Cnidoscolus acrandrus (Urb.) Pax & K.Hoffm., Nat. Pflanzenfam.

Maya-Lastra, Carlos A. & Steinmann, Victor W., 2018, A Nomenclator of Cnidoscolus (Euphorbiaceae), Phytotaxa 346 (1), pp. 1-30 : 4

2. Cnidoscolus acrandrus (Urb.) Pax & K.Hoffm., Nat. Pflanzenfam. ed. 2, 19c: 167 (1931).— Jatropha acrandra Urb., Symb. Antill. 7: 515 (1913).— Victorinia acrandra (Urb.) León, Mem. Soc. Cub. Hist. Nat. “Felipe Poey” 15: 243 (1941).— Cnidoscolus acrandrus (Urb.) Pax & K.Hoffm. ex Fern.Casas, Fontqueria 55: 69 (2002), comb. superfl. Type:— DOMINICAN REPUBLIC. Santo Domingo: Prov. Barahona prope Bahoruco juxta flumen, 50 m, September 1911, M. Fuertes 1395 (lectotype BM-000820458!, designated here; isolectotypes A-00139289!, F-V0056793F, G-00434402!, G-00434403!, K-000254137!, NY-00083453!, NY-00842138!, P-00545652!, U-0181379!, US-00731070!, W!).

Distribution:— Dominican Republic (microendemic).

Notes:— We consider the combinations proposed by Fernández Casas (2002b) to validate those initially made by Pax & Hoffmann (1931) to be superfluous. Although Pax & Hoffmann made no reference to the basionym, their combinations were published prior to 1 January 1953. According to Article 41.4 of the ICN ( McNeill et al. 2012) if “no reference to a basionym is given but the conditions for its valid publication as the name of a new taxon or replacement name are fulfilled, that name is nevertheless treated as a new combination or name at new rank when this was the author’s presumed intent and a potential basionym applying to the same taxon exists.” The holotype in B was probably destroyed; here we designated the BM specimen as lectotype.