1783
DOI: 10.5962/bhl.title.824
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Encyclopédie méthodique. Botanique

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
24
0
1

Year Published

1957
1957
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 58 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
24
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…93) -"I cannot hes itate" -considered it a species of Randia L., this placement was amended in the errata and "Index sexualis" of the same book, wherein he instead recognized the taxon at generic level, with a name in reference to its "beautifully reclining branches". The name Randia longiflora had already been published by Lamarck (1789), whose resurrection of Randia is also mentioned in Salisbury's description. Unfortunately, the diagnostic characteristics of the new genus were not much discussed by Salisbury, who apparently planned to detail that elsewhere ("in alio loco fusius exponam"; Salisbury, 1808: Index Sexualis).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…93) -"I cannot hes itate" -considered it a species of Randia L., this placement was amended in the errata and "Index sexualis" of the same book, wherein he instead recognized the taxon at generic level, with a name in reference to its "beautifully reclining branches". The name Randia longiflora had already been published by Lamarck (1789), whose resurrection of Randia is also mentioned in Salisbury's description. Unfortunately, the diagnostic characteristics of the new genus were not much discussed by Salisbury, who apparently planned to detail that elsewhere ("in alio loco fusius exponam"; Salisbury, 1808: Index Sexualis).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of genera later to be included in Vanguerieae, the two ®rst were Canthium (Lamarck 1783) and Vangueria (Jussieu 1789). Canthium was partly de®ned by having two locules and Vangueria by ®ve.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…308" only leads to Tournefort's (1719: 308) "Daucus Hispanicus, umbellâ maximâ", without any additional information. Lamarck (1783), who had accessed Tournefort's specimen (cf. Thellung, 1926), characterised the Linnaean species in the same sense as Desfontaines (1798) later described his D. maximus, a binomial that included in synonymy Tournefort's polynomial and referred to Linnaeus's D. mauritanicus with a question mark.…”
Section: ■ Background and Original Materials Of Daucus Mauritanicusmentioning
confidence: 99%