Linda in Arcadia, Teuvo Ahti, Renato Benesperi, Guillermo Amo de Paz, Pradeep K. Divakar, David L. Hawksworth
<p>(3013) <b><i>Lichen pullus</i></b> Schreb., Spic. Fl. Lips.: 131. 9 Jul–25 Oct 1771, nom. cons. prop.</p> <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> <p>(H) <i>Lichen pullus</i> Neck., Delic. Gallo-Belg.: 510. 1768, nom. rej. prop.</p> <p>Typus: non designatus.</p> <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> <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
(3013) Lichen pullus Schreb.Fl.Lips：131.9 Jul-25 Oct 1771, nom：挪威，Østfold，Hvaler，Spjærøy，Spjærholmen，W侧，在沿海石楠的岩石上，59.0617N，10.9038E，海拔。15 m, 1 Aug 2022, E. Timdal (O No. L-229346; isotypus: MAF No. Lich 25274), typ.Gallo-Belg：510.Xanthoparmelia pulla（Schreb.）O. Blanco & al.（或有时为 Neofuscelia pulla（Schreb.）Essl.不过，该词源长期以来一直被认为是 Parmelia pulla Ach.(Syn. Meth. Lich.: 206. 1814), 因此模式标本一直被认为是阿查里亚的采集品。H-ACH 1420D (= H9502152) 中的 Parmelia pulla 标本符合当前用法，因此被 Esslinger & 指定为讲座模式；Ahti（在 Revista Fac. Ci.Ci.Univ. Lisboa, ser.2, C, Ci.Nat.17: 728 & fig.["1973"] 1975).然而，我们中的一个人（L.A. ）指出这是不正确的，因为 Acharius 的种名是作为基于 Lichen pullus Schreb.(Spic. Fl. Lips.: 131. 1771) 的新组合，因为该名称被列为异名。1771. 因此，有必要解决预定基名的地位和类型化问题，以确定 Acharius 名称的应用。情况很复杂，因为 Schreber 的名称是 Lichen pullus Neck 的后来同名。(Delic. Gallo-Belg.: 510. 1768) 的同名，它是一种皮质而非蜡质的棕色鳞片状物种。这两个名称的原型包括 Dillenius（Hist.Musc.: 182, t. 24, fig.1742 [sic 1741, fide Henrey, Brit. Bot. Hort. Lit. 2: 271. 1975])，但我们不认为它们是同名异物，因为文本明确指出它们指的是不同基质的物种，因此应相应地进行分类。Crombie (in J. Linn. Soc., Bot. 17: 572. 1880) 研究了 Dillenian 的收藏，并指出 A 来自现在被称为 Melanohalea olivacea (L.) O. Blanco & al.的物种，B 来自现在被称为 Melanohalea olivacea (L.) O. Blanco & al.的物种、我们研究了这些藏品的高分辨率数字图像，没有理由不同意 Crombie 关于 B 的观点，但 A 似乎具有具乳突状叶柄的皮孔，因此可能是 Melanohalea exasperata (De Not.) O. Blanco & al.，而不是 M. olivacea。M. exasperata 和 M. olivacea 几乎都是皮质和可育的，而 Melanelixia fuliginosa 只有在特殊情况下才皮质和不育，并有丰富的等位体。因此，Necker 的地衣很可能是一个皮质的 Melanohalea 种，但我们选择不根据 Dillenius 的图 77A 对其进行分类，因为我们还没有研究这种分类对 M. exasperata 的可能影响。我们注意到，虽然 Schreber 的名称在发表时是不合法的，但他的外延名称被 Sibthorp（Fl. Oxon.: 326. 1794）合法化为 Lichen olivaceus var.这种地衣广泛分布于欧洲温带地区、非洲北部和南部、澳大利亚和新西兰的裸露岩石上，数量丰富，在这些地区的所有标准检查表和国家植物志中都有记载；2023 年 12 月 1 日，它在谷歌学术中的引用次数为 1200 次。我们选择了来自瑞典的新采集物作为保存类型，而不是之前在该国指定的" lectotype"，以便获得已测序的类型，并用最新方法对其化学成分进行检验。DNA 测序尤为重要，因为这种地衣有时被视为近缘物种复合体的一部分。我们分离了总基因组 DNA，并对 DNA 的内部转录间隔区（ITS）（真菌采用的通用 DNA 条形码标记）进行了测序。分离出的 DNA 保存在马德里康普斯顿大学（UCM）农学院 SYSTEMOL 研究小组。在 P.K.D. 的协助下，G.A.P. 获得了新类型的 ITS 序列数据，并将其存入 GenBank（登录号：OR899250）、在 P.K.D. 的协助下，通过 TLC 和 HPLC 对其进行了检测，发现它含有：stenosporic 酸（主要）、divaricatic 酸（次要）以及微量的 perlatolic 酸、4-O-demethylstenosporic 酸、oxystenosporic 酸和 gyrophoric 酸。(1803），Acharius 将其列为 Parmelia pulla 的第二个异名。该名称首次被卡罗尔用于种级（在《肤蝇等幼虫学报》上。3: 288.
