Hypericum cernuum, Roxb. ex D. Don, 1825
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5852/ejt.2015.108 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3795250 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/0385BB6B-FFC7-9F2D-FF45-FB78FB82AF19 |
treatment provided by |
Carolina |
scientific name |
Hypericum cernuum |
status |
|
Roxburgh (1832b: 400) referred to Hardwicke’s description of a Hypericum (of which there was only one) and that seeds of this were sent by Hardwicke to Calcutta for cultivation. There is a Hardwicke specimen of the plant in BM (no. 4 sides of High mountains Flos in April Figurd no. 4) and the matching drawing is in the British Library (Vol. XIV no. 60). Roxburgh’s name for the plant had first been validated by David Don in the Prodromus Florae Nepalensis without reference to Hardwicke. Don referred to a Kamroop (a plant collector employed by Wallich) specimen from Srinagar. I could not find this in the BM collection where it would be expected. The earliest name for the species is Hypericum oblongifolium of Choisy, who apparently based his species on a Roxburgh specimen labelled Hypericum cernuum forwarded to de Candolle by Aylmer Lambert. The de Candolle Herbarium (G-DC) sheet including this material also contains a later specimen received from Wallich. The shoot with Roxburgh’s ticket in his hand and another with the Lambert details are indicated as separate specimens with different barcode numbers, as does the third shoot from Wallich. I take the Roxburgh and Lambert elements to comprise a single specimen and consider them in combination to make up the holotype.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |