Linda in Arcadia, Teuvo Ahti, Renato Benesperi, Guillermo Amo de Paz, Pradeep K. Divakar, David L. Hawksworth
{"title":"(3013) Proposal to conserve the name Lichen pullus Schreb. (Parmelia pulla, Xanthoparmelia pulla) against L. pullus Neck. (Parmeliaceae, lichenized Ascomycota) with a conserved type","authors":"Linda in Arcadia, Teuvo Ahti, Renato Benesperi, Guillermo Amo de Paz, Pradeep K. Divakar, David L. Hawksworth","doi":"10.1002/tax.13153","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.13153","url":null,"abstract":"<p>(3013) <b><i>Lichen pullus</i></b> Schreb., Spic. Fl. Lips.: 131. 9 Jul–25 Oct 1771, nom. cons. prop.</p>\u0000<p>Typus: Norway, Østfold, Hvaler, Spjærøy, Spjærholmen, W side, on rock in coastal heath, 59.0617N, 10.9038E, alt. 15 m, 1 Aug 2022, <i>E. Timdal</i> (O No. L-229346; isotypus: MAF No. Lich 25274), typ. cons. prop.</p>\u0000<p>(H) <i>Lichen pullus</i> Neck., Delic. Gallo-Belg.: 510. 1768, nom. rej. prop.</p>\u0000<p>Typus: non designatus.</p>\u0000<p>The well-established name <i>Xanthoparmelia pulla</i> (Schreb.) O. Blanco & al. (or sometimes <i>Neofuscelia pulla</i> (Schreb.) Essl.) has been used to refer to a common, brown, foliose saxicolous lichen. The basionym had, however, long been considered to be <i>Parmelia pulla</i> Ach. (Syn. Meth. Lich.: 206. 1814), and so the type had been assumed to be an Acharian collection. A specimen of <i>Parmelia pulla</i> in H-ACH 1420D (= H9502152) conforming to current usage was therefore designated as lectotype by Esslinger & Ahti (in Revista Fac. Ci. Univ. Lisboa, ser. 2, C, Ci. Nat. 17: 728 & fig. 1. [“1973”] 1975). However, one of us (L.A.) pointed out that this was incorrect, as Acharius's species name was intended as a new combination based on <i>Lichen pullus</i> Schreb. (Spic. Fl. Lips.: 131. 1771) as that name was listed as a synonym. It is therefore necessary to address the status and typification of the intended basionym to fix the application of Acharius's name.</p>\u0000<p>The situation is complicated as Schreber's name is a later homonym of <i>Lichen pullus</i> Neck. (Delic. Gallo-Belg.: 510. 1768), a corticolous and not a saxicolous brown parmelioid species. The protologues of both these names include Dillenius (Hist. Musc.: 182, t. 24, fig. 77. 1742 [<i>sic</i> 1741, fide Henrey, Brit. Bot. Hort. Lit. 2: 271. 1975]), but we do not consider them isonyms because the texts make clear they were referring to species of different substrata and so should be typified accordingly. Figure 77 shows three lichens, A, B and C, but on page 182 Dillenius cited only A and B. Crombie (in J. Linn. Soc., Bot. 17: 572. 1880) studied the Dillenian collections, and stated that A was from the species now known as <i>Melanohalea olivacea</i> (L.) O. Blanco & al., and B from that now known as <i>Melanelixia fuliginosa</i> (Fr. ex Duby) O. Blanco & al. We examined high-resolution digital images of these collections and have no reason to disagree with Crombie's opinion for B, but A appears to have apothecia with papillate thalline exciples and so may be <i>Melanohalea exasperata</i> (De Not.) O. Blanco & al., rather than <i>M. olivacea</i>. Both <i>M. exasperata</i> and <i>M. olivacea</i> are almost always corticolous and fertile, whereas <i>Melanelixia fuliginosa</i> is only exceptionally corticolous and sterile with abundant isidia. Necker's lichen was therefore most likely a corticolous <i>Melanohalea</i> species, but we choose not to lectotypify it here by Dillenius's fig. 77A as we have not investigat","PeriodicalId":49448,"journal":{"name":"Taxon","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140004526","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"(3020) Proposal to conserve the name Trichostema brachiatum (Lamiaceae) with a conserved type","authors":"Gerry Moore, Derick Poindexter","doi":"10.1002/tax.13154","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.13154","url":null,"abstract":"<p>(3020) <b><i>Trichostema brachiatum</i></b> L., Sp. Pl.: 598. 