(1565) Proposal to conserve the name Caesalpinia sinensis (Hemsl.) Vidal against C. chinensis Roxb. (Leguminosae: Caesalpinioideae)

Abstract

Caesalpinia is a pantropical genus of Leguminosae with 120-150 species. In preparing the manuscript of the Leguminosae: Caesalpinioideae for the Flora of China, we came across a threat to the name Caesalpinia sinensis (Hemsl.) Vidal with a basionym of 1887, which has consistently been accepted for a species native from the northern Indochina peninsula to south China since Vidal's revision of Asiatic Caesalpinia (Bull. Mus. Natl. Hist. Paris ser. 3, 395 (Bot. 27): 69-136, 1976). There exists an overlooked earlier homonym, C. chinensis Roxb., that first appeared in the 1832 edition of Flora Indica, and which was based on sterile specimens from plants cultivated in a botanic garden in Calcutta believed to be of Chinese origin. The name has never been adopted since then, however. Later authors either ignore the name (e.g., Cheng in Chen, Fl. Reipubl. Popul. Sin. 39: 96-111, 1988) or prefer to treat it as a synonym of Caesalpinia crista L. (e.g., Forbes & Hemsley in J. Linn. Soc. (Bot.) 23: 206, 1887 (as C. nuga (L.) Ait.), and Vidal, I.c.). According to Art. 53.3 Ex. 9 (a voted example) of the ICBN (Greuter & al., Regnum Veg. 138. 2000), C. chinensis and C. sinensis are to be treated as homonyms. So Vidal's combination is illegitimate because it is to be regarded as a later homonym (Art. 53.1) of C. chinensis Roxb., and thus it cannot be used. Vidal (I.c.) treated two species described by Merrill, C. tsoongii Merr. (in Philip. Joum. Sci. 27: 162. 1925) and C. stenoptera Merr. (in J. Am. Arb. 19: 35. 1938), as synonyms of C. sinensis and this taxonomic treatment has been generally accepted. The correct name for the species is, therefore, C. tsoongii Merr., but this name has been adopted for C. sinensis only by D. Fang & al. (Enum. PI. Guangxi, 1986). Otherwise, the name has been cited only as a synonym of C. sinensis. On the other hand, the name C. sinensis (Hemsl.) Vidal is widely used in taxonomic and medicinal bibliography, for example: Larsen & al. (Fl. Camb., Laos et Viet-Nam 18: 36. 1980); Cheng (in Chen, Fl. Reipubl. Popul. Sin. 39: 102. 1988); Fu. & al. (Higher P1. China 7: 33-34. 2002); Xie & Yu (Enum. & Icon. Chin. Trad. Med. P1. China, 440. 1996); Anonymous (Yunnan Medical Company) (Enum. Chin. Trad. Med. P1. Yunnan, 218. 1993). To employ the correct yet little known name C. tsoongii and abandon the widely used name C. sinensis will cause unnecessary instability in taxonomy and much inconvenience to the medicinal industry. We thus propose to conserve the name Caesalpinia sinensis (Hemsl.) Vidal against its earlier homonym, Caesalpinia chinensis Roxb.