{"title":"(2997) 关于保护具有保留类型的 Arundo multiplex（簕杜鹃）（禾本科：簕杜鹃属）的建议","authors":"I.M. Turner, Khoon Meng Wong","doi":"10.1002/tax.13090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>(2997) <b><i>Arundo multiplex</i></b> Lour., Fl. Cochinch.: 58. Sep 1790 [Angiosp.: <i>Gram</i>.], nom. cons. prop.</p>\n<p>Typus: Vietnam, Hué, 31 Mai 1970, <i>Hô 687</i> (L 2D-code L.1220269; isotypi: L 2D-codes L.1220270 & L.1220271), typ. cons. prop.</p>\n<p>Merrill (in Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc., ser. 2, 24(2): 83. 1935) accepted <i>Arundo multiplex</i> Lour. (Fl. Cochinch.: 58. 1790) as the earliest available name for a species of bamboo widely cultivated in Asia, and referred to it as <i>Bambusa multiplex</i> (Lour.) Raeusch. ex Schult. & Schult. f. (in Roemer & Schultes, Syst. Veg. 7: 1350. 1830). The identity of <i>Arundo multiplex</i> Lour. has been questioned, with some authors preferring to use <i>Bambusa glaucescens</i> (Willd.) Siebold ex Merr. (in Philipp. J. Sci., C 7: 230. 1912). However, <i>Bambusa multiplex</i> is currently the more often used name for the species (e.g., Dransfield & Widjaja, Pl. Resources SE Asia. 7, Bamboos: 65. 1995; Ohrnberger, Bamboos World: 266. 1999; Mabberley, Mabberley's Pl.-Book, ed. 4: 97. 2017; Vorontsova & al., World Checkl. Bamboos Rattans: 24. 2017).</p>\n<p>If Loureiro made herbarium specimens of <i>Arundo multiplex</i>, none has survived (Stapleton in Edinburgh J. Bot. 51: 14. 1994). This presents a problem because Loureiro cited “Arundarbor tenuis” of Rumphius (Herb. Amboin. 4: 1, t. 1. 1743) in the protologue of <i>Arundo multiplex</i>. “Arundarbor tenuis” is not <i>Bambusa multiplex</i>, but <i>Neololeba atra</i> (Lindl.) Widjaja (in Reinwardtia 11: 114. 1997). But in the absence of any Loureiro specimens or illustrations of <i>Arundo donax</i>, the Rumphian element must be considered in typifying the name, and Rumphius's plate seems to be the obligate lectotype as no indisputable Rumphius specimens are known (Van Steenis-Kruseman in Van Steenis, Fl. Males., ser. I, 1: 452 1950). This would make <i>Arundo multiplex</i> the earliest name for <i>Neololeba atra</i>, requiring a new combination in <i>Neololeba</i>. <i>Bambusa glaucescens</i> would become the correct name for what is now generally called <i>Bambusa multiplex</i>.</p>\n<p>This means that two established bamboo names, <i>Bambusa multiplex</i> and <i>Neololeba atra</i>, are currently under threat if nomenclatural rules are followed. The solution proposed here is to conserve <i>Arundo multiplex</i> with a conserved type to maintain the current usage of the names. A specimen collected in Hué, where Loureiro was based during the period 1742–1777 (Merrill, l.c. 1935), is here proposed as the conserved type.</p>","PeriodicalId":49448,"journal":{"name":"Taxon","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"(2997) Proposal to conserve Arundo multiplex (Bambusa multiplex) (Gramineae: Bambusoideae) with a conserved type\",\"authors\":\"I.M. Turner, Khoon Meng Wong\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/tax.13090\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>(2997) <b><i>Arundo multiplex</i></b> Lour., Fl. Cochinch.: 58. Sep 1790 [Angiosp.: <i>Gram</i>.], nom. cons. prop.</p>\\n<p>Typus: Vietnam, Hué, 31 Mai 1970, <i>Hô 687</i> (L 2D-code L.1220269; isotypi: L 2D-codes L.1220270 & L.1220271), typ. cons. prop.</p>\\n<p>Merrill (in Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc., ser. 2, 24(2): 83. 1935) accepted <i>Arundo multiplex</i> Lour. (Fl. Cochinch.: 58. 1790) as the earliest available name for a species of bamboo widely cultivated in Asia, and referred to it as <i>Bambusa multiplex</i> (Lour.) Raeusch. ex Schult. & Schult. f. (in Roemer & Schultes, Syst. Veg. 7: 1350. 1830). The identity of <i>Arundo multiplex</i> Lour. has been questioned, with some authors preferring to use <i>Bambusa glaucescens</i> (Willd.) Siebold ex Merr. (in Philipp. J. Sci., C 7: 230. 1912). However, <i>Bambusa multiplex</i> is currently the more often used name for the species (e.g., Dransfield & Widjaja, Pl. Resources SE Asia. 7, Bamboos: 65. 1995; Ohrnberger, Bamboos World: 266. 1999; Mabberley, Mabberley's Pl.-Book, ed. 4: 97. 2017; Vorontsova & al., World Checkl. Bamboos Rattans: 24. 2017).</p>\\n<p>If Loureiro made herbarium specimens of <i>Arundo multiplex</i>, none has survived (Stapleton in Edinburgh J. Bot. 51: 14. 1994). This presents a problem because Loureiro cited “Arundarbor tenuis” of Rumphius (Herb. Amboin. 