The Australian Plant Name Index (APNI) is a tool for the botanical community that deals with plant names and their usage in the scientific literature, whether as a current name or synonym. APNI does not recommend any particular taxonomy or nomenclature. For a listing of currently accepted scientific names for the Australian vascular flora, please use the Australian Plant Census (APC) link above.
Showing Melicope littoralis
- APC
- Plantae(reg.)
- Charophyta(div.)
- Equisetopsida(cl.)
- Magnoliidae(subcl.)
- Rosanae(superordo)
- Sapindales(ordo)
- Rutaceae(fam.)
- Melicope(gen.)
- littoralis(sp.)
-
APC Comment: This species is considered to be endemic to Norfolk Is. There is however a specimen of it at BRI labelled in Allan Cunningham’s hand as “Brisbane River, Cunningham 23”. It is probably mislabeled. No other material of the species has been seen from Australia and according to P.S.Green (in litt.) there is a K sheet of Melicope littoralis which is labeled in Cunningham’s hand as “Norfolk Island, Cunningham 23”. F.M. Bailey, Queensland Fl. 1: 201 (1899), reported M. littoralis from Queensland (as Evodia littoralis) citing the above Brisbane R. collection and a Field Naturalists’ Excursion collection from Eumundi. The latter is M. vitiflora. There are some other reports of M. littoralis (as E. littoralis) from Australia (e.g. N.C.W.Beadle, Student’s Fl. NE New South Wales 4: 545 (1980), but they are probably erroneous and most likely based on misidentified M. vitiflora). -
APC Dist.: NI
-
Text: "This species is considered to be endemic to Norfolk Is. There is, however, a specimen of it at BRI labelled in Allan Cunningham's hand as Brisbane River, Cunningham 23. It is probably mislabelled. No other material of the species has been seen from Australia and according to P.S.Green (in litt.) there is a K sheet of M. littoralis which is labelled in Cunningham's hand as Norfolk Island, Cunningham 23. Frederick M. Bailey, Queensland Fl. 1: 201 (1899), reported M. littoralis from Queensland (as Evodia littoralis), citing the above Brisbane R. collection and a Field Naturalist's Excursion collection from Eumundi. The latter is M. vitiflora. There are some other reports of M. littoralis (as E. littoralis) from Australia, (e.g. N.C.W.Beadle, Student's Fl. N E New South Wales 4: 545 (1980), but they are probably erroneous, most likely being based on misidentified M. vitiflora. There is no doubt that Melicope vitiflora and M. littoralis are distinct from one another. The former differs mainly in having smaller, persistent (vs. deciduous) sepals, smaller, adaxially pubescent (vs. adaxially glabrous) petals, pilose, apically subulate (vs. glabrous, apically obtuse) staminal filaments, and smaller, non-beaked (vs. beaked) follicles."