1 Mai 1753 [Angiosp.: <i>Lab</i>.], nom. cons. prop.</p>\u0000<p>Typus: Herb. Linnaeus No. 750.2 (LINN), typ. cons. prop.</p>\u0000<p>Specimen 750.2, annotated by Linnaeus as <i>Trichostema brachiatum</i> L. with “?” added later by J.E. Smith, was apparently added to LINN after 1753. <i>Trichostema brachiatum</i>, when applied consistent with 750.2, represents a species that is widely distributed in North America north of Mexico. As indicated by Linnaeus (“staminibus brevibus inclusis”), the species is distinguished on the basis of its short stamens. The only cited original material for the name <i>T. brachiatum</i>, a Dillenius icon (“<i>Teucrium Virginicum, Origani folio</i>”, Hort. Eltham. 2: 380, t. 285, fig. 369. 1732; lectotypification by Reveal in Taxon 50: 522. 2001), likely represents the species currently known as <i>T. dichotomum</i> L. (Sp. Pl.: 598. 1753; “staminibus longissimis exsertis”), the “short” stamens in the illustration (see Rees, Cycl. 36(I): <i>Trichostema</i> no. 2. 1817) the result of the coiled filaments in late-day flowers (see McClelland & Weakley in J. Bot. Res. Inst. Texas 17: 220–223. 2023). Druce & Vines (Dillenian Herb.: 181. 1907) incorrectly applied Dillenius's polynomial consistent with specimen 750.2 (LINN).</p>\u0000<p>Michaux (Fl. Bor.-Amer. 2: 3–4, t. 30) published the names <i>Isanthus</i> and <i>I. coeruleus</i> and Redouté's illustration in Michaux of <i>I. coeruleus</i> clearly represents the same species as specimen 750.2 (LINN). Like Michaux, many subsequent authors also recognized <i>I. coeruleus</i>, some without citing <i>Trichostema brachiatum</i> (e.g., Eaton, Man. Bot., ed. 2: 285, 467. 1818; Torrey, Comp. Fl. N. Middle Stat.: 233, 238. 1826; Wood, Class-book Bot.: 541. 1881; Gray, Manual, ed. 6: 405–406. 1889; Chapman, Fl. S. U.S., ed. 3: 389. 1897) and others (e.g., Muhlenberg, Cat. Pl. Amer. Sept.: 56. 1813; Nuttall, Gen. N. Amer. Pl. 2: 27, 39. 1818; Bentham, Labiat. Gen Spec.: 166–167. 1833, 658–660. 1835; Steudel, Nomencl. Bot., ed. 2, 1: 823–824. 1840, 2: 703. 1841; Torrey, Fl. New York 2: 55, 81–82. 1843; Candolle, Prodr. 12: 572–574. 1848) citing <i>T. brachiatum</i> as a synonym of <i>I. coeruleus</i>, their adoption of the later <i>I. coeruleus</i> instead of a new combination in <i>Isanthus</i> based on the earlier <i>T. brachiatum</i> the result of their following the “Kew Rule”, in which priority was applied only within the genus.</p>\u0000<p>Only a few authors attempted to apply <i>Trichostema brachiatum</i> consistent with Dillenius's illustration. Lamarck & Poiret (Tabl. Encycl. 2: t. 515. 1794, 3: 71. 1823; Encycl. 6: 572. 1805, 8: 84–85. 1808) applied the name consistent with the species now known as <i>T. setaceum</i> Houtt. (= <i>T. lineare</i> Walter; <i>T. lineare</i> Nutt.), a species taxonomically aligned with <i>T. dichotomum</i>. Others (Rees, Cycl. 19(I): <i>Isanthus</i> no. 1. 1811, l.c. 1817; Pursh, Fl. Amer","PeriodicalId":49448,"journal":{"name":"Taxon","volume":"42 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140004416","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"(3015) Proposal to reject the name Arum pentaphyllum (Arisaema pentaphyllum) (Araceae)","authors":"Duilio Iamonico, Manudev Kambiyelummal Madhavan","doi":"10.1002/tax.13150","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.13150","url":null,"abstract":"<p>(3015) <b><i>Arum pentaphyllum</i></b> L., Sp. Pl.: 964. 1 Mai 1753 (Angiosp.: <i>Ar</i>.), nom. utique rej. prop.</p>\u0000<p>Typus: non designatus.</p>\u0000<p>Linnaeus, in <i>Species plantarum</i> (1753: 964–967), published 22 names under <i>Arum</i> L., among which only one (<i>A. maculatum</i> L.) is currently accepted in this genus, while the other 21 names are now treated in 13 different genera (see, e.g., Jarvis, Order out of Chaos: 318–320. 