Abstract
Recent phylogenetic studies have suggested that the monotypic Fokienia A.Henry & H.H.Thomas is nested within Chamaecyparis Spach, which is in agreement with separate morphological studies. Here the authors confirm a previous taxonomic treatment that incorporated Fokieniahodginsii (Dunn) A.Henry & H.H.Thomas into Chamaecyparis based on the monophyly requirement of taxonomy, i.e. Chamaecyparishodginsii (Dunn) Rushforth. In addition, the type collection of the basionym Cupressushodginsii Dunn was found to contain three sheets of specimens, one in K including a vegetative branch (K000088294) and a separate ovulate cone (K001090486), a second one in A (A00022477), and a third one in IBSC (IBSC0016081). All three specimens are marked with Hongkong Herbarium No. 3505, but only the two specimens in K and IBSC possess similar handwriting of "Cupressushodginsii Dunn". The two specimens should be considered as syntypes according to the Shenzhen Code. The specimen in K is better preserved but it is a mixture according to the collection label: cones from Foochow (Fuzhou) and foliage from Yenping (Nanping). We lectotypified the name Cupressushodginsii with K000088294 because the specimen is well preserved and has enough characters for identification. Moreover, an ovulate cone (K001090486) is on the same sheet.