{"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}
<p>(3020) <b><i>Trichostema brachiatum</i></b> L., Sp. Pl.: 598. 1 Mai 1753 [Angiosp.: <i>Lab</i>.], nom. cons. prop.</p> <p>Typus: Herb. Linnaeus No. 750.2 (LINN), typ. cons. prop.</p> <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> <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> <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
(3020) Trichostema brachiatum L., Sp.Pl.: 598.1 Mai 1753 [Angiosp：Herb.750.2 (LINN), typ. cons. prop.标本750.2，林奈注释为Trichostema brachiatum L.，J.E. Smith后来加上了"？"，显然是在1753年之后被添加到LINN中的。Trichostema brachiatum 的应用与 750.2 一致，代表了一种广泛分布于北美洲墨西哥以北的物种。正如林奈所指出的（"staminibus brevibus inclusis"），该种因雄蕊短而与众不同。Brachiatum 名称的唯一原始材料，是 Dillenius 的图标（"Teucrium Virginicum, Origani folio", Hort.Eltham.2: 380, t. 285, fig.1732; lectotypification by Reveal in Taxon 50: 522.dichotomum L. (Sp. Pl.: 598. 1753; "staminibus longissimis exsertis"), 插图中的 "短 "雄蕊 (see Rees, Cycl. 36(I)：Trichostema no.德克萨斯州 17: 220-223. 2023 年）。Druce & Vines (Dillenian Herb.: 181. 1907) 错误地应用了与标本 750.2 (LINN)一致的 Dillenius 的多项式。Michaux (Fl. Bor. -Amer. 2: 3-4, t. 30) 发表了 Isanthus 和 I. coeruleus 的名字，Redouté 在 Michaux 中的 I. coeruleus 插图明显代表与标本 750.2 (LINN) 相同的种。和 Michaux 一样，许多后来的作者也承认了 I. coeruleus，其中一些没有引用 Trichostema brachiatum（例如，Eaton，Man.Bot., ed. 2: 285, 467.1818; Torrey, Comp.1818; Torrey, Comp.N. Middle Stat.1826; Wood, Class-book Bot.1881; Gray, Manual, ed. 6: 405-406.1889; Chapman, Fl.S. U.S., ed. 3: 389.1889；Chapman, Fl. S. U. S., ed. 3: 389.Pl.Amer.9 月：56。1813; Nuttall, Gen.Pl.2: 27, 39.1818; Bentham, Labiat.Gen Spec.1833, 658-660.1835; Steudel, Nomencl. Bot., ed. 2, 1: 823-824.1840, 2: 703.1841; Torrey, Fl.纽约 2: 55, 81-82.1843; Candolle, Prodr. 12: 572-574.1848) 引用 T. brachiatum 作为 I. coeruleus 的异名，他们采用后来的 I. coeruleus 而不是基于较早的 T. brachiatum 的 Isanthus 新组合，这是他们遵循 "邱园规则 "的结果，其中优先权只适用于属内。Lamarck & Poiret (Tabl.2: t. 515.1794, 3: 71. 1823; Encycl.1805, 8: 84-85.setaceum Houtt.(= T. lineare Walter; T. lineare Nutt.), 在分类学上与T.其他（Rees，Cycl：Isanthus no.1. 1811, l.c. 1817; Pursh, Fl.Amer。9 月 2: 405, 414.1814; Steudel, Nomencl. Bot.1: 440, 847.1821; Guillemin in Audouin & al.Class.Hist.Nat.9: 22. 1826, 16: 362.brachiatum consistent with 750.2 (LINN)。Sprengel(Syst。 Veg。 2: 694, 719. 1825) 把 T. brachiatum 作为一个 dubium 名，指出 "Trichostemma [sic] brachiatum L., soli Dillenio notum, quod Nuttallius huc trahit [即 Isanthus coeruleus 的异名]， alienum est et valde dubium、1888）使用了与标本 750.2（LINN）一致的名称 Trichostema brachiatum，并且作为严格优先权的坚持者，将其与 Isanthus brachiatus 合并，在同义词中引用了 I. coeruleus。