(3078) Proposal to conserve the name <i>Sonerila</i>, nom. cons. against <i>Codigi</i> (<i>Melastomataceae</i>)

(3078) Sonerila Roxb., Fl. Ind. 1: 180. Jan–Jun 1820 [Angiosp.: Melastomat.], nom. cons. Typus: S. maculata Roxb. (=) Codigi Quesné in Tessier & Thouin, Encycl. Meth. Agric. 3: 354. 1793, nom. rej. prop. Typus: non designatus. Sonerila, a melastomataceous genus with trimerous flowers, uniparous (scorpioid) cymes, and a 3-locular inferior ovary, was described by William Roxburgh (Fl. Ind. 1: 180. 1820). This Old World genus includes 207 accepted species (POWO, 2025 [https://powo.science.kew.org/, accessed 15 Jan 2025]), distributed from Sri Lanka, India, Nepal, Bhutan, South China, Taiwan, and Indo-China to the Malay Archipelago. Dennstedt (Schlüssel Hortus Malab.: 35. 1818) published “Cassebeeria” and cited “Cassebeeria maculata, IX, 65” (Rheede's illustration in Hort. Malab. 9: 127, t. 65. 1689). In the early 1900s, it was thought that “Cassebeeria” was validly published and had priority over Sonerila Roxb. (1820). Therefore, the proposal by Harms (in Notizbl. Königl. Bot. Gart. Berlin, Append. 13: 29. 1904) to conserve the name Sonerila over “Cassebeeria” (Dennstedt, l.c.) was accepted. Later, it was realized that “Cassebeeria” was not validly published (see https://www.ipni.org/n/26235-1, accessed 15 Jan 2025), and that the proposal was not necessary. Nevertheless, Sonerila remains a conserved name but without any actively competing name currently rejected in its favor. Prior to Roxburgh (l.c.), Michel Adanson (in Diderot & d’Álembert, Encycl. Dict. Sci. Arts, Suppl. 2: 487. 1776) described “Codigi” and cited “par Van-Rheede, dans son Hortus Malabaricus, vol. IX, planche LXV, page 127, sous le nom Malabare soneri ila”. At the end of his account Adanson wrote of “Codigi”: “Cette plante n'a encore été déterminée par aucun botaniste, & elle forme un genre particulier dans la famille des campanules” (This plant has not yet been determined by any botanist, and it forms a particular genus in the campanula family). Although it is clear that he recognized it as a valid genus, Adanson's heading comprised only the single word “CODIGI”, which he identified (from Rheede, l.c.: t. 65) as of Brahmi (“Brame”) origin, with no indication of its usage either in French (entries of many French terms are preceded by the symbol “§”) or in Latin. Lamarck (Encycl. 2: 62. 1786) also published “Codigi”, but likewise not validly, because there was just the single entry “CODIGI” without any evident Latin equivalent – and also, more importantly, because “Codigi” does not appear in the list of Latin names of genera on p. 771. It was Lamarck's usual practice to give the name in both languages, even when he considered the French and the Latin to be the same. Any doubt of “Codigi” not being intended as a scientific name is resolved by Quesné (in Tessier & Thouin, Encycl. Meth. Agric. 3: 354. 1793), who clearly gives “CODIGI, Codigi”. Thus, Codigi was certainly validly published by Quesné (l.c.) in 1793, as he was the first to establish the Latin name ‘Codigi’ and also referred to Adanson's description. The name Codigi is not in use in any major on-line databases (IPNI [https://ipni.org], Plants of the World Online [https://powo.science.kew.org/], TROPICOS [https:// tropicos.org], all accessed 15 Jan 2025). From 1820 to the present, the genus name Sonerila has been consistently used in over 40 monographs, floras and checklists, including Wight & Arnott (Prodr. Fl. Ind. Orient.: 321. 1834), Miquel (Fl. Ned. Ind. 1: 561. 1855), Clarke (in Hooker, Fl. Brit. Ind. 2: 529. 1879), Cogniaux (in Candolle & Candolle, Monogr. Phan. 7: 507. 1891), Clement (in Long & Grierson, Fl. Bhutan 2: 297. 1984), Renner & al. (in Larsen & Nielsen, Fl. Thailand 7: 482. 2001), and Chen & Renner (in Wu & al., Fl. China 13: 390. 2007). As further evidence, Google Scholar records over 700 citations of Sonerila since 1820 and not a single one for Codigi. Both Codigi and Sonerila refer to the same genus and the former has priority over the latter. In order to maintain nomenclatural stability, we propose that Sonerila Roxb. (1820) be conserved against Codigi Quesné (1793). We thank Dr. D.J. Mabberley (Oxford and Sydney) for identifying the nomenclatural problem; Dr. John McNeill (Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh, RBGE), Dr. K.N. Gandhi (Harvard University), and Dr. Subir Bandyopadhyay (Kolkata) for their valuable comments; and Dr. A.A. Mao, Director, Botanical Survey of India and The Head, Southern Regional Centre, Coimbatore and the Head, Department of Botany, University of Calicut for facilities. SN is thankful to the Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF), New Delhi, for funding (Sanction No: EMR/2018/007346, dated 29 October 2022). RS is grateful to the Botanical Survey of India for awarding the Research Associate Fellowship, International Association for Plant Taxonomy for the IAPT Research Grant 2020, and the Government of Kerala for financial assistance.