CLADONIA SYLVATICA AND THE DESCRIPTIVE METHOD OF LINNAEUS

Abstract

When a wellknown name of a very common species is suddenly changed for nomenclatural reasons we always feel disagreeable and regret that no possibility exists for conservation of specific names. An actual case is Cladonia sylvatica (L.) Hoffm., in 1961 changed by T. Ahti to C. arbuscula (Wallr.) Rabenh. Taxon vol. 14 (pp. 228231) J. W. Thomson claims that the rejection of the epithet sylvatica was based upon a misunderstanding of the descriptive method of Linnaeus. However, a critical study of the Species Plantarum and other publications by Linnaeus leaves no doubt that Ahti was correct in his interpretation of the case in question. The problem was raised in 1953 when, in a new commented edition of Linnaeus's Iter Dalecarlicum J. A. Nannfeldt pointed out (p. 232): In spite of the fact that Linnaeus is always cited as the author of all three species mentioned [Cladonia rangiferina, C. and C. alpestris] he was obviously totally unfamiliar with the existence of two distinctly different types of the 'common reindeer lichen', which are easily and surely recognized already by their colours (pure-grey to greyish-white in C. rangiferina, and yellowish-greenish-white in C. silvatica (translated from Swedish). his Flora Lapponica (1737 p. 335) Linnaeus stated the occurrence of two different types of reindeer lichen, one species and its variety: Lichen noster in Botanicorum scriptis delineatus quodammodo convenit cum eo, qui in campis arenosis & siccioribus crescit, sed datur & varietas quaedam major, quam a nullo depictam observavi, nisi a solo Wormio in suo musaeo .... The division into two parts of the whole species of reindeer lichen is clearly shown in Flora Suecica (ed. 1, 1745 p. 358; italics by R.S.): Habitat ubique in sylvis praesertim in montosis sterilibus.