appear as a small detail, 

 but it illustrates the application of the rule of 

 priority that exists to promote stability and 

 accuracy in plant nomenclature. The name A. 

 octandra Marsh. (1785), published later and long 

 used for this tree, is a synonym without taxo- 

 nomic validity of A. Jlava Sol. 



Confusion reigns in the names applied to two 

 evergreen shrubs planted in the southeastern 

 states, one of them commonly grown and the 

 other one rare. The well-known Florida native 

 Illicium parvijlorum Michx. ex Vent, is often 

 misidentified in nurseries as J. anisatum L. , a 

 Japanese plant. Although the Japanese species 

 is barely known in most areas, its name has long 

 been associated with the wrong plant. 



Another common shrub in nurseries, and one 

 widely cultivated in the southeastern United 

 States, is Ternstroemia gymnanthera (Wight & 

 Arn.) Sprague of the tea family (Theaceae). It has 

 long been sold in nurseries under the name 

 Cleyerajaponica Thunb., a different though 

 closely related plant. Many nurseries are now 

 aware of the correct identification of these plants 

 and are labeling them accordingly. The true 

 Cleyerajaponica is an attractive, small evergreen 

 tree with fragrant white flowers and black fruit, 

 but it is rarely cultivated. 



The name Anisostichus capreolatus (L.) Bur. 

 (1884) can no longer be used for the cross vine, 

 because the earlier name Bignonia capreolata L. 



9 