随后的作者也纷纷效仿（例如，Briquet in Engler & Prantl, Nat.Pflanzenfam.4(3a):215.1895; Fernald & Robinson, Manual：693.1908; Britton & Brown, Ill.Fl.N. U.S., ed. 3, 3: 104.1913; Small, Fl.S.E. U.S., ed. 2: 1019.1913; Taylor, Fl.Vicin.纽约：529。1915; Adams, Short Guide Canad.种子 Pl.: 66. 1938; Kearney & Peebles, Fl.Pl.Ferns Arizona：770.1942; Fernald, Manual：1216.刘易斯（在 Brittonia 5: 589. 1945 年）在他的 Trichostema 修订本中没有承认 Isanthus，他接受了 T. brachiatum 这个名字（同义词中引用了 I. coeruleus），并将标本 750.2（LINN）作为 "标准"（另见 Epling in J. Bot. 67: 11. 1929 年）。刘易斯使用 "标准 "一词可能是承认 750.2 虽然不是模式标本，但仍可作为 T. brachiatum 这一名称的应用标准。如今，大多数人都遵循刘易斯的属概念，Trichostema brachiatum 这一名称在该物种的分布区广泛使用，包括美国 30 多个州、哥伦比亚特区、加拿大安大略省和魁北克省。该名称已被用于 100 多种植物志、名录和其他关于墨西哥以北北美植物区系的著作中（例如，Haines，Fl.Nov. Angl.
{"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}
<p>(3015) <b><i>Arum pentaphyllum</i></b> L., Sp. Pl.: 964. 1 Mai 1753 (Angiosp.: <i>Ar</i>.), nom. utique rej. prop.</p> <p>Typus: non designatus.</p> <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> <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> <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> <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.
:170）的相关描述，但他确实提供了关于其材料来源的补充信息："Rumphal pianta orientale, specie d'Aro Indiano quale così vien descritta dal Padre Matteo"（《Rumphal pianta orientale, a species of Indian Arum lily which has been described by Father Matteo》）。利玛窦（意大利马切拉塔，1552 年 10 月 6 日-中国北京，1610 年 5 月 11 日），意大利耶稣会教士，耶稣会中国传教团的创始人之一。在来华传教（1583 年开始）之前，他曾于 1578 年（9 月 13 日）至 1582 年在印度果阿（印度西部，果阿邦）和科钦（印度西南部，喀拉拉邦）居住（夏宝嘉，《紫禁城里的耶稣会士》：35.2010 年）。这两座城市目前都属于西高止山脉地区。扎诺尼显然没有从利玛窦神父那里收到保存的标本，而只是收到了他在印度发现的各种植物的插图和描述（G. Cristofolini & U. Mossetti, pers. comm.马德拉斯 3: 1571-1592.1931; Sharma & al., Fl.卡纳塔克邦：298。1984; Sharma & al.马哈拉施特拉邦：220。1996; Nayar & al., Fl.Pl.W. Ghats 2: 955.2014; Sasikala & al., Fasc.Fl.印度 29: 294.2019; Mao & Dash, Fl.Pl.India Annot.Checkl.单子叶植物。2020），在西高止山脉仅有一种 Areae 科植物的叶片具有五片或更多小叶，该种是 Sauromatum venosum (Aiton) Kunth (Enum. Pl. 3: 28. 1841), 以 Arum venosum Aiton (Hort. Kew. 3: 315. 1789) 为基础。五叶的叶片上有三片较大的小叶和两片较小的小叶（扎诺尼描述的 "有柄"），没有假茎，花序产生强烈的气味，膨大的佛焰苞管在叶片部分下方有明显的缢缩，黄色的、波状的、锐尖的佛焰苞冠檐很长，有玫瑰色的斑点。venosum (1753 vs. 1789) 相比，林奈学名 Arum pentaphyllum 在命名上具有优先权，因此不能保留 Kunth（l.c. ）的组合，需要根据林奈学名在 Sauromatum 中进行新的组合。然而，接受 A. pentaphyllum L.及其在 Sauromatum 下的（新）组合会破坏 S. venosum 被广泛接受的用法，它出现在涉及非洲、印度和东南亚部分地区的核对表和植物学著作中（Hepper in Kew Bull.21: 492.1967; Rao & Verma in Bull.Bot.Surv.印度 18: 18. 1976; Hara & al.Fl.Pl.