PROPOSAL TO REJECT THE NAME LIMONIA ACIDISSIMA L. NOM. AMBIG. REJIC. IN FAVOUR OF L. ELEPHANTUM (CORR.), COMB. NOV.

Abstract

In I753, Linnaeus in his Species Plantarum ed. I, established Schinus limonia for specimens collected from Ceylon and deposited in Hermann's Herbarium vol. i, p. 76 and vol. 2, p. 8 (BM). In synonymy, he quoted Tserou Katou Naregam of Rheede's Hortus Malabaricus vol. 4, giving reference t. I2. However, in I762, in his Species Plantarum ed. 2, he renamed S. limonia L. Limonia acidissima L. and changed the reference from t. 12 to t. 14. But t. 14 is good illustration of quite different plant later to be named Limonia crenulata Roxb. (I795). Because of this, the name Limonia acidissima L. was invariably mistakenly applied to the plant L. crenulata Roxb. for wellover hundred years, despite the fact that the latter does not occur in Ceylon. This mis-application of the name Limonia acidissima L. was first pointed out by Trimen (1887: I42). Later, Swingle (I914) also fully supported Trimen's comments on the typification of L. acidissima L., which, according to them, should be restricted to the Wood Apple tree widespread in India, Ceylon to Indochina. All the same, the name continued to be used in the wrong sense well into the present century. For examples, Guillaumin in Lecomte, Fl. Indo-china I: 655 (I9II), Haines, Bot. Bihar & Orissa: 163 (I925) and Craib, Fl. Siam Enum. i: 229 (I926), all use L. acidissima L. for what should have been called L. crenulata Roxb. Peculiarly, even Gamble reverted to this in his Man. Indian Timbers ed. 2 (I922) with the comment as this is not critical botanical work I prefer to adhere to the old name, although earlier in his Fl. Presid. Madras I: I12 (I915), he had followed Trimen in appropriately naming the same taxon L. crenulata Roxb. Having clearly established that the name Limonia acidissima L. (1762) is applicable to the Wood Apple, Swingle (1914, I943) did not in fact use this name but adopted Feronia limonia (L.) Swingle. His initial argument (I914) for this treatment was that he considered the generic name Limonia L. (1762) to be later homonym of Limonium Mill. (I754) and the earliest generic name available to be, therefore, Feronia Correa (800o). Under the latter generic name the earliest specific epithet limonia L. (1753) is, of course, available. However, I agree with Airy Shaw (I938) who argued convincingly against Swingle's interpretation and cited the example of Peponia and Peponium given in Art. 75 of the ICBN (I972) two separate valid generic names. Swingle's (1943: 465-466, foot note) further contention that Linnaeus failed to give generic description of Limonia L. in 1762, can now be discounted in the light of the second paragraph of Article I3, Note 3 of the ICBN (I972). His third argument, that Limonia L. was derived from two or more entirely discordant elements (cf. Art. 70 of ICBN, I972) and is therefore, to be rejected nomen confusum is no longer tenable because the i2th International Botanical Congress, Leningrad I975 voted to delete Art. 70, from the Code, and it cannot now be invoked. more telling argument by Swingle for rejection of the name Limonia is that it has long been used in different senses and should be rejected nomen ambiguum. But Art. 69 of ICBN I972 amended during the Leningrad Congress I975 (see Taxon 25(I): I72 (I976) states A name must be rejected if it has been widely and persistently used for taxon not including its type. Since the lectotypification of Schinus limonia L. (Limonia acidissima) by the specimen in the Hermann herbarium vol. 2, p. 8, (see also Panigrahi, I977) makes it unequivocally referable to the Wood Apple, I do not agree with Swingle's view of treating the name Limonia L. nomen ambiguum. Swingle's (I.c.) further argument that because species referred by him to I3 different genera have at various times been transferred to Limonia L., the latter name is a permanent source of confusion or error and therefore is to be rejected, runs counter to Art. 69 amended in I975. I am unable to trace any proposal for conservation of Feronia Correa over Limonia L., promised by Swingle, and I now see no objection to the generic name Limonia L. being used in its correct sense.