(2678) Cicendia stricta Griseb. in J. Proc. Linn. Soc., Bot. 6: 143. 15 Mai 1862 [Angiosp.: Gentian.], nom. utique rej. prop. Lectotypus (vide Çiçek in Phytotaxa 184: 105. 2014): Guatemala, pr. Las Nubes, 11 Jan 1857, Wendland 120 (GOET barcode GOET003994). The genus Cicendia Adans. (Fam. Pl. 2: 503. 1763), which was often called Microcala Hoffmanns. & Link (Fl. Portug. 1: 359. 1813–1820) prior to the 1960s, has for well over a century consistently been said to comprise two species, following Gilg (in Engler & Prantl, Nat. Pflanzenfam. IV(2): 68–69. 1895, ‘Microcala’). The two species are Cicendia filiformis (L.) Delarbre (Fl. Auvergne, ed. 2: 29. 1800), native to Europe, the type of the generic name, and C. quadrangularis (Dombey ex Lam.) Griseb. (Gen. Sp. Gent.: 157. 1838), native to North and South America. Recently, however, I received a manuscript for review in which it was said that the genus included a third species, C. stricta Griseb. (in J. Proc. Linn. Soc., Bot. 6: 143. 1862), native to Central America. The name Cicendia stricta is listed in nomenclatural indices, but otherwise it appears never to have been used as an accepted name, or cited in the synonymy of an accepted name, in any publication subsequent to its original publication by Grisebach until 2014. In that year, Çiçek (in Phytotaxa 184: 100–108. 2014) brought attention to this long-unused name in a paper on the typification of certain specific names in Cicendia. Çiçek appropriately lectotypified the name Cicendia stricta by the specimen cited above, but did not comment on the current taxonomic status of the species so named. The lectotype represents the species now known as Gyrandra brachycalyx (Standl. & L.O. Williams) G. Mans. (in Taxon 53: 722. 2004), based on Centaurium brachycalyx Standl. & L.O. Williams (in Ceiba 3: 125. 1952), which has an extensive but discontinuous range extending from central Mexico south to western Panama (Broome in Brittonia 28: 419–421. 1976). Labels on the type specimen indicate that Grisebach had originally considered placing this species in Erythraea Borkh. (in Arch. Bot. (Leipzig) 1(1): 30. 1796), i.e., in the genus that would later be called Centaurium Hill (Brit. Herb.: 62. 1756) s.l., but by the time he published on this species he had decided to place it in Cicendia. In 1894, Knoblauch (in Bot. Centralbl. 60: 359. 1894), who had seen the type specimen, recognized C. stricta as a species of Erythraea. He neither transferred the epithet stricta to Erythraea nor equated C. stricta with any known species already included in that genus, saying instead that the proper disposition of C. stricta would of necessity await further studies of Erythraea. Until now, no other author has identified Cicendia stricta Griseb. with Erythraea, Centaurium, or Gyrandra Griseb. (in Candolle, Prodr. 9: 44. 1845). As implied above, the name Cicendia stricta was not cited or mentioned in any context in Broome's (l.c.) monograph on the Central American species of Centaurium s.l. or in Mansion (l.c.: 719–740) narrowed circumscription of Centaurium, in which publication Mansion's established the new genus Zeltnera G. Mans. and restored acceptance of Schenkia Griseb. (in Bonplandia (Hannover) 1: 226. 1853) and Gyrandra, with nomenclatural transfers to the latter three genera. For the species discussed here, the specific epithet stricta has 90 years’ priority over brachycalyx, and the epithet stricta has not been used in Gyrandra for any species. The transfer of the epithet stricta to Gyrandra would have consequences beyond the change in the name of Gyrandra brachycalyx. The name Centaurium strictum (Schiede) Druce (in Bot. Exch. Club Brit. Isles Rep. 1916: 614. 1917) and its currently accepted homotypic synonym Zeltnera stricta (Schiede) G. Mans. (l.c.: 736) already exist, and are applied to a different, currently accepted species. If the epithet stricta were transferred to Gyrandra, there would then be two species within the historic and still familiar circumscription of Centaurium having the same specific epithet, stricta. This would lead to confusion as to which names were and were not homotypically synonymous, and as to whether the name C. brachycalyx had been reduced to synonymy within Z. stricta. Such confusion is especially likely to arise because G. brachycalyx was sometimes confused with the true Z. stricta (as Centaurium) before the differences between these species were made clear by Broome (l.c.). Conversely, the species here called Gyrandra brachycalyx would have different specific epithets, depending on whether an author followed the historic circumscription of Centaurium or accepted the division of the genus advocated by Mansion. This could lead to additional confusion. Rejection of the long-unused name Cicendia stricta would counter incorrect inferences that a third species of Cicendia is present in Central America, would avoid the potential causes for confusion noted above, and would preserve the distinctive specific epithet which has consistently been used for Gyrandra brachycalyx since 1952. JSP, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9086-2645