Search

In the protologue of Mespilus cotoneaster L., a low red-fruited shrub, Linnaeus indicated the distribution of the species as "in Europae frigidioris collibus apricis inque Pyreneis, Ararat" and references to, for example, Hortus cliffortianus and Bauhin's Pinax were given. However, at the same time it is obvious that Linnaeus knew this species mainly from Sweden. In Flora Suecica ed. 1: 147. 1745 he cited it (as "Mespilus foliis ovatis integerrimis") from "Uplandiae, Oelandiae, Smolandiae, Scaniae c Lid, Norsk Flora, ed. 1-5. 1944-1985; Hamet-Ahti & al., eds., Retkeilykasvio, ed. 1 & 2. 1984, 1986; Hansen, ed., Dansk feltflora. 1981; Mossberg & al., Den Nordiska Floran. 1992). The species is a relatively common constituent of the vegetation of dry, rocky places in southern and central Norway and Sweden, and it also occurs in southern Finland and on Bornholm in Denmark. The name has been used extensively outside the Nordic countries as well. So, for example, Browicz (in Fl. Europaea 2: 72.1968) regarded C. integerrimus as a species distributed over large parts of Europe. This situation changed when Hylmd (in Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 87: 305-330. 1993) circumscribed the common red-fruited Cotoneaster in Scandinavia in a narrower

Pyracantha coccinea is a shrub growing naturally in N.E. Spain, S. France, central Italy, the Balkan Peninsula, the Black Sea coast, Anatolia, Caucasus and N. Iran. Elsewhere it is extensively cultivated in gardens of temperate areas, and sometimes naturalized. Due to its wide distribution and common occurrence it is mentioned in several relevant floras (e.g. Pojarkova in Komarov, Fl. SSSR 9: 414. 1939; Ball in Tutin & al., Fl. Eur. 2: 73. 1968; Riedl in Rechinger, Fl. Iran. 66: 65. 1969; Browicz in Davis, Fl. Turkey 4: 132. 1972), and in gardening literature (e.g. Rehder, Man. Cult. Trees Shrubs, ed. 2: 357. 1987; Everett, N. Y. Bot. Gard. Ill. Encycl. Hort. 8: 2855. 1981; Knees in Cullen & al., Eur. Gard. Fl. 4: 438. 1995). Unless conserved, the name Pyracantha coccinea, unquestioned for more than 150 years, must under the rule of priority (Art. 11.4) be displaced by P. pauciflora, a forgotten name for the same taxon. Mespilus pauciflora Poir. was transferred to Crataegus as C. pauciflora (Poir.) Pers. (Syn. P1. 2: 37. 1806), to Pyracantha as P. pauciflora M. Roem. (Fam. Nat. Syn. Monogr. 3: 220. 1847) and later combined at the rank of variety in some genera (M. pyracantha var. pauciflora (Poir.) Dum. Cours., Bot. Cult., ed. 2, 5: 450. 1811; C. pyracantha var. pauciflora (Poir.) Steud., Nomencl. Bot., ed. 2, 1: 433. 1840; P. coccinea var. pauciflora (Poir.) Dippel, Handb. Laubholzk. 3: 421. 1893). Roemer (I.c.) had already stated: "Ex autoritate cl. Sprg. huc ducta, caeterum a nullo botanico helvetico memorata", and modern Swiss floras also omit this name (e.g. Hess & al., Fl. Schweiz 2: 472. 1970). To clarify the identity of Pyracantha pauciflora we examined the microfiche of the original material kept in P-LAM (IDC, fiche No. 221[14]). The plant is doubtless the same as P. coccinea, as also confirmed by M. Kerguelen who kindly examined it. The specimen label agrees with Poiret's indication of provenance: "dans les environs de Lausanne, par le citoyen Reynier". In view of this, and in order to maintain general usage, it seems most desirable to conserve the name P. coccinea against P. paucifiora, as here proposed. The type of Pyracantha coccinea is the same as that of Mespilus pyracantha L. (Sp. PI.: 478. 1753) for which it is a substitute name (Art. 7.3). A search of the Lin