Rubus evadens Focke (1910: 117)
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/phytotaxa.114.1.6 |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5079021 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/AD2A87DF-FFB1-FFA1-C2B4-3ABAFBB12128 |
|
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
|
scientific name |
Rubus evadens Focke (1910: 117) |
| status |
|
Rubus evadens Focke (1910: 117) View in CoL .
Rubus viburnifolius Focke (1910: 75) View in CoL , nom. illeg., non Franchet (1895: 63).— Rubus neoviburnifolius Lu & Boufford (2003: 252) View in CoL , nom. illeg. superfl. Type:— CHINA. Yunnan: Simao, collection date unknown, A. Henry 11714 (holotype B, probably destroyed, isotypes A!, E!, K!, MO!, NY!, PE!, US!).
Rubus nanopetalus Cardot (1914: 300) View in CoL . Type :— CHINA. Yunnan:? Yanjin County, Lao-tsou-te-outze, collection date unknown, B. d' Anty s. n. (holotype P-00746126!).
Notes: — Rubus viburnifolius Focke (1910: 75) View in CoL is a later homonym of R. viburnifolius Franchet (1895: 63) View in CoL . In the Flora of China, Lu & Boufford (2003) proposed the name R. neoviburnifolius Lu & Boufford (2003: 252) View in CoL to replace R. viburnifolius Focke. Lu View in CoL & Boufford's name, however, is a nomenclaturally superfluous name, because Focke (1910) had already himself proposed R. evadens View in CoL to replace his earlier later homonym. Therefore the earliest legitimate name, R. evadens Focke View in CoL , is resurrected here.
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 |
Rubus evadens Focke (1910: 117)
| WANG, HUAN-CHONG, WANG, YUE-HUA & SUN, HANG 2013 |
Rubus nanopetalus
| Cardot, J. 1914: ) |
Rubus evadens
| Focke, W. O. 1910: ) |
Rubus viburnifolius Focke (1910: 75)
| Lu, L. D. & Boufford, D. E. 2003: ) |
| Focke, W. O. 1910: ) |
| Franchet, A. 1895: 63 |