(2774) Cassyta baccifera J.S. Muell., Ill. Syst. Sex. Linnaei: t. 29. 1 Dec 1771 [Angiosp.: Cact.], nom. cons. prop.

Typus: [icon in] Mueller, Ill. Syst. Sex. Linnaei: t. 29. 1 Dec 1771.

(=) Cactus parasiticus L., Syst. Nat., ed. 10: 1054. Mai–Jun 1759, nom. rej. prop.

Lectotypus (vide Mottram & Hoxey in Cactician 13: 92. 2020): [icon in] Plumier, Pl. Amer.: t. 197, fig. 2. 1758.

The name Rhipsalis baccifera has been in use for the past 80 years for the most naturally wide‐ranging species of Cactaceae. This epiphyte is widespread in the American tropics, from Florida (U.S.A.), eastern Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean, southwards to Bolivia and northeastern Brazil, and it is the only naturally occurring cactus in the Old World, having long‐distance dispersed in prehistoric times to the humid parts of Africa, Madagascar, the Comores, Seychelles and Sri Lanka, where it is represented by various subspecies (Hunt & al., New Cactus Lexicon, Text.: 253. 2006, Illustr.: xi. 2013). In 1939, long before it was possible to conserve specific names, William Stearn (in Cactus J. (Croydon) 7: 107. 1939) combined the priorable Cassyta baccifera J.S. Muell. (Ill. Syst. Sex. Linnaei: t. 29. 1771) into Rhipsalis, the species having been previously known as Rhipsalis cassutha Gaertn. (Fruct. Sem. Pl. 1: 137. 1788). Rhipsalis baccifera is probably the cactus most represented in herbaria worldwide, since it is one of the easiest members of this succulent family to collect and dry, most forms also lacking spines. It is a conspicuous element of the Neotropical flora, even colonizing older street trees in towns and being amongst the commonest of pendent epiphytes, such as in the Brazilian city of Belém do Pará, eastern Amazônia. The name Rhipsalis baccifera is employed in many flora accounts and online checklists in countries throughout its range and is in the living collection databases of botanic gardens. An online search for the name Rhipsalis baccifera between 1980 and 2020 has recovered 1100 records, of which 365 were retrieved when restricting the search for scientific papers (341 for scientific articles). Recently, however, an older name, Cactus parasiticus L. (Syst. Nat., ed. 10: 1054. 1759), based on a mixture of the cactus and look‐alike cylindrical‐leaved orchids (Campylocentrum or Dendrophylax), has been resurrected and lectotypified by Mottram & Hoxey (in Cactician 13: 91–92. 2020) with the cactus element, using the cited illustration of a Caribbean plant discovered and drawn by Charles Plumier in the 17th century. These authors argued convincingly that in later publications Linnaeus restricted its application to the cactus element. Their decision displaces the universally used R. baccifera with a name that has hitherto never been in use, no doubt because its mixture of typifiable elements has discouraged authors from taking it up; indeed, earlier rules had required a name derived from two or more discordant elements to be rejected. Cactus parasiticus was cited in the synonymy of R. cassutha with a “?” by the cactus monographer Karl Schumann (Gesamtbeschreib. Kakteen: 622. 1898). On the other hand, the subsequent American monographers, N.L. Britton & J.N. Rose (Cactaceae 4: 219. 1923), stated that the type of Cactus parasiticus was “a species of Vanilla, probably V. claviculata Swartz” (Orchidaceae). As reported by Jarvis (Order out of Chaos: 372. 2007), Barthlott & Taylor (in Bradleya 13: 73. 1995), in a synopsis of Rhipsalideae, had earlier indicated their intention to formally reject the Linnaean name, but subsequently this action was not taken in the belief that orchidologists were going to lectotypify C. parasiticus in favour of one of the orchid elements, thereby removing the threat to R. baccifera. For reasons now lost sight of this did not happen, and so, in order to prevent undesirable nomenclatural change, Cassyta baccifera, the basionym of R. baccifera is here proposed for conservation against Cactus parasiticus. Aymonin (in Humbert, Fl. Madagasc. 145: 114. 1983) lectotypified Cassyta baccifera by the only surviving element, J.S. Mueller's (l.c.) detailed illustration.