2007; The Natural History Museum, Linnaean Plant Names (from The Linnaean Plant Name Typification Project) [Dataset resource], https://data.nhm.ac.uk/dataset/the-linnaean-plant-name-typification-project/resource/ec9fffe8-f7f4-4dcd-9471-641c4922d956, accessed 8 Feb 2024). One of these names, <i>A. pentaphyllum</i> L. (l.c.: 964–965) was described from India and appears still to be untypified.</p>\u0000<p>The protologue of <i>Arum pentaphyllum</i> (Linnaeus, l.c.) consists of a very short diagnosis (“ARUM acaule, foliis quinatis”) and two synonyms cited from Morison (“Arum pentaphyllum indicum. <i>Moris. hist</i>. [Pl. Hist. Univ.] 3. <i>p</i>. 540 [549]. <i>s</i>. 13. <i>t</i>. 5. <i>f</i>. 27.” [1699]) and Zanoni (“Romphal planta indiae orientalis. <i>Zan. hist</i>. [Istoria Botanica] 205. <i>fig</i>. [LXXVIII, preceding p. 205]” [1675]); the provenance was also reported (“<i>Habitat in</i> India”). Both Morison (l.c. 1699: sect. 13, t. 5, fig. 27) and Zanoni (l.c. 1675: fig. LXXVIII: https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=ucm.5325109245&seq=381) published almost identical illustrations, which are original material for the Linnaean name. No original specimens have been located in the Linnaean and Linnaean-linked herbaria. Therefore, the two illustrations are the only extant original material. Both match the Linnaean diagnosis in depicting a plant without stem and with leaves 5-palmate (“foliis quinatis”); both illustrations also include the spadix but no floral details are represented there.</p>\u0000<p>In accordance with the treatments of Schott (in Schott & Endlicher, Melet. Bot.: 17. 1832) and Blume (Rumphia 1: 109. 1836), Jarvis (l.c.: 319) considered <i>Arum pentaphyllum</i> to be <i>Arisaema pentaphyllum</i> (L.) Schott (l.c.). Nevertheless, this name has not been otherwise accepted in any botanical publication in over a century, and in fact the illustration and Zanoni's (l.c.: 170) associated description clearly demonstrate that the name cannot be applied to any member of the tribe <i>Arisaemateae</i> Nakai to which the genus <i>Arisaema</i> belongs, because the illustrated spathe appears to be constricted with a connate tube and a gaping and erect blade, while according to Mayo & al. (Gen. Araceae: 268. 1997; in Kubitzki, Fam. Gen. Vasc. Pl.: 268–272. 1998) the spathe tube is cylindric with blade fornicate in tribe <i>Arisaemateae</i>.</p>\u0000<p>Furthermore, there are four characters that suggest the plant cannot belong to <i>Arisaema</i> itself (see, e.g., Mayo & Gilbert in Kew Bull. 41: 261–278.","PeriodicalId":49448,"journal":{"name":"Taxon","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-02-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140004515","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Unearthing the identity, taxonomy and nomenclature of the enigmatic Marchantiopsis stoloniscyphula (Marchantiophyta, Marchantiaceae) from China","authors":"Tian-Xiong Zheng, Yong Hu, Wei Li, Xue-Dong Li","doi":"10.1002/tax.13146","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.13146","url":null,"abstract":"Owing to a combination of reportedly unique morphological characters and an unlocatable type specimen, <i>Marchantiopsis stoloniscyphula</i> has been regarded as an enigmatic species in Marchantiaceae since its description, and all subsequent taxonomic treatments of this species were made without examination of the type. We located the original material of <i>M. stoloniscyphula</i> which was included as an admixture within the holotype of <i>Wiesnerella fasciaria</i> deposited in IFP. Our morphological examination found that <i>M. stoloniscyphula</i> and <i>W. fasciaria</i> are conspecific with <i>Marchantia papillata</i> subsp. <i>grossibarba</i> and <i>Sandea japonica</i>, respectively. The nomenclature of <i>Marchantiopsis</i> and <i>M. stoloniscyphula</i> are discussed. Lectotypes for <i>M. stoloniscyphula</i> and <i>W. fasciaria</i> are also designated.","PeriodicalId":49448,"journal":{"name":"Taxon","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-02-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140004414","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Report of the Nomenclature Committee for Fungi: 24","authors":"Tom W. May","doi":"10.1002/tax.13148","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.13148","url":null,"abstract":"An addition to the list of names for protection under Art. F.2.1 from the <i>Cordyceps</i> Working Group, containing two names of genera, is approved. The following two family names are recommended for conservation: <i>Physaraceae</i> against <i>Fuliginaceae</i>; and <i>Metschnikowiaceae</i> against <i>Nectaromycetaceae</i> and <i>Torulopsidaceae</i>. The following six generic names are recommended for conservation: <i>Blastomyces</i> Gilchrist & W.R. Stokes against <i>Blastomyces</i> Costantin & Rolland; <i>Cercospora</i> with a conserved type; <i>Didymium</i> against <i>Mucilago</i> and <i>Spumaria</i>; <i>Discula</i> with a conserved type; <i>Metschnikowia</i> against <i>Torulopsis</i>; and <i>Phyllopsora</i> against <i>Triclinum</i> and <i>Crocynia</i>. The proposal concerning the gender of the genus <i>Glomus</i> is referred to the General Committee. The following 15 species names are recommended for conservation: <i>Agaricus cingulatus</i> (<i>Tricholoma cingulatum</i>) against <i>A. ramentaceus</i>; <i>A. psammopus</i> (<i>Tricholoma psammopus</i>) against <i>A. concolor</i>; <i>Apioporthe corni</i> (<i>Aurantioporthe corni</i>, <i>Cryptodiaporthe corni</i>) against <i>Sphaeronaema aurantiacum</i> and <i>Myxosporium nitidum</i>; <i>Ditiola mucida</i> (<i>Holwaya mucida</i>) against <i>Acrospermum caliciiforme</i> (<i>Crinula caliciiformis</i>); <i>Entoloma sericeum</i> against <i>Agaricus pascuus</i> (<i>E. pascuum</i>); <i>Geoglossum uliginosum</i> Hakelier against <i>G. uliginosum</i> (Pers.) P. Crouan & H. Crouan; <i>Microsphaera alphitoides</i> (<i>Erysiphe alphitoides</i>) with a conserved type; <i>Peziza cinnamomea</i> (<i>Pezicula cinnamomea</i>) against <i>Naemaspora grisea</i>; <i>Phyllosticta yuccae</i> against <i>Leptodothiorella notabilis</i>; <i>Puccinia psidii</i> (<i>Austropuccinia psidii</i>) against <i>Caeoma eugeniarum</i> and <i>Uredo neurophila</i>; <i>Tolypocladium inflatum</i> against <i>Cordyceps subsessilis</i>; <i>Tricholoma sciodes</i> against <i>Agaricus hordus</i>; <i>Tuber aestivum</i> Vittad. against <i>T. aestivum</i> (Wulfen) Spreng. and <i>T. blotii</i>; <i>T. magnatum</i> against <i>T. griseum</i>; and <i>T. melanosporum</i> against <i>T. nigrum</i>. The following two species names are recommended for rejection under Art. 56: <i>Ramularia gibba</i> and <i>Tuber cibarium</i>. Proposal 2307 (concerning <i>Hypocrea lutea</i> (Tode) Petch) is no longer relevant, following the removal in the <i>Shenzhen Code</i> (Turland & al. in Regnum Veg. 159. 2018) of Art. 57.2 of the <i>Melbourne Code</i> (McNeill & al. in Regnum Veg. 154. 2012). Proposal 2233 (to conserve <i>Bipolaris</i> against <i>Cochliobolus</i>) and four proposals concerning names in <i>Trichoderma</i> and <i>Hypocrea</i> (2305, 2306, 2308 and 2309) have been withdrawn because the names were included in a list for protection from an approved working group: for <i>Bipolaris</i>, the <i>Dothideomycetes</i> Working Group, and for <i>","PeriodicalId":49448,"journal":{"name":"Taxon","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-02-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140004408","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"(111) Request for a binding decision on whether Gymnosporia (Wight & Arn.) Benth. & Hook. f. (Celastraceae) and Gymnospora (Chodat) J.F.B. Pastore (Polygalaceae) are sufficiently alike to be confused","authors":"José Floriano Barêa Pastore, Jefferson Prado","doi":"10.1002/tax.13157","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.13157","url":null,"abstract":"<p>(111) <b><i>Gymnosporia</i></b> (Wight & Arn.) Benth. & Hook. f. (1862) [Angiosp.: <i>Celastr</i>.]