Cinnamomum goeppertii Ettingshausen (1883a: 15

Doweld, Alexander B., 2017, New names in Cinnamomoides, Cinnamomum and Neolitsea (Lauraceae), and Pterospermum (Malvaceae), fossil and living, Phytotaxa 326 (3), pp. 189-201 : 192

Cinnamomum goeppertii Ettingshausen (1883a: 15 ; 1883b: 189) (‘Goepperti’).

≡ Daphnogene javanica Göppert (1854: 44) ≡ Cinnamomum javanicum (Göppert) van Konijnenburg-van Cittert, van Waveren & Jonkers (2004: 8), nom. illeg., non Blume (1826: 570).

Holotype:— INDONESIA. Java Island, Tji-Gembong, Tandjung , Junghuhn 354 ( RGM 11814 , Naturalis Biodiversity Center, Leiden, The Netherlands).

IFPNI: 0F6FEF8C-D892-45BB-8789-73FB0E96A8D4.

Note:—The fossil-species Daphnogene javanica Göppert , if transferred into Cinnamomum , should receive a new name to avoid homonymy with the previously published Cinnamomum javanicum Blume. Thus , C. goeppertii Ettingshausen , proposed for D.javanica Göppert , was correct.Van Konijnenburg-van Cittert et al. (2004), disagreed with the correct re-naming of Ettingshausen, and proposed instead a new combination, Cinnamomum javanicum (Göppert) van Konijnenburg-van Cittert, van Waveren & Jonkers, which is a later homonym of Cinnamomum javanicum Blume. They wrote: “Von Ettingshausen (1883a) transferred the species with a slightly different diagnosis, but based only on Goeppert’s specimen to the genus Cinnamomum and created (illegitimately) a new name, C. goeppertii . This is not allowed according to the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (Greuter et al., 2000). The combination should have been named Cinnamomum javanicum ”. They obviously overlooked the fact that this name was already occupied by an extant species. In sum, the earlier correct name C. goeppertii Ettingshausen should be reinstated.

In addition, the precise date of publication of Ettingshausen’s Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Tertiärflora der Insel Java, missing in Taxonomic Literature II ( Stafleu & Mennega 2000: 419), is clarified here. The work was published as a preprint between 11 and 18 August 1883 (vide weekly records of newly published books and main serials in Vienna: Österreichische Buchhändler-Correspondenz # 33, S. 332. 18 Aug 1883) [http://fossilplants.info/publications/ 2C20E891-6E54-414D-9F4D-F09BAC3AD519]; the journal issue of Sitzungsberichte (Heft 1–3 for 1883) was published later, 8–15 September, 1883 (vide Österreichische Buchhändler-Correspondenz # 37, S. 373. 15 Sept 1883) [http://fossilplants.info/publications/ 91AEB095-E31B-48D4-8E2C-8521B4131296].

The dates of publication of Göppert’s Die Tertiärflora auf der Insel Java were indicated in Taxonomic Literature II ( Stafleu & Cowan 1976: 967) as 1854 and 1857, for two parts. However, the work was published as a whole (pages [1]–169, [1, err.], pl. 1–14) and presented to the Parliament of the Netherlands (Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal) on 11 July 1854: Verslag der Handelingen van de Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal 9: 1058. 1854 [http://fossilplants. info/publications/ 46B42CBD-C9A5-4C2A-B264-E9574F652CFF]. So, all scientific names in this work of Göppert should be dated as published in 1854, not 1857.