Re: pygmy Drosera + taxonomic querry

Jan Schlauer (
Tue, 7 Nov 1995 12:01:27 +0100


>> The name _D.echinoblastus_ (...)

> I didn't understand this bit.

Look, _D.echinoblastus_ is not a beautiful name. Nevertheless it is valid
and correct. The substantival epithet meaning something like "Sundew, the
hedgehog-bud" (in Latin (or rather Latinized Greek), "sundew" and the
attribute have different genders). If it should be "Hedgehog-budded
sundew", the name would have to be spelled "D.echinoblasta" (with an
adjectival epithet).

> About this bit, Allen told me his intention was to publish is as
>"D.echinoblast*a*" (which any of you can see in his volume 2 of Aussie
>CPs), but it was Marchant who told him it would be best to publish it as
>"D.echinoblast*us*". I guess Allen accepted because Marchant was the
>"professional" taxonomist and supposedly knew what he was doing.

Well, it is only a matter of taste but at least in this case I think that
my taste is closer to Allen's than to Marchant's.

> Now Jan, you told me that when this type of error occurs, it
>immediately reverts to the correct form, without anyone having to publish
>another article stating the error. So wouldn't this also apply to the
>D.echinoblastus case? Shouldn't it be switched to D.echinoblasta?

No because _D.echinoblastus_ is not a spelling error (it is *only* not
elegant, IMHO).

The opposite is the case with Nepenthes hamatus and Nepenthes glabratus,
both epithets were *intended* to be adjectival ones, only KOSTERMANS (who
prepared the protologues for TURNBULL & MIDDLETON) thought that _Nepenthes_
was male (which he could have recognized not to be the case if he had
looked at _N.distillatoria_, the first valid name in the genus).

>Or maybe their speedy evolution
>hasn't given them time to get well organized at the gene regulation and
>expression level.

Then Lentibuariaceae must have evolved at an even greater speed, with
_Utricularia_ having "forgotten" how to form "normal" vegetative parts!

Kind regards