{"title":"Picea×darwyniana Björk&Goward:一个无效的分类学名称","authors":"W. Strong","doi":"10.1139/cjb-2023-0062","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<i>Picea </i>× <i>darwyniana </i>Björk & Goward was recently proposed to replace <i>Picea albertiana</i> S. Brown as the representative taxon for the hybrid offspring of <i>Picea glauca</i> (Moench) Voss and <i>Picea engelmannii </i>Parry ex Engelm., but should be considered invalid for three reasons. First, the proponents failed to document in any way that the <i>P. albertiana</i> S. Brown isotypes were<i> Picea glauca </i>× <i>mariana </i>Little & Pauley hybrids, as they claimed. Secondly, the <i>P. albertiana</i> S. Brown isotypes lacked pubescent twigs, purple markings on their seed-cones, and denticulate cone-scale margins, which are characteristics of <i>P. glauca</i> × <i>mariana</i>. This indicates a misinterpretation of the <i>P. albertiana</i> S. Brown parentage. Lastly, <i>P.</i> × <i>darwyniana </i>appears to be an example of <i>P. albertiana</i> ssp. <i>ogilviei </i>Strong & Hills. As the latter is an earlier and validly published name, <i>P.</i> × <i>darwyniana </i>is an illegitimate replacement for plants within the <i>P. glauca</i> × <i>engelmannii </i>(= <i>P.a</i>. ssp. <i>albertiana</i>) and <i>P. engelmannii </i>× <i>glauca </i>(= <i>P.a.</i> ssp. <i>ogilviei</i>) circumscriptions based on naming priority.","PeriodicalId":9092,"journal":{"name":"Botany","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Picea × darwyniana Björk & Goward: an invalid taxonomic name\",\"authors\":\"W. Strong\",\"doi\":\"10.1139/cjb-2023-0062\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<i>Picea </i>× <i>darwyniana </i>Björk & Goward was recently proposed to replace <i>Picea albertiana</i> S. Brown as the representative taxon for the hybrid offspring of <i>Picea glauca</i> (Moench) Voss and <i>Picea engelmannii </i>Parry ex Engelm., but should be considered invalid for three reasons. First, the proponents failed to document in any way that the <i>P. albertiana</i> S. Brown isotypes were<i> Picea glauca </i>× <i>mariana </i>Little & Pauley hybrids, as they claimed. Secondly, the <i>P. albertiana</i> S. Brown isotypes lacked pubescent twigs, purple markings on their seed-cones, and denticulate cone-scale margins, which are characteristics of <i>P. glauca</i> × <i>mariana</i>. This indicates a misinterpretation of the <i>P. albertiana</i> S. Brown parentage. Lastly, <i>P.</i> × <i>darwyniana </i>appears to be an example of <i>P. albertiana</i> ssp. <i>ogilviei </i>Strong & Hills. As the latter is an earlier and validly published name, <i>P.</i> × <i>darwyniana </i>is an illegitimate replacement for plants within the <i>P. glauca</i> × <i>engelmannii </i>(= <i>P.a</i>. ssp. <i>albertiana</i>) and <i>P. engelmannii </i>× <i>glauca </i>(= <i>P.a.</i> ssp. <i>ogilviei</i>) circumscriptions based on naming priority.\",\"PeriodicalId\":9092,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Botany\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Botany\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1139/cjb-2023-0062\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PLANT SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Botany","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1139/cjb-2023-0062","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PLANT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Picea × darwyniana Björk & Goward: an invalid taxonomic name
Picea × darwyniana Björk & Goward was recently proposed to replace Picea albertiana S. Brown as the representative taxon for the hybrid offspring of Picea glauca (Moench) Voss and Picea engelmannii Parry ex Engelm., but should be considered invalid for three reasons. First, the proponents failed to document in any way that the P. albertiana S. Brown isotypes were Picea glauca × mariana Little & Pauley hybrids, as they claimed. Secondly, the P. albertiana S. Brown isotypes lacked pubescent twigs, purple markings on their seed-cones, and denticulate cone-scale margins, which are characteristics of P. glauca × mariana. This indicates a misinterpretation of the P. albertiana S. Brown parentage. Lastly, P. × darwyniana appears to be an example of P. albertiana ssp. ogilviei Strong & Hills. As the latter is an earlier and validly published name, P. × darwyniana is an illegitimate replacement for plants within the P. glauca × engelmannii (= P.a. ssp. albertiana) and P. engelmannii × glauca (= P.a. ssp. ogilviei) circumscriptions based on naming priority.
期刊介绍:
Botany features comprehensive research articles and notes in all segments of plant sciences, including cell and molecular biology, ecology, mycology and plant-microbe interactions, phycology, physiology and biochemistry, structure and development, genetics, systematics, and phytogeography. It also publishes methods, commentary, and review articles on topics of current interest, contributed by internationally recognized scientists.