澄清一种苏木的学名和产地

<正> 陈焕镛和侯宽昭在《华南植物志资料(Ⅰ)》中,命名新种粉叶苏木Caesalpinia hypoglaucaChun et How见(《植物分类学报》7:20,图版6:2,1958),是根据左景烈(C.L.Tso)23669号和梁向日(H.Y.Liang)69846号(Typus)采于十万大山的标本以及Fenzel(芬次尔)据认为采自海南的标本鉴定的。但Fenzel的标本“无号”、“无记录”;且《海南植物志》第二卷(1965)中,对“粉叶苏木”在海南的产地,其叙述也是“具体地点未详”(226页)。所以,该种在海南是否有分布,值得怀疑。

CLARIFICATION ON THE NOMENCLATURE AND LOCALITY OF A SPECIES OF CAESALPINIA

There has long existed a confusion in the nomenclature and locality of the so-called Caesalpinia hypoglauca Chun et How (1958) ("Fenye Sumu"). The author of this paper found that this binonym is a superfluous synonym of Caesalpinia caesia Hand.-Mazz. (1936) (xvGuangxi Yunshi") and its original collections were made in Shiwandashan (located in the south of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region), never in Hainan Island.The name Caesalpinia hypoglauca is based on 3 numbers of specimens collected entirely in Shiwandashan, one of which was G. Fenzel’s collection. The mistake was first made by some taxonomists, such as Chun and How, and later the authors of the Flora Hainanica wrongly took Hainan Island as the locality of Fenzel’s collec? Won.In 1929, G. Fenzel, German silviculturist, made a lot of collections along the Chinese-Vietnamese border as well as in Shiwandashan and Hainan Island. For some reasons the localities of his collections are sometimes confused. Having clarified the nomenclature and locality of the alleged Caesalpinia hypoglauca, the author feels re; sponsible to suggest that Fenzel’s collections should be handled with more care in order to avoid other mistakes.