identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
457F87AD0D6635189BFCFB12FF36FF43.text	457F87AD0D6635189BFCFB12FF36FF43.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pharbitis caerulea Wall.	<div><p>Pharbitis caerulea Wall.</p> <p>Ipomoea nil (L.) Roth (1797: 36). Convolvulus nil Linnaeus (1762: 219). Pharbitis nil (L.) Choisy (1834: 441). Type: Dillenius, Hort. Eltham. 1 (1732) 96, t. 80 f. 91 (lectotype, designated by Verdcourt (1957)).</p> <p>Ipomoea caerulea Roxb. ex Ker Gawler (1818: t. 276). Convolvulus caeruleus (Roxb. ex Ker Gawl.) Sprengel (1824: 593), as ‘ coeruleus ’. Pharbitis caerulea (Roxb. ex Ker Gawl.) Wall. in O’Shaughnessy (1841: 505). Lectotype (designated here): Ker Gawler, Bot. Reg. 4 (1818) t. 276. Epitype (designated here): cult. in Hortus Botanicus Calcuttensis, [EIC 1373.3] (K-W)).</p> <p>Pharbitis caerulea is the only new combination made in The Bengal Dispensatory that appears in IPNI (www.ipni.org). The combination is credited to Wallich in the book and based on ‘ Ipomoea caerulea Kön. ’ with a reference to the second edition of Roxburgh’s Flora Indica (Roxburgh 1832). The species had actually been included in the first edition (Roxburgh 1824) based on a name supplied by J. König. However many of Roxburgh’s species, because they were mostly published posthumously from manuscripts that had been wholely or partly in circulation, were validated at earlier dates by other authors. Ipomoea caerulea first appeared in The Botanical Register in 1812. The author of the text in the early volumes was John Bellenden Ker Gawler (Stafleu &amp; Cowan 1979). The species was described and illustrated from material grown from seed at the nursery of Whitley &amp; Co. in Fulham, London. The seed had been obtained from the Botanic Garden in Calcutta presumably under the name Ipomoea caerulea. Ker Gawler cited ‘Roxb. corom. ined.’, which presumably is a reference to manuscript material that Roxburgh sent to Sir Joseph Banks who was overseeing publication of Roxburgh’s Plants of the Coast of Coromandel. I have not been able to trace any herbarium specimens (BM, K) relating to the material of Ipomoea caerulea described or drawn in The Botanical Register and therefore I lectotypify the species to the illustration prepared by Sydenham Edwards. The Wallich Herbarium contains specimens named Ipomoea caerulea that were cultivated in the Calcutta Botanic Garden and I designate one of these as epitype. The plant is correctly referred to Ipomoea nil (L.) Roth.</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/457F87AD0D6635189BFCFB12FF36FF43	Public Domain	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.		Plazi	Turner, I. M.	Turner, I. M. (2011): The contribution of Sir William Brooke O’Shaughnessy (1809 - 1889) to plant taxonomy. Phytotaxa 15: 57-63, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.7
457F87AD0D6735189BFCFEB8FD75FD31.text	457F87AD0D6735189BFCFEB8FD75FD31.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Abelmoschus longifolius (Willd.) Wall.	<div><p>Abelmoschus longifolius (Willd.) Wall.</p> <p>Abelmoschus esculentus (L.) Moench (1794: 617). Hibiscus esculentus Linnaeus (1753: 696). Lectotype (designated by van Borssum Waalkes 1966): Herb. Linn. 875.31 (LINN).</p> <p>Hibiscus longifolius Willdenow (1800: 827). Abelmoschus longifolius (Willd.) Wall. in O’Shaughnessy (1841: 215). Holotype: INDIA. Klein s.n. (B, fide van Borssum Waalkes (1966)).</p> <p>Willdenow (1800) described Hibiscus longifolius from Indian material. This species has generally been considered a synonym of the okra or lady’s fingers plant, Abelmoschus esculentus (L.) Moench. In The Bengal Dispensatory the combination Abelmoschus longifolius appears, attributed to Wallich. This is a much earlier publication of the name than given in IPNI.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/457F87AD0D6735189BFCFEB8FD75FD31	Public Domain	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.		Plazi	Turner, I. M.	Turner, I. M. (2011): The contribution of Sir William Brooke O’Shaughnessy (1809 - 1889) to plant taxonomy. Phytotaxa 15: 57-63, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.7
457F87AD0D6735189BFCFD6BFCC1F9E9.text	457F87AD0D6735189BFCFD6BFCC1F9E9.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Scilla pancration (Steinh.) O'Shaughnessy	<div><p>Scilla pancration (Steinh.) O’Shaughnessy</p> <p>Drimia pancration (Steinh.) J.C. Manning &amp; Goldblatt in Manning et al. (2003: 557). Squilla pancration Steinheil (1836a: 371), (1836b: 279). Scilla pancration (Steinh.) O’Shaughnessy (1841: 662). Urginea pancration (Steinh.) Ogilvie (1855: 373). Urginea maritima subsp. pancration (Steinh.) Richter (1890: 218). Charybdis pancration (Steinh.) Speta (1998: 60). Type: originally from Malta but cultivated in France.