Magnolia singapurensis (Ridl.) H.Keng

Chen, J. & Baldini, R. M., 2020, Flora of Singapore precursors, 19: Nomenclatural notes on Artabotrys (Annonaceae) and Magnolia (Magnoliaceae), Blumea 65 (3), pp. 179-187 : 186

Magnolia singapurensis (Ridl.) H.Keng — Fig. 6

Magnolia singapurensis (Ridl.) H. Keng (1978) 129. — Talauma singapurensis Ridl.(1914) 323. — Magnolia candollei (Blume) H.Keng var. singapurensis (Ridl.) Noot. (1987) 376, nom. illeg. (see note 2) — Magnolia liliifera (L.) Baill. var. singapurensis (Ridl.) Govaerts in Frodin & Govaerts (1996) 71. — Lirianthe liliifera (L.) Sima & S.G.Lu var. singapurensis (Ridl.) Sima & S.G.Lu (2012) 61. — Lectotype (designated by Dandy 1928): Ridley 5091 (lecto BM000551337;isolecto MEL2085479,MEL2121641,SING0067862, UC267519), Singapore, Chan Chu Kang, 1891. See note 1.

Talauma kutcinensis A. Agostini (1926) 191. — Type: Beccari PB 2102 (holo FI007529 ),[ Malaysia,] Sarawak,‘ Kutcin’ [Kuching], July 1866. See note 3.

Notes — 1. Ridley cited two syntypes (Ridley 3656 and 5091) in his protologue of Talauma singapurensis . Subsequently, Dandy (1928) provided a type statement ‘Ridley 5091 (type in Herb. Brit. Mus.; Herb. Berlin)’ that constitutes the first effective lectotypification of this name. Therefore, the BM specimen of Ridley 5091 ( Fig. 6a ) is the lectotype of Talauma singapurensis . A superfluous lectotypification was performed by Nooteboom (1987), who designated the SING duplicate of Ridley 5091 as lectotype instead. Nooteboom (2012) erroneously regarded the BM specimen as a holotype .

2. When Keng (1978) transferred Talauma candollei Blume ( Blume 1823) to Magnolia , he made a new combination ‘ Magnolia decandolli ’ that was intended to be a replacement name in order to avoid generating a later homonym of Magnolia candollei Link ( Link 1831) . However, Magnolia candollei and ‘ Magnolia decandolli ’ are to be considered orthographic vari- ants (commemorating Augustin Pyramus de Candolle) and thus homonyms. An even earlier homonym exists, i.e., Magnolia decandollei Savi ( Savi 1819) , which makes Keng’s name il- legitimate and also Nooteboom’s combination which is based on Keng’s name.

3. Agostini (1926) cited a single gathering ( Beccari PB 2102 ) collected in 1866 in her protologue of Talauma kutcinensis . Agostini spelt the specific epithet as ‘ kutcinensis ’ whereas Nooteboom (1987, 1988) spelt the specific epithet as ‘ kuteinensis ’. ‘Kutcin’ is probably an orthographical variant of Kuching, an administrative division in Sarawak, whereas ‘Kutei’ is probably an orthographic variant of Kutai, a historical region in East Kalimantan. Because Beccari travelled largely within Kuching in 1866 ( Van Steenis-Kruseman 1950), the original spelling of the specific epithet ‘ kutcinensis ’ should be used. Agostini (1926) mentioned that she consulted the Webb’s Herbarium in FI, where we located a sole specimen of Beccari PB 2102 . Thus, the FI-B specimen ( Fig. 6b ) is the holotype of Talauma kutcinensis .

Figures

Fig. 6 a.Lectotype of Talauma singapurensis Ridl.(= Magnolia singapurensis (Ridl.) H.Keng),Ridley 5091 (BM000551337); b. holotype of Talauma kutcinensis A.Agostini (= Magnolia singapurensis (Ridl.) H.Keng), Beccari PB 2102 (FI007529).