</p>\u0000<p><b><i>Gymnospora</i></b> (Chodat) J.F.B. Pastore (2013) [Angiosp.: <i>Polygal</i>.]</p>\u0000<p><i>Gymnospora</i> (Chodat) J.F.B. Pastore (<i>Polygalaceae</i>), a small genus including two species, both endemic to Brazil, was elevated to generic status by Pastore (in Novon 22: 305. 2013). Previously this taxon had been recognized as a section of <i>Polygala</i> by Chodat (in Biblioth. Universelle Rev. Suisse 25: 698. 1891; in Mém. Soc. Phys. Genève 31(2), no. 2: 87. 1893) or as a subgenus by Paiva (in Fontqueria 50: 147. 1998). When Pastore (l.c.) decided to adopt <i>Gymnospora</i> as a generic name, the similarity with <i>Gymnosporia</i> (Wight & Arn.) Benth. & Hook. f. (Gen. Pl. 1: 359, 365. 1862), nom. cons. (<i>Celastraceae</i>) was certainly overlooked. <i>Gymnosporia</i>, based in <i>Celastrus</i> sect. <i>Gymnosporia</i> Wight & Arn. (Prodr. Fl. Ind. Orient. 1: 159. 1834), is conserved with a conserved type against <i>Catha</i> Forssk. ex Scop. (1777), <i>Scytophyllum</i> Eckl. & Zeyh. (1834–1835), <i>Encentrus</i> C. Presl (1845), and <i>Polyacanthus</i> C. Presl (1845). <i>Gymnosporia</i> has an Old World distribution, including about 115 species.</p>\u0000<p>While there are no parallel binding decisions on generic names ending in -<i>sporia</i>/-<i>ius</i>/-<i>ium</i> vs. -<i>spora</i>/-<i>us</i>/-<i>um</i> as to whether or not they are sufficiently alike to be confused and treated as homonyms, there are some decisions on names ending in -<i>ia</i> versus -<i>a</i>. Examples include <i>Gaillona</i> Bonnem. (1828) [Algae] vs. <i>Gaillonia</i> DC. (1830) [Angiosp.: <i>Rubiaceae</i>] and <i>Gillena</i> Adans. (1763) [Angiosp.: <i>Clethraceae</i>] vs. <i>Gillenia</i> Moench (1802) [Angiosp.: <i>Rosaceae</i>], both not considered homonyms. On the other hand, <i>Andinia</i> (Luer) Luer (2000) [Angiosp.: <i>Orchidaceae</i>] vs. <i>Andina</i> J.A. Jiménez & M.J. Cano (2012) [Mosses] and <i>Huberia</i> DC. (1828) [Angiosp.: <i>Melastomataceae</i>] vs. <i>Hubera</i> Chaowasku (2012) [Angiosp.: <i>Annonaceae</i>] are treated as homonyms. Because the ending -<i>spora</i> is not rare, and perhaps because accidentally this spelling was much more used for angiosperm generic names than -<i>sporia</i>, there are cases where <i>Gymnosporia</i> was mistakenly spelled as <i>Gymnospora</i>, in some cases even on the titles of scientific papers (see Monpara & al. in Int. J. Bioinf. Intelligent Computing 2: 82–98. 2023; Kotade & Hiremath in Asian J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 5: 78–84. 2019; Anil & Talluri in Rasayan J. Chem. 14: 2318–2326. 2021; and Van Wyk & Gericke, People's Plants: Useful Pl. S. Africa: 126. 1998). Given that the situation is not easily interpreted, a binding decision from Nomenclature Committees will certainly bring stability. If <i>Gymnospora</i> and <i>Gymnosporia</i> are treated as homonyms, a replacem","PeriodicalId":49448,"journal":{"name":"Taxon","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140004409","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Iván A. Valdespino, Petra Korall, Stina Weststrand, Christian A. López, Jun-Yong Tang, Alexander Shalimov, Xian-Chun Zhang
{"title":"Rebuttal to “(2943) Proposal to conserve Selaginella, nom. cons., (Selaginellaceae) with a conserved type”: An unwarranted and disruptive idea","authors":"Iván A. Valdespino, Petra Korall, Stina Weststrand, Christian A. López, Jun-Yong Tang, Alexander Shalimov, Xian-Chun Zhang","doi":"10.1002/tax.13145","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.13145","url":null,"abstract":"A rebuttal to the proposal to conserve <i>Selaginella</i>, nom. cons., with a conserved type is submitted. We further discuss why this proposal is unwarranted and disruptive to nomenclatural stability as is the intention to split <i>Selaginella</i> since potentially segregated genera fail to reconcile monophyly and taxonomic diagnosability. Accordingly, we recommend the rejection of the Proposal (2943) and not to follow the dismembering of <i>Selaginella</i>.","PeriodicalId":49448,"journal":{"name":"Taxon","volume":"59 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139987612","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
P. Pablo Ferrer‐Gallego, Wesley M. Knapp, Aaron J. Floden, Gerry Moore
{"title":"(3009) Proposal to conserve the name Trillium erectum (Melanthiaceae: Parideae) with a conserved type","authors":"P. Pablo Ferrer‐Gallego, Wesley M. Knapp, Aaron J. Floden, Gerry Moore","doi":"10.1002/tax.13117","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.13117","url":null,"abstract":"<p>(3009) <b><i>Trillium erectum</i></b> L., Sp. Pl.: 340. 1 Mai 1753 [Angiosp.: <i>Lil</i>. / <i>Melanth</i>.], nom. cons. prop.</p>\u0000<p>Typus: United States, W. North Carolina, Henderson Co., shady woods, base of Mt. Pisgah, 8 Mai 1897, <i>Biltmore Herbarium 1135c</i> (MO No. 147310 [barcode MO-3717726]; isotypi: NCU barcode NCU00086525, NY barcodes NY02684139 & NY02684140, US No. 331198 [barcode 03929343]), typ. cons. prop.</p>\u0000<p><i>Trillium</i> L. (<i>Melanthiaceae</i>: <i>Parideae</i>) consists of long-lived perennial herbs with characteristic rhizomes and is made up of about 50 species worldwide with concentrations in eastern and western North America and eastern Asia (Gates in Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 4: 43–92. 1917; Haga in Jap. J. Genet. 18: 168–171. 1942; Berg in Skr. Norske Vidensk.-Akad. Oslo, Mat.-Natkurvidensk. Kl. 1958(1): 1–36. 1958; Osaloo & al. in J. Pl. Res. 112: 35–49. 1999; Case & Case, Trilliums. 1997; Broyles & al. in Amer. J. Bot. 100: 1155–1161. 2013; Lampley & al. in Phytotaxa 552: 278–286. 2022; Meredith & al., Conserv. Status Trillium N. America. 2022). <i>Trillium erectum</i> L. is widely collected for the medicinal plant trade (see Yokosuka & Mimaki in Phytochemistry 69: 2724–2730. 2008; Hayes & al. in Phytochemistry 70: 105–113. 2009; Ur Rahman & al. in Molecules 22: 2156. 2017). The species is common in the understory of eastern North American forests and is found from southern New Brunswick, westward across southern Ontario to the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, throughout the upper Midwest and northeastern United States and south through the southern Appalachians (Case & Case in Bull. Amer. Rock Gard. Soc. 51: 162–168. 1993, l.c. 1997; Case in FNA Ed. Comm., Fl. N. Amer. N. Mexico 26: 90–117. 2002; Griffin & Barrett in Canad. J. Bot. 82: 316–321. 2004; USDA Plants Database: available at https://plants.sc.egov.usda.gov/home/plantProfile?symbol=TRER3).</p>\u0000<p>Linnaeus (Sp. Pl.: 340. 1753) described <i>Trillium erectum</i> providing the short diagnosis “TRILLIUM flore pedunculato erecto”, and listed four synonyms: (1) “Paris foliis ternis, flore pedunculato erecto” cited from Linnaeus (Amoen. Acad. 1: 154. 1749); (2) “Solanum triphyllum brasilianum” cited from Bauhin (Prodr.: 91. 1620; Pinax: 167. 1623) and with the annotation “<i>Burs</i>. <i>IX</i>: 12”; (3) “Solanum triphyllum canadense” cited from Cornut (Canad. Pl.: 166, t. 167. 1635); and (4) “Solano congener triphyllum canadense” cited from Morison (Pl. Hist. Univ. 3: 532, sect. 13, t. 3, fig. 7. 