Re: Iris domestica

 

Goldblatt and Mabberly. Unlike dichotoma, it had never been considered a member of the genus Iris, and since Iris chinensis already exists (as a synonym for Iris japonica) it required a new name.

It was originally described by Linnaeus as Ixia chinensis, and later renamed Belamcanda by someone who realized it wasn't related to Ixia. I don't have access to the whole paper, but apparently Linnaeus *also* named a specimen of the species asÂEpidendrum domesticumÂ(placing it in a genus of orchids), so Goldblatt and Mabberly used that specific epithet in combination with Iris.

If you're a splitter who thinksÂIrisÂis too encompassing, it looks likeÂPardanthusÂactually has priority overÂBelamcandaÂby a year and would be the correct name. They have both been referred to that genus asÂPardanthus chinensisÂandÂPardanthus dichotomus.

Sean Z

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Dennis Kramb d*@badbear.com [iris-species] <i*@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Â

Who is responsible for Belamcanda chinensis going back to Iris domestica? I know the when & why, but I don't know the who.

Thanks,
Dennis in Cincinnati


Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index