TAXON 69 (5) • October 2020: 1117–1118
synonymy relating to the glabrous-fruited Af. sceptrum (Oliv. &
T. Hanb.) K. Schum. (l.c.: 214). It was also sometimes confused with
Af. melegueta (Van Harten in Econ. Bot. 24: 211. 1970), which was
certainly encouraged by the fact that its epithet was identical to a
pharmaceutical name for the African article of commerce.
Thus, Linnaeus’s Amomum grana-paradisi originally included
at least three species, two of which were not West African. Though
its application was quickly restricted to a West African species, it
has been variably applied to at least three of those. Its adoption for
any of the species involved would increase confusion, and there is
no original material that could serve as a type to fix the meaning
of the name. Gagnepain (l.c.: 371) concluded a century ago that
A. grana-paradisi L. was “une espèce totalement inconnue” (a com-
pletely unknown species). Hepper (l.c.: 133) very reasonably con-
cluded that the name should be rejected as persistently misapplied,
as permitted under editions of the Code prior to the Leningrad Code
(Stafleu & al. in Regnum Veg. 97. 1977). Consistent with that prac-
tice, Burtt & Smith (in Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 31: 180.
1972) agreed that “the application of this name is wholly uncertain
and it was rightly rejected by Hepper.” Though later changes to the
Code made the publication of a formal rejection proposal necessary,
no such proposal was ever published.
Some recent literature has treated Amomum grana-paradisi as
dubious, or simply ignored it. The thorough revision of Aframomum
by Harris & Wortley (in Syst. Bot. Monogr. 104: 183. 2018) listed
Af. grana-paradisi among “doubtful and excluded names” because
“Hepper … showed that we cannot determine which species either
Linnaeus or pre-Linneans were referring to when using the name.”
Lock (in Kew Bull. 35: 299–313. 1980), Sosef & al. (Check-list
Pl. Vasc. Gabon: 417–418. 2008) and Aigbokhan (Annot. Checklist
(2774) Proposal to conserve the name Cassyta baccifera (Rhipsalis baccifera)
against Cactus parasiticus (Cactaceae)
Nigel P. Taylor1 & Daniela C. Zappi2,3
1 University of Gibraltar, Gibraltar Botanic Gardens campus, ‘The Alameda’, Red Sands Road, P.O. Box 843, Gibraltar, GX11 1AA
2 University of Brasilia, Secretaria da Coordenação de Pós-Graduação em Botânica – Caixa Postal 04457, CEP 70919-970, Brasília,
DF, Brazil
3 Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi, Belém, PA, Brazil
Address for correspondence: Nigel P. Taylor, nigelcactus.taylor@gmail.com
DOI https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.12339
First published as part of this issue. See online for details.
(2774) Cassyta baccifera J.S. Muell., Ill. Syst. Sex. Linnaei: t. 29.
1 Dec 1771 [Angiosp.: Cact.], nom. cons. prop.
Typus: [icon in] Mueller, Ill. Syst. Sex. Linnaei: t. 29.
1 Dec 1771.
(=) Cactus parasiticus L., Syst. Nat., ed. 10: 1054. Mai–Jun
1759, nom. rej. prop.
Lectotypus (vide Mottram & Hoxey in Cactician 13: 92.
2020): [icon in] Plumier, Pl. Amer.: t. 197, fig. 2. 1758.
Version of Record
Taylor & Zappi • (2774) Conserve Cassyta baccifera
Vasc. Pl. S. Nigeria: 7, 204. 2014) accepted other names above with-
out listing Af. grana-paradisi as a synonym of any.
Other sources effectively treat Amomum grana-paradisi as if it had
been rejected, though they disagree as to its placement in synonymy.
The Global Biodiversity Information Facility (www.gbif.org) and Plants
of the World Online (powo.science.kew.org) list Am. grana-paradisi as
a synonym of Aframomum melegueta, while some ethnobotanical refer-
ences indicate it to be a synonym of Af. sceptrum (Turay, Med. Pl. Sierra
Leone: 19. 1997; Burkill, Useful Pl. W. Trop. Africa, ed. 2, 5: 315–316.
2000). Tropicos (www.tropicos.org) has claimed that it is illegitimate
because it is a provisional synonym (which is doubly wrong).
If Amomum grana-paradisi were not rejected, it would likely
have priority over any of the names in use for species to which it
might be applied. Adopting this name for any species would cause
confusion because of its substantial history of use for other species.
Allowing Af. grana-paradisi to replace the now well-defined Af.
melegueta would be particularly undesirable because that name is
well known in commerce and in non-taxonomic scientific literature.
Google Scholar, accessed 6 July 2020, returns “about 2930 results”
for “Aframomum melegueta”, versus 4 for “Aframomum grana-para-
disi”, only one of which treats it as an accepted name. Therefore, no
negative effects will result from the rejection of Amomum grana-
paradisi.
Author information
WLA, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7509-0432
Acknowledgements
John McNeill and John Wiersema are thanked for helpful
comments.
The name Rhipsalis baccifera has been in use for the past
80 years for the most naturally wide-ranging species of Cactaceae.
This epiphyte is widespread in the American tropics, from Florida
(U.S.A.), eastern Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean, south-
wards to Bolivia and northeastern Brazil, and it is the only naturally
occurring cactus in the Old World, having long-distance dispersed
in prehistoric times to the humid parts of Africa, Madagascar, the
Comores, Seychelles and Sri Lanka, where it is represented by
1117
German & Al-Shehbaz • (2775) Conserve Lepidium pumilum
various subspecies (Hunt & al., New Cactus Lexicon, Text.: 253.