1699). The protologue includes as the geographical locality “<i>Habitat in Virginia</i>”. Both the synonyms from Cornut (l.c.) and Morison (l.c.) include illustrations that are, therefore, original material for the name <i>Trillium erectum</i>.</p>\u0000<p>Reveal (in Phytologia 72: 2. 1992) designated as the lectotype the illustration “Solanum triphyllum Canadense” published by Cornut (l.c.: t. 167), and this lectotypification was ","PeriodicalId":49448,"journal":{"name":"Taxon","volume":"13 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139947991","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Thank you to Reviewers","authors":"","doi":"10.1002/tax.13136","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.13136","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The Editors are most grateful to all people who have generously given their time to review manuscripts submitted for publication in TAXON. The list below includes all external reviewers whose reviews were completed in 2023. We greatly appreciate their help and support, and we want it to be known that we and the authors and readers of TAXON have all greatly profited from their advice and competence.</p>\u0000<p>Aedo, C., Madrid, Spain</p>\u0000<p>Akiyama, H., Sanda, Japan</p>\u0000<p>Andrew, R., Armidale, Australia</p>\u0000<p>Andrino, C.O., Belém, Brazil</p>\u0000<p>Applequist, W., St. Louis, Missouri, U.S.A.</p>\u0000<p>Arup, U., Lund, Sweden</p>\u0000<p>Ballard, H., Jr., Athens, Ohio, U.S.A.</p>\u0000<p>Barkworth, M., Logan, Utah, U.S.A.</p>\u0000<p>Barrett, R., Sydney, Australia</p>\u0000<p>Barrie, F., Saint Louis, Missouri, U.S.A.</p>\u0000<p>Benz, B., Fort Worth, Texas, U.S.A.</p>\u0000<p>Bittrich, V., Campinas, Brazil</p>\u0000<p>Boatwright, J.S., Cape Town, South Africa</p>\u0000<p>Bobrov, A., Borok, Russian Federation</p>\u0000<p>Bohley, K., Munich, Germany</p>\u0000<p>Bohs, L., Salt Lake City, Utah, U.S.A.</p>\u0000<p>Cano, M.J., Murcia, Spain</p>\u0000<p>Cellinese, N., Gainesville, Florida, U.S.A.</p>\u0000<p>Chao, Y.-S., Taipei, Taiwan</p>\u0000<p>Coiro, M., Zurich, Switzerland</p>\u0000<p>Croat, T., St. Louis, Missouri, U.S.A.</p>\u0000<p>Delprete, P.G., Cayenne, French Guiana</p>\u0000<p>De Queiroz, K., Washington, D.C., U.S.A.</p>\u0000<p>Domina, G., Palermo, Italy</p>\u0000<p>Duan, L., Guangzhou, China</p>\u0000<p>Dupin, J., Boulder, Colorado, U.S.A.</p>\u0000<p>Eggli, U., Zurich, Switzerland</p>\u0000<p>Faruk, A., Ardingly, United Kingdom</p>\u0000<p>Fiaschi, P., Florianópolis, Brazil</p>\u0000<p>Forrest, L.L., Edinburgh, United Kingdom</p>\u0000<p>Franck, A., Gainesville, Florida, U.S.A.</p>\u0000<p>Friesen, N., Osnabrück, Germany</p>\u0000<p>Friis, I., Copenhagen, Denmark</p>\u0000<p>García, M.A., Madrid, Spain</p>\u0000<p>García, N., Santiago, Chile</p>\u0000<p>Gastaldello Rando, J., Barreiras, Brazil</p>\u0000<p>Geltman, D., St. Petersburg, Russian Federation</p>\u0000<p>Gibb, S., Lincoln, New Zealand</p>\u0000<p>Grant, J., Neuchâtel, Switzerland</p>\u0000<p>Grassi, F., Milan, Italy</p>\u0000<p>Greimler, J., Vienna, Austria</p>\u0000<p>Harris, D., Edinburgh, United Kingdom</p>\u0000<p>Hawksworth, D., Richmond, United Kingdom</p>\u0000<p>Herendeen, P., Glencoe, Illinois, U.S.A.</p>\u0000<p>Herting, J., Sydney, Australia</p>\u0000<p>Hjertson, M., Uppsala, Sweden</p>\u0000<p>Hori, K., Kochi City, Japan</p>\u0000<p>Hoyos, D., Córdoba, Argentina</p>\u0000<p>Hu, G., Wuhan, China</p>\u0000<p>Iamonico, D., Pisa, Italy</p>\u0000<p>Jarvis, C., London, United Kingdom</p>\u0000<p>Kashiwadani, H., Japan</p>\u0000<p>Kazempour-Osaloo, S., Tehran, Iran</p>\u0000<p>Kessler, M., Zurich, Switzerland</p>\u0000<p>Khan, G., Oldenburg, Germany</p>\u0000<p>Khassanov, F.O., Tashkent, Uzbekistan</p>\u0000<p>Kilian, N., Berlin, Germany</p>\u0000<p>Koch, J., Osnabrück, Germany</p>\u0000<p>Koch, M., Heidelberg, Germany</p>\u0000<p>Kress, W.J., Washington, D.C., U.S.A.