Castanopsis lanceifolia (Oerst.) Hickel & A.Camus, Bull. Soc. Bot.

Turner, Ian M., 2022, FROM ACACIA TO ZIZIPHUS: PLANT NAMES COMMEMORATING THE BOTANIST WILLIAM ROXBURGH, Edinburgh Journal of Botany 79 (1911), pp. 1-102 : 31

Castanopsis lanceifolia (Oerst.) Hickel & A.Camus, Bull. Soc. Bot. France 68: 394 (1922).

– Quercus lanceifolia Roxb., Fl. Ind. 3: 634 (1832), as ‘lanceaefolia’, nom. illegit., non Q. lancifolia Schltdl. & Cham. (1830) . – Pasania lanceifolia Oerst., Vidensk. Meddel. Naturhist. Foren. Kjøbenhavn 1866: 84 (1866), as ‘lanceaefolia’. – Castanopsis roxburghiana S.N.Biswas, Bull. Bot. Surv. India 11: 189 (1971) [‘1969’], nom. illegit., superfl. – Type: [unpublished illustration] Icones Roxburghianae 2384 (lectotype K, designated here). Figure 5 .

Biswas published Castanopsis roxburghiana as a nomen novum for Roxburgh’s later homonym Quercus lanceifolia . However, this was not required as Pasania lanceifolia Oerst. stands as a replacement and basionym for the accepted Castanopsis lanceifolia .

Cayratia roxburghii Gagnep., Notul. Syst. (Paris) 1: 346 (1911). – Vitis roxburghii M.A.Lawson, Fl. Brit. India 1(3): 655 (1875), nom. illegit., non V. roxburghii Wight &

Arn. (1834). – Cissus roxburghii Planch., Monogr. Phan. 5(2): 572 (1887), nom. illegit.,

non C. roxburghii Peterm. (1845) . – Type : India, Courtallam, R. Wight 427 (lectotype E [ E00174262 ], designated by Shetty & Singh, Kew Bull. 44: 473 [1989]; isolectotypes E [ E00174263 , E00174264 , E00174265 ], K [ K001089959 ]) .

Cayratia roxburghii Gagnep. represents a replacement name for Vitis roxburghii M.A.Lawson , a later homonym.

Figures

Figure 5. The lectotype of Quercus lanceifolia Roxb., and hence Castanopsis lanceifolia (Oerst.) Hickel & A.Camus. Icones Roxburghianae 2384 in the collection of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. Reproduced with the permission of the Board of Trustees of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew.