Abstract
The generic name Laurentia Adanson (Fam. P1. 2: 134, 568 (1763)) must be rejected as superfluous under Art. 63 of the current (1978) Code. Adanson employs it simply as a substitute for Lobelia L. (Gen. P1. ed. 5: 401 (1754)) and cites 'Lobelia Lin.' as a synonym. The reasons for his doing so are made clear on p. 157 of the Famille des Plantes, vol. 2. Here he uses the name Lobelia in the sense of Plumier, for the genus subsequently named Scaevola by Linnaeus (Mantissa Altera: 145 (1771) nom. cons.). It would be possible, of course, to maintain Laurentia as a nomen conservandum, but I am disinclined to propose conservation, partly because Laurentia seems uncomfortably similar to Laurencia Lamour. (Rhodophyta, nom. cons.) and partly because C. B. Presl (Prodr. Mon. Lobel.: 32 (1836)) has provided a satisfactory alternative name for the genus, or rather for that part of the genus which F. E. Wimmer (in Engl., Pflanzenr. 102 (IV. 276 b): 387 (1953)) has referred to Sect. 1 Solenopsis (C. Presl) Endl. Solenopsis C. Presl is of no economic, and trifling horticultural, importance.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