</p>\u0000<p>Kučera, J., České Budějovice, Czech Republic</p>\u0000<p>Leopardi-Verde, C.L., Tecomán, Mexico</p>\u0000<p>Lewis, G.P., Richmond, United Kingdom</p>\u0000<p>Li, L., Kunming, China</p>\u0000<p>Li","PeriodicalId":49448,"journal":{"name":"Taxon","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139953244","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Synopsis of Proposals on Nomenclature – Madrid 2024: A review of the proposals to amend the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants submitted to the XX International Botanical Congress","authors":"Nicholas J. Turland, John H. Wiersema","doi":"10.1002/tax.13114","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.13114","url":null,"abstract":"<h2> NOTICE</h2>\u0000<p>Individual members of the International Association for Plant Taxonomy (IAPT) are entitled to participate in the preliminary guiding vote (so-called “mail vote”) on proposals to amend the <i>International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants</i> (hereafter “<i>Code</i>”; Turland & al. in Regnum Veg. 159. 2018) submitted to the XX International Botanical Congress, Madrid, 2024, as stated in Div. III Prov. 2.5 of the <i>Code</i>. Authors of these proposals and members of the nine Permanent Nomenclature Committees (see Div. III Prov. 7.1) are also entitled to vote, but no institutional votes (Div. III Prov. 3) are allowed. The IAPT office is sending a ballot (voting form) by email to those IAPT members who have email addresses on file, the authors for correspondence of the proposals, and the secretaries of the Permanent Nomenclature Committees. A printed copy of the ballot is being sent to IAPT members who have no email address on file. If you are entitled to vote but do not receive a ballot, you may request an electronic or printed copy from the IAPT office at the following address. An electronic copy of the ballot should be filled out, saved, and sent by email to the IAPT office at office@iapt-taxon.org. Alternatively, a printed copy may be filled out and sent by airmail to: IAPT office, Plant Science and Biodiversity Centre, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dubravska cesta 9, SK-845 23 Bratislava, Slovakia. All ballots must be received no later than 31 May 2024, so that they may be included in the tabulation to be made available to members of the Nomenclature Section of the Congress.</p>\u0000<p>The sessions of the Nomenclature Section, which will take definitive action on the proposals, will be held in the Villanueva Pavilion, Real Jardín Botánico, Plaza de Murillo 2, Madrid 28014, Spain, from Monday, 15 July 2024 (beginning at 08:30 hours) to Friday, 19 July 2024 (see https://ibcmadrid2024.com/?seccion=nomenclature&subSeccion=nomenclature).</p>\u0000<p>Each person registered for at least one full day of the Congress is entitled to register as a member of the Nomenclature Section. Registration for the Congress should be done in advance (see https://ibcmadrid2024.com/index.php?seccion=registrationArea&subSeccion=registrationInfo); the confirmation received will be the evidence of eligibility for Nomenclature Section registration, which will start during a welcome reception on Sunday, 14 July, at 17:00–20:00 hours in the Villanueva Pavilion. Nomenclature Section registration will continue on Monday, 15 July beginning at 08:00 hours in the Villanueva Pavilion.</p>\u0000<p>Each registered member of the Nomenclature Section is entitled to one personal vote in the sessions (Div. III Prov. 5.9). Personal votes can neither be transferred nor accumulated; one person never receives more than one personal vote. A member of the Nomenclature Section may be the official delegate of one or more institutions, thereby carrying institutio","PeriodicalId":49448,"journal":{"name":"Taxon","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139948084","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}