Advertisement

Kew Bulletin

, 73:48 | Cite as

New names in Ficus (Moraceae) and Ficophyllum, living and fossil

  • Alexander B. DoweldEmail author
Article

Summary

New replacement names in Ficus are proposed: Ficus aenigmatica nom. nov. for fossil Ficus schimperi Lesq.; Ficus notabilis nom. nov. for extant Ficus gracilis Pittier; Ficus myrtoides nom. nov. for fossil Ficus myrtifolia E. W. Berry; Ficus slovenica nom. nov. for fossil Ficus pilosa Ettingsh.; Ficus solomonensis nom. nov. for extant Ficus hesperia Corner; Ficus venustoides nom. nov. and F. venustula nom. nov. for the fossils Ficus venusta Saporta and Ficus venusta (Unger) Ettingsh. respectively and Ficus yellowstonica nom. nov. for fossil Ficus densifolia Knowlt. Cretaceous fossil species of Ficus, lacking cuticular details of the leaf structure and their confirmed affiliation with extant Ficus, are placed into the formal fossil genus Ficophyllum: Ficophyllum cretaceum comb. nov., Ficophyllum densinerve comb. nov., Ficophyllum dentatum comb. nov., Ficophyllum gracile comb. nov., Ficophyllum reuschii comb. nov., Ficophyllum tenuifolium comb. nov. New replacement names in Ficophyllum are proposed for fossil species previously placed in Ficus: Ficophyllum angustifolium nom. nov. for fossil Ficus angustifolia Hosius; Ficophyllum hosii nom. nov. for fossil Ficus laurifolia Hosius & Marck; Ficophyllum magnolioides nom. nov. for fossil Ficus magnoliifolia Lesq.; Ficophyllum marckii nom. nov. for fossil Ficus elongata Hosius, and Ficophyllum antiquum nom. nov. for fossil Ficus crassinervis Hosius. A new combination, Ficus burmensis comb. nov., is validated. Laurus ficoides nom. nov. is proposed as a replacement name for fossil Ficus reticulata Saporta. Seven species of Ficus are lectotypified.

