[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Ludwigia glandulosa
Chuch H. wrote:
" From what I have learned thus far, "Ludwigia peruensis" is unlikely to be
synonymous with L. glandulosa. If it is not an outright misnomer, the
species designation, peruensis, leads me to think of Peru. Has a Peruvian
Ludwigia sp. ever been described?"
That came to mind, and there is a Ludwigia peruviana (L.) H.Hara listed in
the Green Card Index (Harvard University) and in the Australian Plant Names
Index. The citation for both listings is the same - The Journal of Japanese
Botany 28 (Oct. 1953) 292, so they are both referring to the same plant. The
name is a synonym of Jussiaea peruviana L., which appeared in Species
Plantarium in 1753 and apparently was collected in Peru in 1714 (L. E.
Feuillée, Hist. Pl. Med. Peru Chile 716, t. 9. 1714).
Plugging the species epithet "peruenis" into the APNI search engine gives 5
hits - all members of the Asteraceae (Compositae) family, and none of them
are names of aquatic plants.
Ludwigia is in a different family altogether, the Onagraceae, which has 24
genera, 2 with aquatic species - Ludwigia and Boisduvalia.
You can get quite the history lesson tracking down a name.
The APNI lists 395 records for Ludwigia, but "peruensis" is not among them -
that's why I doubt its validity. I don't know where Arthur found the name,
but I suspect it was probably a hobbyist or hobby related website, and it
isn't uncommon to find mistakes (unintentional) in names on those types of