Hydnocarpus ¿ pentandra OR pentandrus ?

Skip to first unread message

Dinesh Valke

May 2, 2011, 2:45:47 PM5/2/11
to efloraofindia
Dear friends,

Would like to know the reasoning for both spellings being used: Hydnocarpus pentandra AND Hydnocarpus pentandrus.

Sites like NPGS / GRIN, The Plants List maintain Hydnocarpus pentandrus.
Am sure, Tabish and Shrikant ji have given a thought too, to this discrepancy and have reasoned to keep Hydnocarpus pentandra in their notes.


shrikant ingalhalikar

May 3, 2011, 4:13:59 AM5/3/11
to efloraofindia
Dineshji nomenclature is a debatable subject, I am not competant to
make any comments on preferences, I just follow what BSI says.
Regards, Shrikant

On May 2, 11:45 pm, Dinesh Valke <dinesh.va...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear friends,
> Would like to know the reasoning for both spellings being used: *Hydnocarpus
> pentandra* AND *Hydnocarpus pentandrus.**
> *Sites like NPGS / GRIN, The Plants List maintain *Hydnocarpus pentandrus*.
> Am sure, Tabish and Shrikant ji have given a thought too, to this
> discrepancy and have reasoned to keep *Hydnocarpus pentandra *in their notes
> *.
> *Regards.
> Dinesh*
> *

Dinesh Valke

May 3, 2011, 4:48:21 AM5/3/11
to shrikant ingalhalikar, efloraofindia
Me too agree with you, Shrikant ji ... this subject could be as deep as Mariana's Trench !!
Would go with pentandra ... faintly remember, Pankaj (Sahani) having told me that the trees are associated with male form of the epithet, hopefully not mistaking.


Pankaj Kumar

May 8, 2011, 6:19:22 PM5/8/11
to indiantreepix, Dinesh Valke, Shrikant Ingalhalikar
Respected Sirs
The end depicts the gender.
But gender in ICBN is very technical.
A tree is male, but if it has been given a feminine generic name then
it is to be followed. In other words, even if a name ends with a
masculine suffix, it will be considered as male even if it is not !!!
It is so confusing all the time.

Ideally the name should be Hydnocarpus pentandrus but interestingly in
the original description it is written as
Hydnocarpus pentandra (Buch.-Ham.) Oken Allg. Naturgesch. iii. (2)
1381 (1841) which is attached with the mail.
Basionym: Chilmoria pentandra Buch.-Ham. Trans. Linn. Soc. London
13(2): 501. (1822)
Hamilton's protologue was unfortunately not free.

Article 62.1 of ICBN, Vienna code says: "62.1. A generic name retains
the gender assigned by botanical tradition, irrespective of classical
usage or the author's original usage. A generic name without a
botanical tradition retains the gender assigned by its author.".....
SEE ITS SO CONFUSING. It means, Pankaj Kumar is a girl if his dad says
so :P..... but he is a boy if his dad doesnt say anything or he is a
boy if his dad says so....

First step if to see what the original basionym was? In this case it
was "pentandra" but at the same time, original generic name was also
"Chilmoria", obviously both with the same gender.

Recommendation 62A, of ICBN, Vienna code says: "62A.1. When a genus is
divided into two or more genera, the gender of the new generic name or
names should be that of the generic name that is retained." hence the
new name Hydnocarpus should have been used with pentandrus, but this
was not the case.

Article 61.1 of ICBN, Vienna Code says: "Only one orthographical
variant of any one name is treated as validly published: the form that
appears in the original publication, except as provided in Art. 60
(typographical or orthographical errors and standardizations), Art.
14.11 (conserved spellings), and Art. 32.7 (inproper Latin

Article 60.1 of ICBN, Vienna Code says: "The original spelling of a
name or epithet is to be retained, except for the correction of
typographical or orthographical errors and the standardizations
imposed by Art. 60.5 (u/v or i/j used interchangeably), 60.6
(diacritical signs and ligatures), 60.8 (compounding forms), 60.9
(hyphens), 60.10 (apostrophes), 60.11 (terminations; see also Art.
32.7), and 60.12 (fungal epithets).".

Hence, when you transfer it to new genus it was supposed to retain the
gender of generic name as "Hydnocarpus pentandrus" but this didnt
happen according to the protologue where it is mentioned as
"pentandra". So this name should be retained, according to me and it
should be Hydnocarpus pentandra unless it was corrected by some one
according to another article 32.7 of ICBN Vienna Code, that says,
"Names or epithets published with an improper Latin termination but
otherwise in accordance with this Code are regarded as validly
published; they are to be changed to accord with Art. 16, 17, 18, 19,
21, 23, and 24, without change of the author citation or date of
publication (see also Art. 60.11)".

Hope this is understandable.
Unfortunately I dont know what is Mariana's Trench !! :P

Hydnocarpus pentandra PROTOLOGUE.jpg

Dinesh Valke

May 9, 2011, 1:29:14 AM5/9/11
to Pankaj Kumar, indiantreepix, Shrikant Ingalhalikar
Many thanks dear Pankaj for the elaborate explanation regarding pentandrus and pentandra of Hydnocarpus.
Going with Hydnocarpus pentandra.

About Mariana's Trench ...
Just as we know peak of Mt Everest is the highest place above sea level, so is Marian's Trench lowest below sea level.
More at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariana_Trench.

To me the depth of subject discussed is analogous to that of Mariane's Trench.



2011/5/9 Pankaj Kumar <sahani...@gmail.com>

Pankaj Kumar

May 9, 2011, 2:33:18 AM5/9/11
to Dinesh Valke, indiantreepix, Shrikant Ingalhalikar
If you or anyone else are writing a scientific article on this plant
then in accordance with Article 32.7 of ICBN Vienna Code you can
change the spelling without changing the author citation or date of

2011/5/9 Dinesh Valke <dinesh...@gmail.com>:


Pankaj Kumar Ph.D. (Orchidaceae)
Research Associate
Greater Kailash Sacred Landscape Project
Department of Habitat Ecology
Wildlife Institute of India
Post Box # 18
Dehradun - 248001, India


Apr 17, 2012, 3:40:53 AM4/17/12
to indian...@googlegroups.com
thanks for the info Dr.pankaj kumar
can you get the pdf version of the above document please.
{Hydnocarpus pentandra (Buch.-Ham.) Oken Allg. Naturgesch. iii. (2) 1381 (1841)}
Reply all
Reply to author
0 new messages