Key Words

Cretaceous Laurus nomenclature palaeobotany 

References

  1. Barkworth, M. E., Watson, M., Barrie, F. R., Belyaeva, I. V., Chung, R. C. K., Dašková, J., Davidse, G., Dönmez, A. A., Doweld, A. B., Dressler, S., Flann, C., Gandhi, K., Geltman, D., Glen, H. F., Greuter, W., Head, M. J., Jahn, R., Janarthanam, M. K., Katinas, L., Kirk, P. M., Klazenga, N., Kusber, W.-H., Kvaček, J., Malécot, V., Mann, D. G., Marhold, K., Nagamasu, H., Nicolson, N., Paton, A., Patterson, D. J., Price, M. J., Prud’homme van Reine, W. F., Schneider, C. W., Sennikov, A., Smith, G. F., Stevens, P. F., Yang, Z.-L., Zhang, X.-C. & Zuccarello, G. C. (2016a). Report of the Special Committee on Registration of Algal and Plant Names (including fossils). Taxon 65: 670 – 672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. ____ et al. (as above) (2016b). (276 – 279) Proposals to provide for registration of new names and nomenclatural acts. Taxon 65: 656 – 658.Google Scholar
  3. Berry, E. W. (1916). The Lower Eocene floras of Southeastern North America. Profess. Pap. U.S. Geol. Surv. 91: 1 – 481.Google Scholar
  4. Blume, C. L. (1825). Bijdragen tot de flora van Nederlandsch Indië. Fasc. 9. Lands Drukkerij, Batavia.Google Scholar
  5. Busche, R. & Siegfried, P. (1968). Katalog der in der Sammlung des Geologisch-Paläontologischen Institutes der Universität Münster befindlichen paläontologischen Typen und Belegstücke. Argum. Palaeobot. 2: 39 – 65.Google Scholar
  6. Corner, E. J. H. (1970). New species of Streblus and Ficus (Moraceae). Blumea 18: 393 – 411.Google Scholar
  7. Doweld, A. B. (2015). The International Fossil Plant Names Index (IFPNI): First Year Report. Inter. Org. Palaeobot. (IOP) Newslett. 108: 4 – 5, Appendix A: [1] – [8].Google Scholar
  8. ____ (2016). The International Fossil Plant Names Index (IFPNI): A global registry of scientific names of fossil organisms started. Palaeobotanist 65: 203 – 208.Google Scholar
  9. Edwards, W. N. (1923). On some Tertiary plants from South-East Burma. Geol. Mag. 60: 159 – 165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ettingshausen, C. F. von. (1870). Beiträge zur Kenntniss der fossilen Flora von Radoboj. aus der kaiserlich-königlichen Hof- und Staatsdruckerei, Wien [preprinted from Sitzungsber. Kaiserl. Akad. Wiss., Wien, Math.-Naturwiss. Cl., Abt 1, 61: 829 – 906. (1871)].Google Scholar
  11. ____ (1872). Die fossile Flora von Sagor in Krain. I. aus der kaiserlich-königlichen Hof- und Staatsdruckerei, Wien [preprinted from Denkschr. Kaiserl. Akad. Wiss. Wien, Math.-Naturwiss. Kl. 32: 159 – 202 (1 – 7 Dec 1872)].Google Scholar
  12. Fontaine, W. M. (1889). The Potomac or younger Mesozoic flora. Monogr. U.S. Geol. Surv. 15: 1 – 377.Google Scholar
  13. Heer, O. von (1861). Recherches sur le climat et la végétation du pays tertiaire. Jean Wurster & Comp., Winterthur.Google Scholar
  14. Hosius, A. (1869). Ueber einige Dicotyledonen der westfälischen Kreideformation. Palaeontographica 17: 89 – 104.Google Scholar
  15. Hosius, A. & von der Marck, W. (1880). Die Flora der Westfälischen Kreideformation. Palaeontographica 26: 125 – 236.Google Scholar
  16. IFPNI (2014 onwards). The International Fossil Plant Names Index. Global registry of scientific names of fossil organisms covered by the International Code of Nomenclature for Algae, Fungi, and Plants (formerly International Code of Botanical Nomenclature) and International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. http://www.fossilplants.info/ (accessed 10 Aug 2017).
  17. Knowlton, F. H. (1899). Fossil flora of the Yellowstone National Park. Monogr. U. S. Geol. Surv. 32: 651 – 882.Google Scholar
  18. Knowlton, F. H. (1900a). Flora of the Montana Formation. Bull. U.S. Geol. Surv. 163: 1 – 118.Google Scholar
  19. ____ (1900b). Fossil plants associated with the lavas of the Cascade Range. Rep. (Annual) U.S. Geol. Surv. 18 (3): 37 – 64.Google Scholar
  20. ____ (1902). Change of name of Ficus? hesperia from vicinity of Ashland, Oregon. Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington 15: 86.Google Scholar