尼泊尔 1: 92.1978; Nasir in Nasir & Ali, Fl. W. Pakistan 120: 14.W. Pakistan 120: 14. 1978; Li & Hetterscheid in Li & al.中国 23: 39. 2010; Nayar & al., l.c.; Sasikala & al., l.c.; Mao & Dash, l.c.）和在线数据库（均于 2024 年 2 月 8 日访问），如印度植物群在线 (https://indiaflora-ces.iisc.ac.in/herbsheet.php?id=10942&cat=13)、非洲植物数据库 (https://africanplantdatabase.ch/en/nomen/specie/33454/sauromatum-venosum-dryand-ex-aiton-kunth)、赞比亚植物群 (https://www.zambiaflora.com/speciesdata/species.php?species_id=191190)、莫桑比克植物群 (https://www.mozambiqueflora.com/speciesdata/species.php?species_id=191190) 和世界植物群在线 (http://www.worldfloraonline.org/taxon/wfo-0000304979)。在这种情况下，避免不利的命名法变化并确保命名法稳定性的最佳方法是根据《植物志》第 56 条（Turland & al.56 (Turland & al. in Regnum Veg. 159. 2018).
{"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}
Owing to a combination of reportedly unique morphological characters and an unlocatable type specimen, Marchantiopsis stoloniscyphula 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 M. stoloniscyphula which was included as an admixture within the holotype of Wiesnerella fasciaria deposited in IFP. Our morphological examination found that M. stoloniscyphula and W. fasciaria are conspecific with Marchantia papillata subsp. grossibarba and Sandea japonica, respectively. The nomenclature of Marchantiopsis and M. stoloniscyphula are discussed. Lectotypes for M. stoloniscyphula and W. fasciaria are also designated.
由于其独特的形态特征和无法定位的模式标本，自描述以来，Marchantiopsis stoloniscyphula 一直被认为是马钱科植物中的一个神秘物种。我们找到了 M. stoloniscyphula 的原始材料，该材料作为混合物被包含在 Wiesnerella fasciaria 的主模式中，保存在 IFP 中。形态学检查发现，M. stoloniscyphula 和 W. fasciaria 分别与 Marchantia papillata subsp.讨论了Marchantiopsis 和 M. stoloniscyphula 的命名法。还指定了 M. stoloniscyphula 和 W. fasciaria 的分型。
{"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}
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>
{"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}
<p>(111) <b><i>Gymnosporia</i></b> (Wight & Arn.) Benth. & Hook. f. (1862) [Angiosp.: <i>Celastr</i>.]</p> <p><b><i>Gymnospora</i></b> (Chodat) J.F.B. Pastore (2013) [Angiosp.: <i>Polygal</i>.]</p> <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> <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
(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）。
{"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
A rebuttal to the proposal to conserve Selaginella, 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 Selaginella 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 Selaginella.
