Mez 1896 (Book) Miscellaneous
Bromeliaceae
Author(s):—C. Mez in De Candolle, C. (ed.). Monographiae Phanerogamarum
Publication:—Masson & Cie., Paris France (1896). — DOI
Pages: 990 Illustrations: not illustrated Size: 16x24 cm
Published names (507):
Taxonomy:— The author wrote in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published and the new combinations in Pitcairnia are published his monograph in 1935 and thus as (Mez) Mez with the basionym in Hepetis. (p.952).—Aechmea columnaris Concidered a synonymy of Aechmea latifolia (p.225).—Caraguata morreniana non Guzmania morreniana (Linden ex E.Morren) Mez .—Hepetis anthericoides The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis brittoniana The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis burchelli The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis carinata The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis ensifolia The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis fendleri The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis gracilis The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis hemsleyana The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis heterophylla var. exscapa The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis lancifolia The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis latifolia var. cubensis The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis lorentziana The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis multiramosa The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis oerstediana The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis pavonii The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis platypetala The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis platystemon The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis poeppigiana The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis pulchella The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis pusilla The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis ruiziana The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis spectabilis The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis staminea var. longicauda The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis taenipetala The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis tenuis The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis theae The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Hepetis weddelliana The author writes in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published. The combinations in Hepetus as in the index are published on corresponding page numbers in the index. (p.952).—Karatas guianensis as "Bromelia guyanensis" Hort. ap. Bak. Brom. p.26. considered a synonym of Bromelia balansae Mez (p.31).—Pitcairnia brittoniana The author wrote in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published and the new combinations in Pitcairnia are published his monograph in 1935 and thus as (Mez) Mez with the basionym in Hepetis. (p.952).—Pitcairnia fendleri The author wrote in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published and the new combinations in Pitcairnia are published his monograph in 1935 and thus as (Mez) Mez with the basionym in Hepetis. (p.952).—Pitcairnia hemsleyana The author wrote in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published and the new combinations in Pitcairnia are published his monograph in 1935 and thus as (Mez) Mez with the basionym in Hepetis. (p.952).—Pitcairnia lorentziana The author wrote in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published and the new combinations in Pitcairnia are published his monograph in 1935 and thus as (Mez) Mez with the basionym in Hepetis. (p.952).—Pitcairnia macrophylla Considdered a synonym of Aechmea latifolia (Willd.) Klotzsch (p.226).—Pitcairnia oerstediana The author wrote in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published and the new combinations in Pitcairnia are published his monograph in 1935 and thus as (Mez) Mez with the basionym in Hepetis. (p.952).—Pitcairnia pavonii The author wrote in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published and the new combinations in Pitcairnia are published his monograph in 1935 and thus as (Mez) Mez with the basionym in Hepetis. (p.952).—Pitcairnia pulchella The author wrote in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published and the new combinations in Pitcairnia are published his monograph in 1935 and thus as (Mez) Mez with the basionym in Hepetis. (p.952).—Pitcairnia pusilla The author wrote in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published and the new combinations in Pitcairnia are published his monograph in 1935 and thus as (Mez) Mez with the basionym in Hepetis. (p.952).—Pitcairnia ruiziana The author wrote in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published and the new combinations in Pitcairnia are published his monograph in 1935 and thus as (Mez) Mez with the basionym in Hepetis. (p.952).—Pitcairnia ruiziana The author wrote in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published and the new combinations in Pitcairnia are published his monograph in 1935 and thus as (Mez) Mez with the basionym in Hepetis. (p.952).—Pitcairnia spectabilis The author wrote in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published and the new combinations in Pitcairnia are published his monograph in 1935 and thus as (Mez) Mez with the basionym in Hepetis. (p.952).—Pitcairnia taenipetala The author wrote in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published and the new combinations in Pitcairnia are published his monograph in 1935 and thus as (Mez) Mez with the basionym in Hepetis. (p.952).—Pitcairnia theae The author wrote in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published and the new combinations in Pitcairnia are published his monograph in 1935 and thus as (Mez) Mez with the basionym in Hepetis. (p.952).—Pitcairnia weddelliana The author wrote in the Errata that he does not recognize the Genus Pitcairnia and we must read Hepetis instead, which means that the names need to be considered as not published and the new combinations in Pitcairnia are published his monograph in 1935 and thus as (Mez) Mez with the basionym in Hepetis. (p.952).—Rhodostachys litoralis Basionym for comb. nov. Fascicularia litoralis (p.8).—Sodiroa andreana non Guzmania andreana Mez, 1896 .—Vriesea triflora Vriesea triflora L.B.Sm. & Pittendrigh, nom. nov. for Thecophyllum panniculatum Mez & Werkle, not Vriesea paniculata Mez (1896) [= Tillandsia paniculata (L.) L. 1762)]. (p.9: 614).