C​ACTOLOGIA​ P​HANTASTICA​ 6(1) 5 August 2019 ISSN 2590-3403 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3360737 A Short Note on the Etymology of ​Efossus​ (Cactaceae) M​AARTEN​ H. J. V ​ AN DER​ M​EER1 Abstract​—The name E ​ fossus is usually explained as an abbreviation of Echinofossulocactus​, but probably also alludes to Latin e​ fossus​ ‘excavated’. In 1841, George Lawrence proposed the genus E ​ chinofossulocactus for a group of species hitherto mostly included in E ​ chinocactus Link & Otto (Lawrence 1841). It quickly faded into oblivion, where it remained until Britton & Rose (1922: 109) revived it by raising ​Echinocactus subgen. S​ tenocactus K.Schum. to generic rank under this name. Several authors protested the resurrection of this obscure genus and no less than three intended replacement names were published: B ​ rittonrosea Speg. (1923), E ​ fossus ​Orcutt (1926) and S​ tenocactus ​(K.Schum.) A.Berger2 (1929). Orcutt’s publication was not available to me, but since other authors invariously explain the name ​Efossus as an abbreviation of ​Echinofossulocactus (Backeberg 1961: 2752; Hunt 1980: 105; Tjaden 1982: 570; Heath 1989: 282; Mottram 2014: 106; Z ​ áhora & al. 2018: 47​), I presume that this is the etymology given by Orcutt himself. A sneer from Berger (1929: 244) about the ‘awkward name’ that Britton & Rose had ‘exhumed’3, however, ​points to an additional explanation. One of the possible Latin translations of e​ xhumed​, which also happens to be cognate with f​ ossula​ ‘furrow’ (the second part in ​Echinofossulocactus​), is e​ fossus​. 1 Roggekamp 379 NL-2592 VV Den Haag m@vdm.nu If Berger’s publication of this name is considered invalid, it should probably be attributed to Hill (1933: 228). Kreuzinger (1935: 11) attributed it to ‘Frič & Schelle 1932’, but it is unknown what publication this refers to (Zázvorka & Šedivý 1991: 10: ‘Schelle se objevuje u Fričových jmen rodů jako spoluautor s různými roky. ... Co tyto roky znamenají nevíme.’ [‘Schelle appears as co-author of Frič’s generic names with various years. ... We don’t know what these years mean.’]) 2 ‘Britton und Rose haben für diese Gruppe den ungefügen Namen ​Echinofossulocactus Lawrence (1841) ausgegraben.’ 3 CC ​BY-SA 4.0 1 C​ACTOLOGIA​ P​HANTASTICA​ 6(1) 5 August 2019 ISSN 2590-3403 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3360737 It is true that Berger wrote this three years after Orcutt, but the metaphor is a fairly obvious one. Berger’s remark was quoted by Backeberg & Knuth (1935: 23) as well as by Werdermann (1937: 178). Hunt may have been aware of the wordplay, although he never commented on it. He noted that Britton and Rose had ‘duly exhumed’ the name after it had come to their attention and concluded the same article with the epitaph ‘Hic iacet E ​ chinofossulocactus​, nomen genericum ignoranter generatum, diu ignoratum, denique e​ ffossum4, nunc denuo i​ nfossum​. R.I.P.’ [‘Here lies E ​ chinofossulocactus​, a generic name created in ignorance, unnoticed for a long time, then e​ xhumed​, now finally buried​. R.I.P.’] (Hunt 1980: 105, 107, emphases added). Although there is no direct proof that Orcutt intended this double meaning of the name E ​ fossus​, it is not likely a coincidence. Literature Backeberg C. & Knuth F. M. (1935). Kaktus-ABC. Copenhagen: Nordisk Forlag. https://www.cactuspro.com/biblio_fichiers/pdf/Backeberg/Backeberg_KaktusABC.pdf Britton N. L. & Rose J. N. (1922). The Cactaceae. Descriptions and Illustrations of Plants of the Cactus Family. Volume III. Washington: Press of Gibson Brothers. https://www.cactuspro.com/biblio_fichiers/pdf/Britton_Rose/Britton_Rose_Cactaceae_3.pdf Heath P. V. (1989). The Question of E ​ chinofossulocactus ​(Cactaceae). Taxon 38(2): 281-288. https://www.iapt-taxon.org/historic/Congress/IBC_1993/Echino.pdf Hill. A. W. (1933). Index Kewensis Plantarum Phanerogamarum; Supplementum 8. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/133937 Hunt D. R. (1980). Decent Re-burial for ​Echinofossulocactus Lawr. Cactus and Succulent Journal of Great Britain 42(4): 105-107. https://www.cactuspro.com/biblio_fichiers/pdf/CSJGB/CSJGB-v42_O.pdf Kreuzinger K. (1935). Verzeichnis amerikanischer und anderer Sukkulenten mit Revision der Systematik der Kakteen. Eger [Cheb]: K. Kreuzinger. https://www.cactuspro.com/biblio_fichiers/pdf/Fric_Kreuzinger/Fric_Kreuzinger_KreuzKat.p df The word, which literally means ‘dug out’ (​e​[x​ ​] + ​fossus​), was variantly spelled as ​efossus​, ​effossus​, ​ecfossus and exfossus​. 4 CC ​BY-SA 4.0 2 C​ACTOLOGIA​ P​HANTASTICA​ 6(1) 5 August 2019 ISSN 2590-3403 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3360737 Lawrence G. (1841). Genus IV. ​Echinofossulocactus​. Gardener’s Magazine and Register of Rural and Domestic Improvement VII: 317-318. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/32384292 Mottram R. (2014). The Generitaxa of the Cactaceae: An Annotated Index. The Cactician 4: 1-357. http://www.crassulaceae.ch/uploads/files/Publications/The%20Cactician/Cactician%204%20H Q-1.pdf Spegazzinii C. (1923). Breves notas cactológicas. Anales de la Sociedad Científica Argentina XCVI: 61-74. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/193056 Tjaden W.L. (1982). (673) Proposal to Conserve 5408 Stenocactus (K. Schum.) Berger (1929) over E ​ chinofossulocactus ​Britton & Rose (1922) and Other Generic Names (Cactaceae). Taxon 31(3): 570-573. Werdermann E. (1937). ​Echinofossulocactus​–​Brittonrosea​–​Stenocactus​, welcher Name ist gültig?. Kakteenkunde 1937(12): 177-180. https://www.cactuspro.com/biblio_fichiers/pdf/Kakteenkunde/Kakteenkunde1937.pdf Záhora J., Najéra Quezada P, Flores Flores J. L. & Morales J. (2018). E ​ chinofossulocactus or Stenocactus​. Xerophilia VII(1): 44-58. http://xerophilia.ro/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/xerophilia-2018.12-24-1.pdf Zázvorka J. & Šedivý V. (1991). Jména kaktusů A.V. Friče. Aztekia 14: 3-97. https://www.cactuspro.com/biblio_fichiers/pdf/Aztekia/AztekiaFric.pdf CC ​BY-SA 4.0 3