The systematization of species in plant taxonomy based on the phylogenetic relationships among them are of utmost importance and also very challenging in large genera. In those, phylogenetic results often may suggest substantially different relationships than previous classifications, and call for large‐scale taxonomic revisions. Delimitation of the genus Silene has been and is still somewhat controversial, and recent molecular phylogenetic studies have settled several monophyletic groups that differ substantially from previous taxonomies. The infrageneric taxonomy of Silene s.str. has not been updated as a whole taking the phylogenetic information into account. In this study, we review previous phylogenetic results based on multiple loci, and conducted comprehensive gene tree analyses based on the nrDNA ITS and cpDNA rps16 regions for 1586 and 944 samples representing 415 and 397 species, respectively, including Silene and its allies, as well as a species tree analysis including 262 samples representing 243 species. We sampled representatives from all 44 sections recognized in the most recent global revision of the genus. The results support the recognition of three subgenera, i.e., S. subg. Behenantha, S. subg. Lychnis and S. subg. Silene, which is partly in agreement with previous molecular phylogenetic findings and contradicts all previous traditional classifications. Silene sect. Atocion, with a few annual species showing a narrow distribution range in the eastern Mediterranean, is treated as incertae sedis because of its uncertain phylogenetic position, possibly due to exceptionally high substitution rates. Silene subg. Lychnis, weakly supported as sister to the other subgenera, splits into three main clades and includes four sections. Silene subg. Behenantha, which forms a possible sister group in relation to S. subg. Silene, is poorly resolved basally and includes a large number of mostly small clades recognized as 18 sections. In S. subg. Silene, 11 sections are recognized, among which four are broadly circumscribed: S. sect. Auriculatae, S. sect. Sclerocalycinae, S. sect. Silene and S. sect. Siphonomorpha. Silene sect. Acutifoliae and S. sect. Portenses are described here as new taxa, whereas new status or new combinations are proposed for S. sect. Anotites, S. sect. Muscipula, S. sect. Petrocoma, S. sect. Pulvinatae, S. sect. Sclerophyllae and S. sect. Uebelinia. Five new combinations and two new names are proposed for taxa in Silene formerly assigned to Lychnis and Uebelinia. The correct infrageneric nomenclature compatible with the new infrageneric system is provided along with synonymy and type citations. Shortcomings of this study, such as the lack of a morphological diagnostic key and sparse sampling of some large sections, are listed and discussed.

中文翻译：

---

一个新的分类学骨干，用于对物种丰富的Silene（石竹科）进行亚属分类

在植物分类学中，基于物种之间的系统发生关系将其系统化至关重要，并且在大类中也极具挑战性。在那些系统发育结果中，通常可能暗示与以前的分类有着本质不同的关系，并要求进行大规模的分类学修订。Silene属的划分一直存在争议，并且仍存在争议，最近的分子系统发育研究已经解决了几个与先前分类法大不相同的单系统类别。Silene的基础分类学s.str。考虑到系统发育信息，尚未整体上进行更新。在这项研究中，我们回顾了基于多个基因座的先前系统发育结果，并基于nrDNA ITS和cpDNA rps16区域对分别代表Silene及其盟友的1586和944个样品（分别代表415和397种）进行了全面的基因树分析。作为物种树分析，包括代表243个物种的262个样本。我们抽取了该属的最新全球修订版中公认的所有44个部分的代表。结果支持三个亚属，即，识别S. SUBG。贝亨南（S. subg。）Lychnis和S。子 Silene与先前的分子系统发育发现部分相符，并且与所有先前的传统分类相矛盾。甲硅烷派。Atocion在地中海东部仅有少数一年生物种，分布范围狭窄，由于其系统发生位置不确定，可能是由于极高的替代率，因此被认为是不合格种。米瓦SUBG。利希尼斯（Lychnis）作为另一个亚属的姊妹而受到弱支持，分为三个主要分支，包括四个部分。米瓦SUBG。Behenantha，它可能与S. subg。组成一个姊妹群体。硅烷，在基础上分辨较差，并包含大量被识别为18个部分的大部分小分支。在S. subg。硅烷共有11个部分，其中有4个被广泛限制：S. sect。Auriculatae，S.教派。Sclerocalycinae，S.教派。米瓦和S.教派。Siphonomorpha。甲硅烷派。Acutifoliae和S.教派。在这里，Portense被描述为新的分类单元，而S. sect则提出了新的状态或新的组合。巨人，S。Muscipula，S.教派。Petrocoma，S.教派。Pulvinatae，S . 硬叶菌和S. sect。Uebelinia。在以前分配给Lychnis和Uebelinia的Silene中，提出了五种新组合和两个新名称。提供了与新的基础系统兼容的正确的基础术语，以及同义词和类型引用。列出并讨论了这项研究的不足，例如缺乏形态学诊断关键和一些大切片的稀疏采样。