Dicotylophyllum, de Saporta, 1894

Halamski, Adam T., 2013, Latest Cretaceous leaf floras from southern Poland and western Ukraine, Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 58 (2), pp. 407-443 : 429-430

Genus Dicotylophyllum auct.

Type: See Remarks below.

Remarks.—Poorly known dicotyledonous leaves have usually been referred to the genus Dicotylophyllum . The author of this name is de Saporta (1894) who described four species ( D. cerciforme , D. hederaceum , D. corrugatum , and D. lacerum ) under the above−mentioned generic name without proposing a type. Several authors mistakenly credited the authorship of the genus to Bandulska (1923). Andrews (1970) proposed D. cerciforme as the type of the genus. However, Sender et al. (2010) interpreted Dicotylophyllum cerciforme de Saporta, 1894 from the Albian of Portugal as a probable nymphaealean leaf and chose it as the type of Ploufolia Sender, Gomez, Diez, Coiffard, Martín−Closas, Villanueva−Amadoz, and Ferrer, 2010 . If D. cerciforme be indeed the type of Dicotylophyllum , then Ploufolia is super−

http://dx.doi.org/10.4202/app.2011.0024

fluous and Dicotylophyllum includes only probable nymphaealeans. Such a situation would cause far−reaching nomenclatorial changes and seems thus undesirable. The way to amend such as situation is by no way obvious given that, contrary to the standard requirements, an unrecognisable type is needed to preserve the usual understanding of the genus. The first possibility is to supersede Andrews’s (1970) choice by virtue of Art. 10.5.b of the Code ( Greuter et al. 2000); in effect, in several cases (this one included) Andrews (1970) selected the first described species of a genus, using thus “a largely mechanical method of selection”. Dicotylophyllum hederaceum de Saporta, 1894 , a minute palmately veined leaf with serrate (lobate?) margin, might be designated. However, the material described by de Saporta (1894) is relatively homogenous and it is not excluded that his four species represent in fact a single biological entity (see also Teixeira 1950). This would result in Dicotylophyllum becoming again a form genus of nymphaealeans. A second possibility is to conserve Dicotylophyllum Bandulska, 1923 against Dicotylophyllum de Saporta, 1894 by virtue of Art. 14 of the Code ( Greuter et al. 2000). Pending a decision on this matter, the name of the discussed genus is given here without any author.