{"title":"(111) 请求就 Gymnosporia (Wight & Arn.) Benth. & Hook. f. (Celastraceae) 和 Gymnospora (Chodat) J.F.B. Pastore (Polygalaceae) 是否相似到足以混淆做出具有约束力的决定","authors":"José Floriano Barêa Pastore, Jefferson Prado","doi":"10.1002/tax.13157","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>(111) <b><i>Gymnosporia</i></b> (Wight & Arn.) Benth. & Hook. f. (1862) [Angiosp.: <i>Celastr</i>.]</p>\n<p><b><i>Gymnospora</i></b> (Chodat) J.F.B. Pastore (2013) [Angiosp.: <i>Polygal</i>.]</p>\n<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>\n<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 replacement name must be proposed for <i>Gymnospora</i> (Chodat) J.F.B. Pastore since this name is in use for Brazilian taxa (see https://floradobrasil.jbrj.gov.br).</p>","PeriodicalId":49448,"journal":{"name":"Taxon","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"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\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>(111) <b><i>Gymnosporia</i></b> (Wight & Arn.) Benth. & Hook. f. (1862) [Angiosp.: <i>Celastr</i>.]</p>\\n<p><b><i>Gymnospora</i></b> (Chodat) J.F.B. Pastore (2013) [Angiosp.: <i>Polygal</i>.]</p>\\n<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>\\n<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 replacement name must be proposed for <i>Gymnospora</i> (Chodat) J.F.B. Pastore since this name is in use for Brazilian taxa (see https://floradobrasil.jbrj.gov.br).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49448,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Taxon\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-28\",\"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.13157\",\"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.13157","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
(111) Gymnosporia (Wight & Arn.) Benth. & Hook. f.(1862) [Angiosp.F.B.Pastore（远志科），一个包括两个种的小属，均为巴西特有种，被 Pastore 提升为属种（见 Novon 22: 305.）在此之前，该分类群已被 Chodat（在 Biblioth.Universelle Rev. Suisse 25: 698.1891; in Mém.Soc. Phys. Genève 31(2), no.1893) or as a subgenus by Paiva (in Fontqueria 50: 147. 1998).当 Pastore（l.c.）决定采用 Gymnospora 作为属名时，与 Gymnosporia (Wight & Arn.) Benth. & Hook. f. (Gen. Pl. 1: 359, 365. 1862), nom.(Celastraceae）肯定被忽视了。Gymnosporia, based in Celastrus sect.Gymnosporia Wight & Arn. (Prodr. Fl. Ind. Orient. 1: 159. 1834), is conserved with a conserved type against Catha Forssk.(1834-1835), Encentrus C. Presl (1845), and Polyacanthus C. Presl (1845).虽然对于以-sporia/-ius/-ium 结尾的属名与以-spora/-us/-um 结尾的属名没有平行的有约束力的决定，以确定它们是否足够相似而被混淆并作为同名处理，但对于以-ia 结尾的属名与以-a 结尾的属名有一些决定。例如 Gaillona Bonnem.(1828) [Algae] vs. Gaillonia DC. (1830) [Angiosp.(1763) [Angiosp.: Clethraceae] vs. Gillenia Moench (1802) [Angiosp.: Rosaceae]，两者都不被认为是同名。另一方面，Andinia (Luer) Luer (2000) [Angiosp.: Orchidaceae] vs. Andina J.A. Jiménez & M.J. Cano (2012) [Mosses] 和 Huberia DC. (1828) [Angiosp.: Melastomataceae] vs. Hubera Chaowasku (2012) [Angiosp.: Annonaceae] 被视为同物异名。由于词尾 -spora 并不罕见，而且也许是由于这种拼法比 -sporia 更常用于被子植物的属名，因此 Gymnosporia 被误拼为 Gymnospora 的情况时有发生，有时甚至出现在科学论文的标题上（见 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).鉴于这种情况不易解释，命名委员会做出具有约束力的决定肯定会带来稳定。如果 Gymnospora 和 Gymnosporia 被视为同名，则必须为 Gymnospora (Chodat) J.F.B. Pastore 提议一个替代名称，因为该名称已用于巴西类群（见 https://floradobrasil.jbrj.gov.br）。
(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
Gymnospora (Chodat) J.F.B. Pastore (Polygalaceae), 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 Polygala 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 Gymnospora as a generic name, the similarity with Gymnosporia (Wight & Arn.) Benth. & Hook. f. (Gen. Pl. 1: 359, 365. 1862), nom. cons. (Celastraceae) was certainly overlooked. Gymnosporia, based in Celastrus sect. Gymnosporia Wight & Arn. (Prodr. Fl. Ind. Orient. 1: 159. 1834), is conserved with a conserved type against Catha Forssk. ex Scop. (1777), Scytophyllum Eckl. & Zeyh. (1834–1835), Encentrus C. Presl (1845), and Polyacanthus C. Presl (1845). Gymnosporia has an Old World distribution, including about 115 species.
While there are no parallel binding decisions on generic names ending in -sporia/-ius/-ium vs. -spora/-us/-um as to whether or not they are sufficiently alike to be confused and treated as homonyms, there are some decisions on names ending in -ia versus -a. Examples include Gaillona Bonnem. (1828) [Algae] vs. Gaillonia DC. (1830) [Angiosp.: Rubiaceae] and Gillena Adans. (1763) [Angiosp.: Clethraceae] vs. Gillenia Moench (1802) [Angiosp.: Rosaceae], both not considered homonyms. On the other hand, Andinia (Luer) Luer (2000) [Angiosp.: Orchidaceae] vs. Andina J.A. Jiménez & M.J. Cano (2012) [Mosses] and Huberia DC. (1828) [Angiosp.: Melastomataceae] vs. Hubera Chaowasku (2012) [Angiosp.: Annonaceae] are treated as homonyms. Because the ending -spora is not rare, and perhaps because accidentally this spelling was much more used for angiosperm generic names than -sporia, there are cases where Gymnosporia was mistakenly spelled as Gymnospora, 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 Gymnospora and Gymnosporia are treated as homonyms, a replacement name must be proposed for Gymnospora (Chodat) J.F.B. Pastore since this name is in use for Brazilian taxa (see https://floradobrasil.jbrj.gov.br).
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
