 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
I suspect that the early botanists thought that the proximal swollen, succulent, red pedicel was a true fruit and that the true fruit, the distal nut, was actually its exposed seed; hence the name Exocarpus.
After studies revealed the true botanical nature of the combined structure (a fruit-like pedicel with a hard, true fruit nut) the generic name was slightly modified to Exocarpos.A full historical taxonomic and nomenclature study would clarify this assumption. Botanists are very specific and pedantic when taxonomy and nomenclature are studied, and so thorough notes are kept. Whipstick (talk) 05:35, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
On the contrary, the generic name was originally 'Exocarpos' ascribed by Labillardiere in his original description in 'Relation du Voyage à la Recherche de la Pérouse'Tjuringa (talk) 00:08, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Hovenia dulcis edit
Is there a point to the link? It doesn't seem obvious what the relationship between the species might be (it doesn't seem to be taxonomic). --Urilarim (talk) 12:18, 26 July 2021 (UTC)