{"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
<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> <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> <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> <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> <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
(3009) Trillium erectum L., Sp.Pl.: 340.1 Mai 1753 [Angiosp.: Lil. / Melanth.], nom. cons. prop.Typus：Pisgah, 8 Mai 1897, Biltmore Herbarium 1135c (MO No. 147310 [barcode MO-3717726]; isotypi：Trillium L. (Melanthiaceae: Parideae) 由具有特征根状茎的多年生长寿草本组成，全世界约有 50 种，集中分布在北美东部和西部以及亚洲东部（盖茨在 Ann.Gates in Ann.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.Status Trillium N. America.2022).Trillium erectum L. 被广泛采集用于药用植物贸易（见 Yokosuka & Mimaki in Phytochemistry 69: 2724-2730.2008; Hayes & al. in Phytochemistry 70: 105-113.2009; Ur Rahman & al. in Molecules 22: 2156.2017).该物种常见于北美东部森林的林下，分布于新不伦瑞克省南部，向西穿过安大略省南部到密歇根州上半岛，遍布美国中西部上部和东北部，向南穿过阿巴拉契亚山脉南部（Case & Case in Bull.Amer.岩石花园。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.林奈（Sp. Pl.: 340. 1753）描述了直立三叶草，提供了简短的诊断 "TRILLIUM flore pedunculato erecto"，并列出了四个异名：(1) "Paris foliis ternis, flore pedunculato erecto"，引自林奈（Amoen.1: 154. 1749）；(2) "Solanum triphyllum brasilianum" 引自 Bauhin（Prodr.1635); and (4) "Solano congener triphyllum canadense" cited from Morison (Pl. Hist. Univ. 3: 532, sect. 13, t. 3, fig. 7. 1699).原植物包括地理地点 "弗吉尼亚的生境"。Reveal (in Phytologia 72: 2. 1992) 把 Cornut (l.c.: t. 167) 发表的插图 "Solanum triphyllum Canadense "指定为标准模式，Jarvis (Order out of Chaos: 123, 901. 2007) 也支持这一标准模式。在林奈引用的所有材料中，这幅插图最贴切地反映了直立三叶草（Trillium erectum）这一名称目前的应用情况，但也并非与目前使用的名称没有冲突。花梗比叶长得多，球根也不是本种的特征。不过，就标本分型而言，同型，即原型中引用的标本（《国际植物名录》第 9.6 条，Turland & al. in Regnum Veg. 159. 2018），优先于引用的插图（第 9.12 条）。Burser 标本，Burs.布尔瑟标本馆保存的这张纸（IX: 12 UPS-BURSER）上有一株植物的叶和花，以及一个手写标签，注释为 "Solanum triphyllon Brasilianum | Bauh.| Ex Gallia nova Lutetiam attulit | pharmacopaeus quidam.| 12" (see Juel in Nova Acta Regiae Soc. Upsal., ser.4, 5(7):62.1923).不幸的是，对该标本的仔细研究表明，它不符合当前关于本种的概念，也不支持目前使用的直立三叶草名称。Reveal (l.c.)提到，林奈检查过的 Burser 标本"（Herb. Burser III: 12, UPS）" [IX: 12] 是 T. grandiflorum (Michx.) Salisb。Burser's specimen has broad, rhombische leaves like T. erectum L., die Blumenblätter sind aber oberhalb der Mitte am breitesten, und die Griffel sind ziemlich gerade, ich halte es daher für T. grandiflorum Salisb. Burser's specimen has broad, rhombische leaves like T. erectum L., die Blumenblätter sind aber oberhalb der Mitte am breitesten, und die Griffel sind ziemlich gerade, ich halte es daher für T. grandiflorum Salisb. Burser's specimen has broad, rhombische leaves like T. erectum L.、林奈从卡尔姆（Kalm）获得了一个标本，现保存在 LINN（林奈草本第 469.2 号），标本底部边缘中央有林奈写的字母 "K"（见 Juel in Svenska Linné-Sällsk.Årsskr.3: 61-79.1920; Juel & Harshberger in Proc. Acad.费城 81: 297-303.Philadelphia 81: 297-303.1929; Jarvis, l.c.: 215)。该标本是林奈用来描述直立
