This is a public-interest archive. Personal data is pseudonymized and retained under GDPR Article 89.

Eugenia name tangle

Warning: if you have an aversion to plant nomenclature, please delete 
this message immediately.

If not, then here's an attempted explanation of the horribly tangled 
Eugenia / Temu / Myrciaria / Blepharocalyx problem.

Tim wrote:

> Re the mysteries, or, particularly, THE mystery. Curiouser and
> curiouser, as the man said... Let me see if I've got this straight.
> Temu divaricata (?or is it -um; sorry; forgotten which) = Myrciaria
> dubia = Eugenia divaricata = (the real, the true, the only)
> Blepharocalyx cruickshankii. And taxonomists wonder why 'ordinary
> gardeners' sometimes get a mite irritated with'em... 

Well, here's a chance to get positively incandescent.....(!)

Eugenia divaricata, as named by O. Berg in 1856, was renamed as Temu
divaricatum by O. Berg in 1861, and as Blepharocalyx divaricatus by 
Niedenzu. in 1893. These three are essentially the same name, i.e. the 
specific epithet "divaricata". They are "nomenclatural synonyms":
same name, same species.

A different name for the same species is Eugenia cruckshanksii, as 
named by Hooker & Arnott in 1833, based on the plant from Valparaiso, 
Chile, and renamed as Blepharocalyx cruickshankii by Niedenzu in 1893. 
This has a different specific epithet, and is a "taxonomic synonym": 
different name, same species.

The earlier specific epithet has priority and is the correct one to use
in whatever genus a taxonomist currently considers is appropriate. Hence
"cruickshankii" (1833) rather than "divaricata" (1856). The genus in
which the species is placed (Blepharocalyx) is a only matter of taxonomic
opinion, whereas the correct species name is ruled by the International
Code of Botanical Nomenclature, which includes (along with many other 
rules) the principle of authority.

Eugenia divaricata as named by Bentham in 1840 does not refer to the same 
species as E. divaricata of O. Berg (1856). These are termed "homonyms": 
same name, different species.

Psidium dubium, as named by Kunth in 1823, refers to the same species 
(i.e. a taxonomic synonym) as Eugenia divaricata of Bentham (1840). 
Current opinion has this species belonging to the genus Myrciaria, so the 
correct name is Myrciaria dubia, rather than M. divaricata, because 
"dubia" is the earlier specific epithet.

Does this make sense?

Hope so....   Nick.
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index