当前位置: X-MOL 学术TAXON › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
(2776) Proposal to reject the name Lunaria perennis Mill. (Cruciferae)
TAXON ( IF 3.4 ) Pub Date : 2020-10-29 , DOI: 10.1002/tax.12341
Dmitry A. German 1 , Ihsan A. Al‐Shehbaz 2
Affiliation  

(2776) Lunaria perennis Mill., Gard. Dict., ed. 8: Lunaria No. 4. 16 Apr 1768 [Angiosp.: Cruc.], nom. utique rej. prop.

Holotypus: “Herbar. Miller” (BM barcode BM000582910).

Philip Miller (Gard. Dict., ed. 8: Lunaria No. 4. 1768) described Lunaria perennis based on cultivated plants grown from seeds collected in Greece. The species is restricted to many Greek islands in the south‐east of the Aegean Sea. Despite being the earliest binomial for the species, the name has since been largely neglected and never accepted in subsequent works. However, it was placed in some earlier literature, notably Candolle (Syst. Nat. 2: 288. 1821), Don (Gen. Hist. 1: 175. 1831), Steudel (Nomencl. Bot., ed. 2, 2: 77. 1841), and Jackson (Index Kew. 2: 124. 1895), in the synonymy of Farsetia lunarioides (Willd.) W.T. Aiton, but then had completely disappeared in subsequent taxonomic literature. Aiton's account (Hort. Kew., ed. 2, 4: 96. 1812), which was the unacknowledged work of Robert Brown, was based on Alyssum lunarioides Willd. (Sp. Pl. 3: 461. 1800), the lectotype of which, “habitat in insulis Archipelagi Stenosa, Philocandro et Anapho” [now the East Aegean Greek Islands Donousa, Folegandros, and Anafi, respectively], is B‐W No. 11947 (selected by Phitos in Strid & Tan, Fl. Hellen. 2: 225. 2002).

Since Candolle's (l.c.) work first established conspecificity of the two names, Alyssum lunarioides, as a basionym, continued to replace the earlier‐published Lunaria perennis until recently, though under different generic names. Earlier authors such as Aiton, Candolle, Don, Steudel, and Jackson (see above) as well as Nyman (Consp. Fl. Eur.: 50. 1878), often placed the species in Farsetia Turra (now tribe Anastaticeae DC.), though since the work of Sweet (Hort. Brit.: 467. 1826), the general approach gradually switched to accepting it as a member of Fibigia Medik. of Alysseae DC., viz. Fibigia lunarioides (Willd.) Sweet, as done by Smith in Sibthorp & Smith (Fl. Graec. 7: 22, t. 625. 1831), Fournier (in Bull. Soc. Bot. France 11: 61. 1864), Boissier (Fl. Orient. 1: 258. 1867), Halácsy (Consp. Fl. Graec. 1: 83. 1900), Hayek (Prodr. Fl. Penins. Balcan. 1 [in Repert. Spec. Nov. Regni Veg. Beih. 30]: 426. 1927), Schulz in Engler & Harms (Nat. Pflanzenfam., ed. 2, 17B: 490. 1936), Cullen in Davis (Fl. Turkey 1: 358. 1965), Greuter & al. (Med‐Checklist 3: 116. 1986), Ball in Tutin & al. (Fl. Europ., ed. 2, 1: 369. 1993), Jalas & al. (Atlas Fl. Europ. 11: 60. 1996), Phitos (l.c.), Çetin & al. (in African J. Biotechnol. 11: 110. 2012), and Dimopoulos & al. (Vasc. Pl. Greece [Englera 31]: 72. 2013). The same concept is adopted by the continuously updated national database Flora of Greece web version III (http://portal.cybertaxonomy.org/flora-greece/), and the global electronic resources Global Biodiversity Information Facility (https://gbif.org), Species 2000 & ITIS Catalogue of Life (https://www.catalogueoflife.org), The Plant List (http://www.theplantlist.org), and Tropicos.org (http://tropicos.org), all accessed April 2020, as well as Warwick & al. (in Pl. Syst. Evol. 259: 249–258. 2006).

Molecular phylogenetic studies by Rešetnik & al. (in Molec. Phylogen. Evol. 69: 772–787. 2013) strongly supported maintaining the species in Alysseae but not in Fibigia Medik. Among the two available generic names, Acuston Raf. (Sylva Tellur.: 131. 1838) and Pevalekia Trinajstić (Suppl. Fl. Anal. Jugosl. 7: 10. 1980), the older one has been resurrected by Španiel & al. (in Pl. Syst. Evol. 301: 2463–2491. 2015) in a revised circumscription of the tribe, and the species, as A. lunarioides (Willd.) Raf., has been included in that work and thereafter in specialized databases such as AlyBase (http://www.alysseae.sav.sk/) and BrassiBase (http://www.brassibase.cos.uni-heidelberg.de/) as well as in the Euro+Med PlantBase (http://ww2.bgbm.org/EuroPlusMed/query.asp).