{"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}
<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> <p>Aedo, C., Madrid, Spain</p> <p>Akiyama, H., Sanda, Japan</p> <p>Andrew, R., Armidale, Australia</p> <p>Andrino, C.O., Belém, Brazil</p> <p>Applequist, W., St. Louis, Missouri, U.S.A.</p> <p>Arup, U., Lund, Sweden</p> <p>Ballard, H., Jr., Athens, Ohio, U.S.A.</p> <p>Barkworth, M., Logan, Utah, U.S.A.</p> <p>Barrett, R., Sydney, Australia</p> <p>Barrie, F., Saint Louis, Missouri, U.S.A.</p> <p>Benz, B., Fort Worth, Texas, U.S.A.</p> <p>Bittrich, V., Campinas, Brazil</p> <p>Boatwright, J.S., Cape Town, South Africa</p> <p>Bobrov, A., Borok, Russian Federation</p> <p>Bohley, K., Munich, Germany</p> <p>Bohs, L., Salt Lake City, Utah, U.S.A.</p> <p>Cano, M.J., Murcia, Spain</p> <p>Cellinese, N., Gainesville, Florida, U.S.A.</p> <p>Chao, Y.-S., Taipei, Taiwan</p> <p>Coiro, M., Zurich, Switzerland</p> <p>Croat, T., St. Louis, Missouri, U.S.A.</p> <p>Delprete, P.G., Cayenne, French Guiana</p> <p>De Queiroz, K., Washington, D.C., U.S.A.</p> <p>Domina, G., Palermo, Italy</p> <p>Duan, L., Guangzhou, China</p> <p>Dupin, J., Boulder, Colorado, U.S.A.</p> <p>Eggli, U., Zurich, Switzerland</p> <p>Faruk, A., Ardingly, United Kingdom</p> <p>Fiaschi, P., Florianópolis, Brazil</p> <p>Forrest, L.L., Edinburgh, United Kingdom</p> <p>Franck, A., Gainesville, Florida, U.S.A.</p> <p>Friesen, N., Osnabrück, Germany</p> <p>Friis, I., Copenhagen, Denmark</p> <p>García, M.A., Madrid, Spain</p> <p>García, N., Santiago, Chile</p> <p>Gastaldello Rando, J., Barreiras, Brazil</p> <p>Geltman, D., St. Petersburg, Russian Federation</p> <p>Gibb, S., Lincoln, New Zealand</p> <p>Grant, J., Neuchâtel, Switzerland</p> <p>Grassi, F., Milan, Italy</p> <p>Greimler, J., Vienna, Austria</p> <p>Harris, D., Edinburgh, United Kingdom</p> <p>Hawksworth, D., Richmond, United Kingdom</p> <p>Herendeen, P., Glencoe, Illinois, U.S.A.</p> <p>Herting, J., Sydney, Australia</p> <p>Hjertson, M., Uppsala, Sweden</p> <p>Hori, K., Kochi City, Japan</p> <p>Hoyos, D., Córdoba, Argentina</p> <p>Hu, G., Wuhan, China</p> <p>Iamonico, D., Pisa, Italy</p> <p>Jarvis, C., London, United Kingdom</p> <p>Kashiwadani, H., Japan</p> <p>Kazempour-Osaloo, S., Tehran, Iran</p> <p>Kessler, M., Zurich, Switzerland</p> <p>Khan, G., Oldenburg, Germany</p> <p>Khassanov, F.O., Tashkent, Uzbekistan</p> <p>Kilian, N., Berlin, Germany</p> <p>Koch, J., Osnabrück, Germany</p> <p>Koch, M., Heidelberg, Germany</p> <p>Kress, W.J., Washington, D.C., U.S.A.</p> <p>Kučera, J., České Budějovice, Czech Republic</p> <p>Leopardi-Verde, C.L., Tecomán, Mexico</p> <p>Lewis, G.P., Richmond, United Kingdom</p> <p>Li, L., Kunming, China</p> <p>Li
