Re: why's omissa not omissa?

Fernando Rivadavia (ss69615@ecc-xs09.hongo.ecc.u-tokyo.ac.jp)
Fri, 1 Nov 1996 11:08:22 +0900 (JST)

Jan and all,

>D.ericksoniae (which was originally identified with _D.omissa_
>by Rica Erickson!) matches both the description and the type specimen
>of _D.omissa_ much better (broad sepals, subglobose fruiting calyx,
>large petals, large leaves) than the plant described and depicted in
>the above cited book as "D.nitidula subsp.omissa" (misapplied name),
>which AFAIK has no valid name until this date.

Cool unraveling sequence! I can't wait to hear Allen Lowrie's
comment on this. Too bad this will take weeks since he's not on e-mail!

Best Wishes,

Fernando Rivadavia
Tokyo, Japan