I am concerned about the correct epithet for the Brazilian plant we are looking into, so did some checking for the protologues for 2 names above. I was able to track down the original publication for Ipomoea flammea Nees [in Flora 4: 301. 1821] and that name was published on 21 May 1821. Then in a subsequent article [Flora 4: 329] dated 7 June 1821, Nees equated "36. Convolvulus igneus Schr. ist Ipomoea stammea m." [this has to be a typo for 'flammea'].
But I have not been able to locate the protologue for the Schrader name. The citation as given by IPNI is wrong: the journal should correctly be Gött. Gel. Anz. [not Goelt. Gel. Anz. as stated] but that is not available on Biodiversity Heritage Library, nor any other on-line source I know of.
My concern here is which name is earlier? It is entirely possible that Schrader's name was published earlier than Nees' - we simply can't be sure at this point. When Nees noted in second publication above that the 2 species are the same, his note is signed "Bonn, den 9 Mai 1821. Nees v. Esenbeck" which is worrisome because 9 May is 12 days before the effective date of publication for Ipomoea flammea Nees! If Nees was already aware of the Schrader name on 9 May, and equated it with Ipomoea flammea, then it must mean that the Schrader name was published earlier. Nees became aware of it while his own manuscript was in press and he thus had an early opportunity to claim that Schrader's name was the same species as his own.
Anyway, both names appear to be legitimate (no homonyms blocking their availability to be taken up) so we just need to work out the precise dating for the Schrader name's publication. Will see if I can get the necessary pages from a German colleague.
The 2 attachments have the Nees articles (in 2 parts, sorry) that provides full details on dating.
Add new comment