（2774）Cassyta baccifera JS Muell。，Ill。Syst。性别。林奈：t。1771年12月29日[Angiosp .: Cact。]，标称值。缺点 支柱。

Typus：[图标] Mueller，伊利诺伊州系统。性别。林奈：t。1771年12月1日。

（=）C. Cactus parasiticus L.，Syst。Nat。，ed。10：1054。Mai–Jun 1759，nom。rej。支柱。

Lectotypus（在Cactician中的Vott Mottram＆Hoxey见13：92。2020）：Plumier，Pl。美国：t。图197 2. 1758。

在过去的80年中，Rhipsalis baccifera这个名称已被广泛用于最广泛的仙人掌科物种。这种附生植物广泛分布于美国热带地区，从佛罗里达州（美国），墨西哥东部，中美洲和加勒比海，向南至玻利维亚和巴西东北部，是旧大陆唯一的天然仙人掌，其长距离分布在到非洲，马达加斯加，科摩罗，塞舌尔和斯里兰卡的潮湿地区的史前时期，这里以各种亚种为代表（Hunt等人，《新仙人掌词典》，文本：253。2006； Illustr。：xi。2013） 。1939年，在可以保留特定名称的很长时间之前，William Stearn（在Cactus J.（Croydon）7：107。1939年）中合并了优先使用的Cassyta bacciferaJS Muell。（Ill。Syst。Sex。Linnaei：t。29 . 1771）进入Rhipsalis，该物种以前被称为Rhipsalis cassutha Gaertn。（Fruct.Sem.Pl.1：137.1788）。牛油树可能是全世界范围内最常见的仙人掌植物，因为它是该多肉植物家族中最容易收集和干燥的成员之一，大多数形式也缺乏刺。它是新热带植物群中的一个显着元素，甚至在城镇中的老树上定居，并且是最常见的垂饰植物之一，例如在巴西东部的亚马孙尼亚州贝拉姆·帕拉。名称Rhipsalis baccifera在其整个国家/地区的许多植物区系帐户和在线核对清单中均受雇，并在植物园的生活收藏数据库中使用。在1980年至2020年之间，在线搜索Rhipsalis baccifera这个名称已检索到1100条记录，其中有365条在限制搜索科学论文时被检索到（对于科学文章，为341条）。然而，最近，一个较老的名字叫Cactus parasiticus L.（Syst。Nat。，ed。10：1054. 1759），其基础是仙人掌和类似长圆柱叶兰花的混合物（Campylocentrum或Dendrophylax），已被Mottram＆Hoxey（在Cactician 13：91–92。2020）中使用仙人掌元素进行复活和电赋型，使用了查尔斯·普鲁米耶（Charles Plumier）在17世纪发现和绘制的加勒比植物的引用插图。这些作者有说服力地争辩说，在后来的出版物中，林奈将其应用限制在仙人掌元素上。他们的决定取代了迄今从未使用过的普遍使用的R. baccifera，这无疑是因为其可归类的元素的混合使作者不愿使用它。实际上，以前的规则要求拒绝来自两个或多个不和谐元素的名称。Cassutha的同义词引用了仙人掌寄生虫加上“？” 由仙人掌专着卡尔·舒曼（Gesamtbeschreib。Kakteen：622. 1898）所著。另一方面，随后的美国专着NL Britton＆JN Rose（仙人掌4：219。1923年）指出，仙人掌寄生物的类型是“香草的一种，可能是V. claviculata Swartz”（兰科）。正如贾维斯（Jarvis）所报道（混乱中的秩序：372。2007）一样，巴特洛特和泰勒（Bradleya 13：73. 1995）在Rhipsalideae的提要中，早先表示了他们打算正式拒绝Linnaean名称的意图，但随后采取了这一行动。并不认为兰花学家要对拟寄生梭菌进行定型有利于兰花元素之一，从而消除了对R. baccifera的威胁。由于现在的原因，没有看到这种现象的发生，因此，为了防止发生不希望的命名变化，在此提出了R. baccifera的原名Cassyta baccifera，以防寄生仙人掌。Aymonin（Humbert，Fl。Madagasc。145：114. 1983）通过唯一的幸存元素，JS Mueller（lc）详细说明进行了典型的Cassyta baccifera电选型。