fossil plant nomenclatural problem

[Una Smith]

Here is a frustrating nomenclatural problem that I have been struggling to
resolve.

species 1:  Eucalyptus haeringiana Ettingshausen 1853
species 2:  Eucalyptus haeringiana? Lesquereux 1873     [note the "?"]
species 3:  Eriocaulon? porosum Lesquereux 1874
species 4:  Palaeoaster inquirenda Knowlton 1918        [new genus]

All four species are fossil plant organs (not complete plants).  Species 1
is from the Tertiary of Europe, and the others are from the Cretaceous of
North America.  Species 1-3 are in extant genera; species 4 is the type
species of its genus.  The type specimens of species 2-4 are clearly all
members of a single species, and don't belong in Eucalyptus or Eriocaulon.
(I doubt if species 1 belongs in Eucalyptus either, but that is not my
concern.)  Thus, a new combination is needed.

Here is my problem.  The correct generic name is Palaeoaster, but what is
the correct epithet?  Is it "porosa" from species 3 or "haeringiana?" from
species 2?  This depends on the application of current nomenclatural rules
to species 2.  Is species 2 just a misidentification, or a homonym, or a
proper name?  Lesquereux described species 2 from his own (type) specimen,
cited species 1, and was vague about whether he thought his specimen did
or did not belong in species 1.

What do you think?

        Una Smith                       una.smith at yale.edu

        Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology
        Yale University
        New Haven, CT  06520-8106