Oberonia lycopodioides (J.Koenig) Ormerod

Geiger, D. L., 2020, Studies in Oberonia 8 (Orchidaceae: Malaxideae). Additional 24 new synonyms, a corrected spelling, and other nomenclatural matters, Blumea 65 (3), pp. 188-203 : 196

Oberonia lycopodioides (J.Koenig) Ormerod

Oberonia lycopodioides (J.Koenig) Ormerod in Seidenf. (1995) 21. — Epidendrum lycopodioides J. Koenig (1791) 21. Lectotype (designated by Averyanov 2013): Koenig s.n., 5 Sept. 1779 (lecto K: not seen in 2018, not in K database; isolecotype LIV), [Peninsular Malaysia,] Malacca.

Notes — Oberonia ancipita used by Náves in Blanco (1880: 230) with ‘type’ Cuming 2115 (BM 000088321, K s.n., L.1513842, MO 125587, Philippines; Bohol on one portion of K sheet) has been identified as a synonym of O. lycopodioides (e.g., Bunpha et al. 2019, WCSP 2020). Náves referred to ‘ Malaxis ancip . Rchb.f. in Walp l. c. 214 ex Vidal ms Philipp, fide’. The entry by Náves was not intended to be an introduction of a new name as he clearly attributed the name ancipita to Lindley, and also cited ‘ Malaxis ancip . Rchb in Walp. l. c. 214’ (= Reichenbach 1861: 214). The confusion might have started with Reichenbach (1855: 223) inflecting Lindley’s species epithet anceps in his Latin text: ‘aff. O. ancipiti; quae in affinibus anciptibus Lindl.; In O. ancipiti (e.g., Cuming 2115)’. The ancip... spelling is only found in Reichenbach (1855: in Bonplandia) and not in Reichenbach (1861). It suggests that Náves’ reference to ‘Rchb.f. in Walp.’ is a further error and should have referred to Bonplandia. The mention of Cuming 2115 by Náves, copied from Reichenbach (1855) and not found in Reichenbach (1861), should be regarded as a voucher for the presence of the species in the Philippines, and not as a type designation. Oberonia ancipita is an orthographic variant of Oberonia anceps by Náves without any nomenclatural consequences. Vidal (1886: 266) referred to O. ancipita, Lindl. ? ( Malaxis anceps Reichb.f. ) so wondered whether ancipita was a Lindley name, not a Náves name. It is further evidence that Náves never intended to introduce a new name, and that it was not perceived as a new name by his contemporaries. It is not clear when the orthographic variant was given the status of a distinct taxon; Merrill (1924: 307), Kress et al. (2003) and Bunpha et al. (2019) are the only known sources that use the name, in all cases as a synonym of O. anceps or O. lycopodioides . A contributing factor for the confusion could be the rarity of the work. A copy could be examined in the P library. Cuming 2115 has been confirmed to be O. lycopodioides by the present author. Náves introduced known orthographic spelling variants such as Phalaenopsis lueddemannii for P. lueddemanniana Rchb.f. Accordingly , treating Oberonia ancipita as an orthographic variant has a precedent with other ‘names’ in Náves (in Blanco 1880).