</p> <p>Steinheil segregated the Mediterranean plant Scilla maritima into a separate genus, Squilla, and at the same time separated a new species from Scilla maritima, which he called Squilla pancration. Stafleu and Cowan (1985) indicate that this was first published by Steinheil (1836a), who was an army doctor, in October 1836 in a French journal of military medicine, but most taxonomic works cite Steinheil’s paper (Steinheil 1836b) from a botanical journal of November 1836. As there is no reference to the earlier publication in this work, there are no nomenclatural repurcussions relating to authors failing to cite the earliest publication.</p> <p>In The Bengal Dispensatory, Scilla pancration is listed with other Scilla species. There is no author given for the name and no reference to Squilla pancration. However, as the full title of The Dispensatory indicates, Lindley’s works were consulted by O’Shaughnessy and he refers to Squilla pancration in his Flora Medica (Lindley 1838). This indirect reference and the unique epithet make it clear that a transfer from Squilla to Scilla has been effected by O’Shaughnessy, and the combination is considerably earlier than that presently listed in IPNI. Currently the species is considered to be a member of the largely African genus Drimia (Manning et al. 2003). In researching the synonymy of the species I also found an earlier publication for the combination Urginea pancration. This had been attributed to de Philippe in a number of publications, but I have not been able to trace any original work. Speta (1998) provides reference to a French journal of engineering, but this is a short account of the starch extraction business run by one J. Giordano de Philippe (Anonymous 1863), with no mention of species names.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/457F87AD0D6735189BFCFD6BFCC1F9E9	Public Domain	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.		Plazi	Turner, I. M.	Turner, I. M. (2011): The contribution of Sir William Brooke O’Shaughnessy (1809 - 1889) to plant taxonomy. Phytotaxa 15: 57-63, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.7
457F87AD0D67351F9BFCF953FE2AFA60.text	457F87AD0D67351F9BFCF953FE2AFA60.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hebradendron pictorium (Roxb.) Lindley 1838	<div><p>Hebradendron pictorium</p> <p>IPNI attributes this taxon to Royle (1847: 305), but it appears earlier in The Bengal Dispensatory. However Lindley provided the combination before that in his Flora Medica (1838). All these authors base the combination on Garcinia pictoria Roxb. Garcinia pictoria first appeared as a name in the Hortus Bengalensis (Roxburgh 1814). Note that this must not be confused with Xanthochymus pictorius Roxb., which was published earlier but refers to another species, and to add to the confusion de Candolle (1824) mistakenly referred to as Xanthochymus tinctorius and set in train further nomenclatural complications.</p> <p>Garcinia pictoria did not appear with Roxburgh’s description until the posthumous publication of his complete Flora Indica in 1832. However Mabberley (1977) argued that Buchanan-Hamilton had published a description of Garcinia pictoria in his commentaries on the Herbarium Amboinense of Rumphius (Hamilton 1826). Buchanan-Hamilton believed that a tree he knew from gardens in and around Calcutta was the same as the Rumphian ‘ Arbor mundo ’. The English text before the Latin description is somewhat convoluted. Buchanan-Hamilton says he first encountered the plant in a garden at Baruipur near Calcutta in 1799. He reports that Roxburgh referred to this tree as Garcinia pictoria but he has ‘very little doubt’ that the tree is Oxycarpus indica of the ‘Encyclopedie (Sup. iv. 257)’ [Oxycarpus indica (Thouars) Desr. ≡ Garcinia indica (Thouars) Choisy ex DC.]. There is no internal evidence that Buchanan-Hamilton was accepting Garcinia pictoria [or Garcinia tinctoria as he referred to it in one place] as the correct name for the ‘ Arbor mundo ’, and there is further external evidence that Oxycarpus indica was the name he accepted for it. There is an unpublished manuscript by Buchanan-Hamilton that lists the plant specimens from Bengal that he donated to the East India Company in 1822. A microfilm copy, in the British Library, includes the entry: 1118 Oxycarpus indica. This cites a long synonymy including: ‘ Garcinia pictoria Hort. Beng. 42 sed subnomine G. cornea a hortulensis ostenditur’ and ‘ Arbor mundo dicta Herb. Amb. i 135’. The specimens that Buchanan-Hamilton gave to the East India Company were included in the vast collection that Wallich sorted, listed and dispersed (Mabberley 1977). Number 4852 in the catalogue refers to Garcinia cornea Roxb. and lists 4852B as Oxycarpus indica Hb Ham. A second set of Buchanan-Hamilton’s Bengal collections were presented to Edinburgh University and are now to be found in the herbarium of the Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh (E) (Mabberley 1977). There is a sheet in the collection numbered 1118, which was collected from the Calcutta Botanic Garden on 30 November 1814 and labelled Oxycarpus indica (M. Watson, personal communication). In the Wallich Herbarium at Kew, sheet 4852B is also labelled Oxycarpus indica and bears the same date as the Edinburgh sheet. There seems little doubt that the K-W specimen is a true duplicate of the Edinburgh sheet but it does not bear Buchanan-Hamilton’s number. The specimens, the unpublished specimen list and the published account (Hamilton 1826) all confirm that Buchanan-Hamilton accepted Oxycarpus indica rather than Garcinia pictoria as the name for the ‘ Arbor mundo ’. Graham (1836) came to same conclusion a decade after Hamilton’s publication.