Abstract
To present all the relevant information in order to discuss this point of nomenclature would require more space than is available in these columns. I shall therefore confine myself to stating that Murbeck and Ostenfeld1 chose deliberately to name this species C. edmondstonii rather than C. arcticum (which latter name they then regarded as a synonym) because the species was originally described as C. latifolium var. edmondstonii. This procedure is, of course, contrary to Article 70 of the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature.
Similar content being viewed by others
Article PDF
References
Bot. Notiser, 246 (1898).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
BRETT, O. Cerastium arcticum, Lange. Nature 173, 89 (1954). https://doi.org/10.1038/173089b0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/173089b0
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.