-4- 



The fourth generic footnote (p . 27) refers to Globba 

 longa Rumphius which is followed by other Rumphian taxa of 

 Globba and says, Globbae genus singulare , Monandris tri - 

 locular ibus af f inis . This may be read as tT The singular 

 genus of Globba is similar to the Monandriae with three 

 locules." This is observation, not a new genus. 



Dandy Cp • I 5 ) states that "the Rumphian names mentioned 

 in these footnotes cannot be regarded as generic in the 

 absence of any indication that Linnaeus regarded them as 

 such." Linnaeus refers to each one of these as "genus" 

 and that is clear evidence that he regarded them as of the 

 rank of genus. However, I do not consider that Linnaeus 

 accepted any of these footnoted genera as new, only as 

 "distinct," "of its own genus," n not yet estabiished , " or 

 "singular." Had Linnaeus accepted them they would have 

 appeared in the right hand column in Roman type. 



It is interesting to trace these incidentally 

 mentioned generic names to their point of valid publication. 

 Two of them were validated by Linnaeus in 1759, one was 

 validated by Linnaeus in 1771, and the other was first 

 validly . published by another author. 



Pandanus L.f. (1781) was proposed for conservation 

 against Keura Forssk. (1775) by Airy-Shaw (Taxon 11: 223. 

 1962). St. John (Taxon 12: 201. 1963) argued for Pandanus 

 Stickman (1754). The Committee for Conservation of Generic 

 Names (Taxon 13: 181. 1964) were of the opinion that 

 Pandanus was first validly published by Parkinson in 1773. 