{"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}
<h2> NOTICE</h2> <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> <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> <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> <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
国际植物分类学协会(IAPT)的个人成员有权按照《藻类、真菌和植物国际命名法》(以下简称"《命名法》"；Turland & al. in Regnum Veg. 159. 2018)第 III 分部第 2.5 条的规定，参加提交给 2024 年马德里第 XX 届国际植物学大会的关于《藻类、真菌和植物国际命名法》(以下简称"《命名法》"；Turland & al. in Regnum Veg. 159. 2018)修订提案的初步指导性投票(即所谓的 "邮件投票")。这些提案的作者和九个常设命名委员会的成员（见第 III 分部第 7.1 条）也有权投票，但不允许机构投票（第 III 分部第 3 条）。国际理论物理中心办公室正通过电子邮件向有电子邮件地址的国际理论物理中心成员、提案通信作者和常设命名委员会秘书发送选票（投票表）。投票的印刷本将寄给没有电子邮件地址的国际电话电报协会成员。如果你有投票权但没有收到选票，你可按以下地址向亚太电信协会办公室索取电子版或印刷版选票。选票的电子版应填写、保存并通过电子邮件发送至国际电话电报协会办公室（office@iapt-taxon.org）。或者，也可填写打印文本，并通过航空邮件寄往以下地址IAPT office, Plant Science and Biodiversity Centre, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dubravska cesta 9, SK-845 23 Bratislava, Slovakia.所有选票必须在 2024 年 5 月 31 日之前收到，以便将其列入提供给大会命名科成员的表格中。命名科会议将对提案采取最终行动，会议将于 2024 年 7 月 15 日星期一（8:30 开始）至 2024 年 7 月 19 日星期五在西班牙马德里穆里略广场 2 号皇家植物园 Villanueva 馆举行（见 https://ibcmadrid2024.每个登记参加大会至少一个整天的人都有权登记为名词科成员。大会注册应提前进行(见 https://ibcmadrid2024.com/index.php?seccion=registrationArea&subSeccion=registrationInfo)；收到的确认函将作为命名法分会注册资格的证明，注册将从 7 月 14 日星期日 17:00-20:00 在 Villanueva 馆举行的欢迎招待会上开始。7 月 15 日星期一上午 8:00 开始在 Villanueva 展馆继续进行命名科注册。命名科每位注册成员在会议上均享有一票个人投票权（第 III 分部第 5.9 条）。个人投票既不得转让，也不得累积；一个人的个人投票不得超过一票。命名部成员可作为一个或多个机构的正式代表，从而拥有机构票，每个机构拥有一至七票不等，但包括一票个人票在内，任何人不得拥有超过 15 票。机构票委员会已公布其报告以及马德里大会机构票清单（Ulloa Ulloa & al. in Taxon: https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.13110）。相关说明如下"如何在 2024 年马德里第 XX 届国际生物伦理委员会命名法会议上行使机构投票权"。有权投票的机构将在 2024 年上半年收到总报告员和副报告员的正式信函通知。这封信将由机构间常设委员会办公室通过电子邮件发送给《草本索引》中为各机构开 列的通讯员。因此，各机构应检查其在 Index Herbariorum 中提供的信息是否最新，并提交更正（见 https://sweetgum.nybg.org/science/ih/how-to-update-index-herbariorum/）。在马德里大会上，命名部将首次在互联网上进行现场直播（见 Knapp & al. in Taxon: https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.13127）。可以观摩每天的会议，但不能进行互动评论和投票（见下文提案中的第 III 分部提案 H）。观察员必须提前注册才能观看直播，注册与大会注册无关。大会网站(https://ibcmadrid2024.com/?seccion=nomenclature&subSeccion=nomenclature)的名词科网页将提供全部详情。
{"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}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：