</p> <p>Garcinia cornea is a Linnean name based on another Rumphian species ‘ Ligneum corneum ’. Roxburgh (1832) referred indirectly to Linnaeus in Flora Indica by citing Willdenow, but his description is based on plants growing in Calcutta probably derived from trees grown in Colonel Robert Kyd’s garden, planting material of which came from the Moluccas. Buchanan-Hamiton’s Oxycarpus indica and Roxburgh’s Garcinia cornea are doubtless the same species/taxon as can be seen from the Wallich and general herbaria at Kew which include specimens originating from Roxburgh and specimens from Calcutta when Wallich was superintendent of the Botanic Garden. The material does not belong to G. cornea, which is a much more robust plant, or Garcinia indica. Buchanan-Hamilton noted that his plant was near G. celebica L., and indeed I include it in that species.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/457F87AD0D67351F9BFCF953FE2AFA60	Public Domain	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.		Plazi	Turner, I. M.	Turner, I. M. (2011): The contribution of Sir William Brooke O’Shaughnessy (1809 - 1889) to plant taxonomy. Phytotaxa 15: 57-63, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.7
457F87AD0D60351E9BFCF9BFFCEEFE01.text	457F87AD0D60351E9BFCF9BFFCEEFE01.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Garcinia celebica Linnaeus 1754	<div><p>Garcinia celebica Linnaeus (1754: 7).</p> <p>Brindonia celebica (L.) Thouars in Cuvier (1806: 341). Garcinia triflora Stokes (1812: 12), nom. superfl. Oxycarpus celebica (L.) Poiret (1816: 258). Stalagmitis celebica (L.) Don (1831: 621). Lectotype (designated by Merrill 1917): Herb. Amb. 1 (1741) 134, t. 44.</p> <p>Oxycarpus indica auct. non (Thouars) Desr.: Hamilton (1826: 346). Voucher: INDIA. Calcutta, Honourable East India Company’s Botanical Garden, Anonymous s.n., 30 November 1814 ([EIC 4852 B] ex Herb. Hamilton (K-W); 1118 (E)).</p> <p>Garcinia cornea auct. non L: Roxb. (1832: 629). Voucher: INDIA. s. loc., Anonymous s.n., s. dat. ([EIC 4852A] ex Herb. Roxburgh (K-W)).</p> <p>Garcinia pictoria was not published by Buchanan-Hamilton and its authorship is correctly referred to Roxburgh. There are some obvious differences between Roxburgh’s description of G. pictoria and Buchanan- Hamilton’s account of Oxycarpus indica. Most notably Roxburgh states that G. pictoria is only known from the highest parts of Wynaad District (in what is now the state of Kerala in south-west India) and attempts to bring it in to cultivation in the lowlands have repeatedly failed. There are also Roxburgh icons [available online at: http://apps.kew.org/floraindica/home.do] of Garcinia cornea [1446] and G. pictoria [2279] that show them to be different. The Garcinia from the Calcutta garden is not G. pictoria as published by Roxburgh. Garcinia pictoria Roxb. is generally considered a synonym of Garcinia morella (Gaertn.) Desr., though Maheshwari (1964) in a revision of Indian Garcinia kept it separate. There is a G. pictoria specimen in the herbarium of the Natural History Museum (BM), annotated ‘Flowers of the Wynaad Gamboge tree from Mr Dyer’, which is suitable as a lectotype for the species.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/457F87AD0D60351E9BFCF9BFFCEEFE01	Public Domain	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.		Plazi	Turner, I. M.	Turner, I. M. (2011): The contribution of Sir William Brooke O’Shaughnessy (1809 - 1889) to plant taxonomy. Phytotaxa 15: 57-63, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.7
457F87AD0D61351E9BFCFE5CFB74FDEF.text	457F87AD0D61351E9BFCFE5CFB74FDEF.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Garcinia pictoria Roxburgh 1832	<div><p>Garcinia pictoria Roxburgh (1832: 627).</p> <p>Hebradendron pictorium (Roxb.) Lindley (1838: 114). Lectoype (designated here): INDIA. Wynaad, Roxburgh 180 (BM-000611609).</p> <p>What remains unclear is whether Roxburgh did indeed apply the name Garcinia pictoria, at least for a while, to the G. celebica trees in Calcutta, or whether Buchanan-Hamilton erred in this matter.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/457F87AD0D61351E9BFCFE5CFB74FDEF	Public Domain	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.		Plazi	Turner, I. M.	Turner, I. M. (2011): The contribution of Sir William Brooke O’Shaughnessy (1809 - 1889) to plant taxonomy. Phytotaxa 15: 57-63, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.15.1.7
