A name that is illegitimate because it is a later homonym (Art. 53.1): Ranunculus muricatus Moench 1794 non L. 1753. Part of page 215 of Moench’s Methodus plantas horti botanici et agri Marburgensis (Moench, 1794: 215). This name is doubly illegitimate because it was also nomenclaturally superfluous when published (Art. 52.1). Components of the protologue are as follows: Specific epithet: “muricatus” (muricate), thus a later homonym of R. muricatus L. 1753 and therefore illegitimate under Art. 53.1.Diagnostic phrase name (polynomial): “[Ranunculus] muricatus, caule prostrato […] petalis minimis fugacibus.” (Ranunculus muricatus with prostrate stem […] petals very small, fleeting).Synonym: “Ranunculus parviflorus. Linn.” 1759. An earlier, validly published name at the same rank; citing it made R. muricatus Moench nomenclaturally superfluous when published, and therefore illegitimate under Art. 52.1, because Moench should have used R. parviflorus L. instead.Synonym: “Ranunculus hirsutus flore omnium minimo luteo.” A pre-starting-point phrase name referring to an illustration (Morison, 1680: sect. 4, t. 28, fig. 21).“Obs[ervatio]. Stamina vix decem.” (Observation. Stamens hardly ten).“h[abitat]. [in] H[orto]. Annua.” (It inhabits the garden [the botanic garden at Marburg, Germany]. Annual).

  Part of: Turland N (2019) The Code Decoded. Advanced Books. https://doi.org/10.3897/ab.e38075