  21. Kunth, C. S. (1846). Enumeratio synoptica Ficus specierum cum novarum tum cognitarum Horti Regii Botanici Berolinensis. In: Index seminum in horto botanico Berolinensi anno 1846 collectorum: 14 – 22. Berlin.Google Scholar
  22. Lamarck, J. B. A. P. M. de (1788). Encyclopédie méthodique. Botanique. Vol. 2. Chez Panckoucke, Paris & chez Plomteux, Liège.Google Scholar
  23. ____ (1813). Encyclopédie méthodique. Botanique. Supplement, Vol. 3. Chez Panckoucke, Paris & chez Plomteux, Liège.Google Scholar
  24. LaMotte, R. S. (1952). Catalogue of the Cenozoic plants of North America through 1950. Mem. Geol. Soc. Amer. 51: 1 – 378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lesquereux, L. C. (1868). On species of fossil plants from the Tertiary of the State of Mississippi. Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc. 13: 411 – 413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lesquereux, L. C. (1883). Contributions to the fossil flora of the Western Territories III. Rept. U.S. Geol. Surv. Territ. 8: 1 – 283.Google Scholar
  27. Link, J. H. F. (1822). Enumeratio Plantarum Horti Regii Berolinensis Altera. Pars 2. apud G. Reimer, Berolini [Berlin].Google Scholar
  28. McNeill, J., Barrie, F. R., Buck, W. R., Demoulin, V., Greuter, W., Hawksworth, D. L., Herendeen, P. S., Knapp, S., Marhold, K., Prado, J., Prud’homme van Reine, W. F., Smith, J. F., Wiersema, J. H. & Turland, N. J. (eds) (2012). International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi and plants (Melbourne Code) adopted by the Eighteenth International Botanical Congress Melbourne, Australia, July 2011. Regnum Veg. 154: 1 – 240.Google Scholar
  29. Miquel, F. A. W. (1847). Prodromus Monographiae Ficuum. London J. Bot. 6: 514 – 588.Google Scholar
  30. ____ (1848). Prodromus Monographiae Ficuum. London J. Bot. 7: 221 – 236, 425 – 442.Google Scholar
  31. ____ (1867). Annales musei botanici lugduno-batavi, Vol. 3, Pars 7. apud C. G. van der Post, Amstelodami [Amsterdam].Google Scholar
  32. Moore, S. Le M. (1921). Plants from New Caledonia. Monochlamydeae. J. Linn. Soc., Bot. 45: 379 – 415.Google Scholar
  33. Pittier, H. (1944). Notas dendrológicas de Venezuela. Bol. Soc. Venez. Ci. Nat. 9: 119 – 124.Google Scholar
  34. Richard, A. (1850). Tentamen florae abyssinicae seu enumeratio plantarum hucusque in plerisque Abyssiniae provinciis detectarum et praecipue a beatis doctoribus Richard, Quartin Dillon et Antonio Petit (annis 1838 – 1843) lectarum auctore Achille Richard. Vol. 2. apud Arthus Bertrand, Paris.Google Scholar
  35. Ruiz Lopez, H. & Pavón, J. A. (1821). Flora peruviana, et chilensis, sive descripciones, et icones plantarum peruvianarum, et chilensium, secundum systema linnaeanum digestae, cum characteribus plurium generum evulgatorum reformatis. Auctoribus Hippolyto Ruiz, et Josepho Pavon, superiorum permissu. Vol. 4. typis Gabrielis de Sancha, Madrid.Google Scholar
  36. Saporta, G. de. (1863). Études sur la végétation du sud-est de la France à l'époque tertiaire. Ann. Sci. Nat., Sér. 4, Bot. 19: 5 – 64.Google Scholar
  37. ____ (1868). Études sur la végétation du sud-est de la France à l'époque tertiaire. Troisième partie. Ann. Sci. Nat., Sér. 5, Bot. 9: 5 – 64.Google Scholar
  38. Thunberg, C. P. (1786). D.D. [Docente Deo] Ficus genus, dissertatione botanica, cons. exper. Facult. med. upsal. praeside Carol. P. Thunberg, publico examini subjicit, Elias Gedner, Christophori fil. fjerdhundrensis. In Audit. Gust. maj. d. XXI. Decemb. Anno MDCCLXXXVI. Horis A.M. Solitis. apud direct. Joh. Edman, Upsaliae [Uppsala].Google Scholar
  39. Turland, N. J., Wiersema, J. H., Monro, A. M., Deng, Y.-F. & Zhang, L. (2017). XIX International Botanical Congress: Report of Congress action on nomenclature proposals. Taxon 66: 1237 – 1245.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Board of Trustees of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The International Fossil Plant Names Index, National Institute of Carpology (Gaertnerian Institution)MoscowRussian Federation

Personalised recommendations