2006, Illustr.: xi. 2013). In 1939, long before it was possible to con-
serve specific names, William Stearn (in Cactus J. (Croydon) 7:
107. 1939) combined the priorable Cassyta baccifera J.S. Muell.
(Ill. Syst. Sex. Linnaei: t. 29. 1771) into Rhipsalis, the species having
been previously known as Rhipsalis cassutha Gaertn. (Fruct. Sem.
Pl. 1: 137. 1788). Rhipsalis baccifera is probably the cactus most re-
presented in herbaria worldwide, since it is one of the easiest mem-
bers of this succulent family to collect and dry, most forms also
lacking spines. It is a conspicuous element of the Neotropical flora,
even colonizing older street trees in towns and being amongst the
commonest of pendent epiphytes, such as in the Brazilian city of
Belém do Pará, eastern Amazônia. The name Rhipsalis baccifera is
employed in many flora accounts and online checklists in countries
throughout its range and is in the living collection databases of bota-
nic gardens. An online search for the name Rhipsalis baccifera
between 1980 and 2020 has recovered 1100 records, of which
365 were retrieved when restricting the search for scientific papers
(341 for scientific articles). Recently, however, an older name, Cac-
tus parasiticus L. (Syst. Nat., ed. 10: 1054. 1759), based on a mixture
of the cactus and look-alike cylindrical-leaved orchids (Campylocen-
trum or Dendrophylax), has been resurrected and lectotypified by
Mottram & Hoxey (in Cactician 13: 91–92. 2020) with the cactus ele-
ment, using the cited illustration of a Caribbean plant discovered and
drawn by Charles Plumier in the 17th century. These authors argued
convincingly that in later publications Linnaeus restricted its applica-
tion to the cactus element. Their decision displaces the universally
used R. baccifera with a name that has hitherto never been in use,
no doubt because its mixture of typifiable elements has discouraged
(2775) Proposal to conserve the name Lepidium pumilum against L. descemetii
(Cruciferae)
Dmitry A. German1 & Ihsan A. Al-Shehbaz2
1 South-Siberian Botanical Garden, Altai State University, Lenin Ave. 61, 656049 Barnaul, Russia
2 Missouri Botanical Garden, P.O. Box 299, St. Louis, Missouri 63166-0299, U.S.A.
Address for correspondence: Dmitry A. German, oreoloma@rambler.ru
DOI https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.12340
First published as part of this issue. See online for details.
(2775) Lepidium pumilum Boiss. & Balansa in Boissier, Diagn.
Pl. Orient., ser. 2, 6: 21. Jul–Dec 1859 [Angiosp.: Cruc.],
nom. cons. prop.
Typus: [Turkey, Kayseri], “Terrains salés. − Bords des ma-
rais situés à l’ouest de Césarée (Cappadoce)”, 1107 m alt.,
23 Jul 1856, Balansa 448 (G-BOIS barcode G00150395; iso-
typi [exs. No. 999]: BM barcode BM001172145, BP, FI-W
No. 011176 [FI barcode FI005690], G barcodes G00446260
& G00446261, GOET, JE barcode JE00005905, K barcodes
K000642709 & K000642710, P barcodes P05444741,
P05444743 & P05444744, W Nos. 1889-0019374 & 1889-
1118 Version of Record
TAXON 69 (5) • October 2020: 1118–1120
authors from taking it up; indeed, earlier rules had required a name
derived from two or more discordant elements to be rejected. Cactus
parasiticus was cited in the synonymy of R. cassutha with a “?” by
the cactus monographer Karl Schumann (Gesamtbeschreib. Kakteen:
622. 1898). On the other hand, the subsequent American monogra-
phers, N.L. Britton & J.N. Rose (Cactaceae 4: 219. 1923), stated that
the type of Cactus parasiticus was “a species of Vanilla, probably
V. claviculata Swartz” (Orchidaceae). As reported by Jarvis (Order
out of Chaos: 372. 2007), Barthlott & Taylor (in Bradleya 13: 73.
1995), in a synopsis of Rhipsalideae, had earlier indicated their inten-
tion to formally reject the Linnaean name, but subsequently this
action was not taken in the belief that orchidologists were going to
lectotypify C. parasiticus in favour of one of the orchid elements,
thereby removing the threat to R. baccifera. For reasons now lost
sight of this did not happen, and so, in order to prevent undesirable
nomenclatural change, Cassyta baccifera, the basionym of R. bacci-
fera is here proposed for conservation against Cactus parasiticus.
Aymonin (in Humbert, Fl. Madagasc. 145: 114. 1983) lectotypified
Cassyta baccifera by the only surviving element, J.S. Mueller’s
(l.c.) detailed illustration.
Author information
NPT, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8162-0505
DCZ, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6755-2238
Acknowledgement
The authors gratefully acknowledge the help of Prof. John
McNeill in revising this proposal.
0069354, Z barcode Z-000158309, ZT barcodes ZT-00078598
& ZT-00078599).
(=) Lepidium descemetii Rayneval in Bull. Soc. Bot. France 2:
738. Feb (sero)–Mar 1856, nom. rej. prop.
Holotypus: [Ukraine, Kherson prov.], “in salsuginosis insu-
lae Djarilgatsch [Dzharylgach Island] maris Nigri”, 22 Mai
1845, Descemet (K barcodes K000653993 & K000653994
[together on 1 sheet]).
The name Lepidium pumilum Boiss. & Balansa (in Boissier,
Diagn. Pl. Orient., ser. 2, 6: 21. 1859) has been widely applied since