Evodia or Euodia?

John McNeill johnm at ROM.ON.CA
Tue Nov 26 15:55:42 CST 1996

I find Elaine Chittendon's comment that "Evodia" is "the most used"
quite extrraordinary.  I have checked all the referecne works to hand
and do not find any that do not use "Euodia".  It apears that this was
J.R. & G. Forster's original spelling.  In addition to the NCU-3,
Brummitt(Vasc. Pl. Families and Genera. 1992), Mabberley, Willis, and
Zander, the two papers that I have seen dealing with the genus (Taxon
38: 119-124; Taxon 20: 795) use Euodia.  John
From: John McNeill, Director, Royal Ontario Museum, 100 Queen's Park,
      Toronto, Ontario, M5S 2C6, Canada.
      Tel.: 416-586-5639      Fax: 416-586-8044
      e-mail: johnm at rom.on.ca

______________________________ Reply Separator
Subject: Evodia or Euodia?
Author:  Elaine Chittenden <chitt at GNDS.MSU.EDU> at INTERNET
Date:    26-11-96 15:31

The Rutaceous genus Evodia has 2 different spellings and I thought it
quicker and more personable and more fun to inquire on taxacom rather than
let Evodia win just because it is the most used.  I would like to know what
the correct spelling truly is.  Krussman apparently lists Euodia while the
RHS index for Cultivated Plants used here complicates matters by refering
all Evodia to Tetradium (as Mabberley does also).  I'd like to use Evodia
with some rational provided by those who care.

I would be most appreciative to hear from the Rutaceae folks and others
interested which one they think I should choose as the correct spelling.

Thank you,  Elaine
Elaine Chittenden        Email:chitt at gnds.msu.edu
Collections Manager, W. J. Beal Botanical Garden
Grounds Maintenance, Michigan State University

More information about the Taxacom mailing list