4: 1, t. 1. 1743) in the protologue of <i>Arundo multiplex</i>. “Arundarbor tenuis” is not <i>Bambusa multiplex</i>, but <i>Neololeba atra</i> (Lindl.) Widjaja (in Reinwardtia 11: 114. 1997). But in the absence of any Loureiro specimens or illustrations of <i>Arundo donax</i>, the Rumphian element must be considered in typifying the name, and Rumphius's plate seems to be the obligate lectotype as no indisputable Rumphius specimens are known (Van Steenis-Kruseman in Van Steenis, Fl. Males., ser. I, 1: 452 1950). This would make <i>Arundo multiplex</i> the earliest name for <i>Neololeba atra</i>, requiring a new combination in <i>Neololeba</i>. <i>Bambusa glaucescens</i> would become the correct name for what is now generally called <i>Bambusa multiplex</i>.</p>\\n<p>This means that two established bamboo names, <i>Bambusa multiplex</i> and <i>Neololeba atra</i>, are currently under threat if nomenclatural rules are followed. The solution proposed here is to conserve <i>Arundo multiplex</i> with a conserved type to maintain the current usage of the names. A specimen collected in Hué, where Loureiro was based during the period 1742–1777 (Merrill, l.c. 1935), is here proposed as the conserved type.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49448,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Taxon\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Taxon\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.13090\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Taxon","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.13090","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Typus: Vietnam, Hué, 31 Mai 1970, Hô 687 (L 2D-code L.1220269; isotypi: L 2D-codes L.1220270 & L.1220271), typ. cons. prop.
Merrill (in Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc., ser. 2, 24(2): 83. 1935) accepted Arundo multiplex Lour. (Fl. Cochinch.: 58. 1790) as the earliest available name for a species of bamboo widely cultivated in Asia, and referred to it as Bambusa multiplex (Lour.) Raeusch. ex Schult. & Schult. f. (in Roemer & Schultes, Syst. Veg. 7: 1350. 1830). The identity of Arundo multiplex Lour. has been questioned, with some authors preferring to use Bambusa glaucescens (Willd.) Siebold ex Merr. (in Philipp. J. Sci., C 7: 230. 1912). However, Bambusa multiplex is currently the more often used name for the species (e.g., Dransfield & Widjaja, Pl. Resources SE Asia. 7, Bamboos: 65. 1995; Ohrnberger, Bamboos World: 266. 1999; Mabberley, Mabberley's Pl.-Book, ed. 4: 97. 2017; Vorontsova & al., World Checkl. Bamboos Rattans: 24. 2017).
If Loureiro made herbarium specimens of Arundo multiplex, none has survived (Stapleton in Edinburgh J. Bot. 51: 14. 1994). This presents a problem because Loureiro cited “Arundarbor tenuis” of Rumphius (Herb. Amboin. 4: 1, t. 1. 1743) in the protologue of Arundo multiplex. “Arundarbor tenuis” is not Bambusa multiplex, but Neololeba atra (Lindl.) Widjaja (in Reinwardtia 11: 114. 1997). But in the absence of any Loureiro specimens or illustrations of Arundo donax, the Rumphian element must be considered in typifying the name, and Rumphius's plate seems to be the obligate lectotype as no indisputable Rumphius specimens are known (Van Steenis-Kruseman in Van Steenis, Fl. Males., ser. I, 1: 452 1950). This would make Arundo multiplex the earliest name for Neololeba atra, requiring a new combination in Neololeba. Bambusa glaucescens would become the correct name for what is now generally called Bambusa multiplex.
This means that two established bamboo names, Bambusa multiplex and Neololeba atra, are currently under threat if nomenclatural rules are followed. The solution proposed here is to conserve Arundo multiplex with a conserved type to maintain the current usage of the names. A specimen collected in Hué, where Loureiro was based during the period 1742–1777 (Merrill, l.c. 1935), is here proposed as the conserved type.
期刊介绍：
TAXON is the bi-monthly journal of the International Association for Plant Taxonomy and is devoted to systematic and evolutionary biology with emphasis on plants and fungi. It is published bimonthly by the International Bureau for Plant Taxonomy and Nomenclature, c/o Institute of Botany, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dúbravská cesta 9, SK-845 23 Bratislava, SLOVAKIA. Details of page charges are given in the Guidelines for authors. Papers will be reviewed by at least two specialists.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