A recent rediscovery of the holotype of Lunaria perennis (Al‐Shehbaz & Mabberley in Novon 25: 414–418. 2017) resulted in validation of the combinations Acuston perenne (Mill.) Mabb. & Al‐Shehbaz and A. perenne subsp. obovatum (Boiss. & Kotschy) Mabb. & Al‐Shehbaz. This approach, necessitated by the strict application of the ICN (Turland & al. in Regnum Veg. 159. 2018), is currently only adopted by a few publications (Mabberley, Mabberley's Plant‐book, ed. 4: 13. 2017; Al‐Shehbaz & Barriera in Boissiera 72: 1–192. 2019) and resources such as Plants of the World Online (http://www.plantsoftheworldonline.org), The World Checklist of Vascular Plants (https://wcvp.science.kew.org), World Flora Online (http://www.worldfloraonline.org), and Francis & al. (Update Brassicaceae Species Checklist v.1.2. 2020, http://ipt.pensoft.net/resource?r=aafc‐brassicaceae‐checklist&v=1.2). Since then, the rank of A. perenne subsp. obovatum has been revised, and the taxon was recognized as A. petalodes (DC.) Al‐Shehbaz (Al‐Shehbaz & Barriera, l.c.: 86).

In summary, there are two epithets related to one species. The first, “perennis”, appeared in the literature, except for the original and very few recent publications, exclusively in synonymy and was universally neglected over the last 120 years (much more if Index Kewensis is not counted) and is not yet actively involved in current taxonomic/floristic studies. This epithet has priority over the second, “lunarioides”, which has been in continuous and unambiguous use for over 200 years and is still applied nowadays. In our opinion, retaining the latter epithet in use is clearly preferable for the continuity of nomenclature and now is the proper time to do it before the neglected epithet becomes widely used in relevant literature. An argument against rejection could be the rather limited distribution of the species. We believe, however, that the reasons for rejection are much more robust and are completely in line with the “Guidlines for proposals …” (McNeill & al., https://www.iaptglobal.org/taxon‐guidelines), admitting such actions for “preserving a name with limited usage if the alternative has been almost totally neglected”. Therefore, we propose rejection of Lunaria perennis in order to preserve nomenclatural stability through continued use of the widely recognized combinations based on Alyssum lunarioides.



中文翻译:

(2776)建议拒绝名称Lunaria perennis Mill。(十字花科)

(2776)加纳(Gard ),Lunaria perennis Mill。字典。8:卢娜里亚(Lunaria) 4号 1768年4月16日[Angiosp .: Cruc。],nom。尤蒂克河 支柱。

Holotypus:“草药吧。Miller”(BM条码BM000582910)。

Philip Miller(Gard。Dict。,ed。8Lunaria No.4。1768)描述了基于从希腊收集的种子种植的栽培植物而来的Lunaria perennis。该物种仅限于爱琴海东南部的许多希腊岛屿。尽管是该物种最早的二项式,但此名称在很大程度上已被忽略,并且在以后的作品中从未被接受。但是,它被放置在一些较早的文献中,特别是Candolle(Syst。Nat。2:288. 1821),Don(Gen. Hist。1:175. 1831),Steudel(Nomencl。Bot。,ed。2,2: (Farsetia lunarioides)的代名词(77. 1841)和杰克逊(Index Kew。2:124. 1895)。(将。)WT Aiton,但在随后的分类学文献中已完全消失。Aiton的叙述(Hort。Kew。,第2版,第4期:96。1812年)是Robert Brown的一项未被承认的著作,它基于Alyssum lunarioides Willd。(Sp。Pl。3:461. 1800),其选型是“居住在insulis Archipelagi Stenosa,Philocandro et Anapho中”(现在分别是东爱琴海希腊群岛Donousa,Folegandros和Anafi),是B–W否11947(由Phitos在Strid&Tan,Fl。Hellen。2:225。2002中选择)。

自从Candolle(lc)的工作首次确定了这两个名称的专一性以来Alyssum lunarioides作为别名,尽管使用了不同的通用名称,但直到最近一直继续代替早先出版的Lunaria perennis。诸如Aiton,Candolle,Don,Steudel和Jackson的早期作者(见上文)以及Nyman(Consp。Fl.Eur.:50。1878),经常将该物种放置在Farsetia Turra(现为Anastaticeae DC部落)中,尽管从Sweet(Hort。Brit .: 467. 1826)的工作开始,一般的方法逐渐转向接受它作为Fibigia Medik的成员。的Alysseae DC,即 (威尔德。)甜,如史密斯(Smith)在西伯普(Sibthorp&Smith)(Fl。Graec。7:22,t。625. 1831),Fournier(in Bull。Soc。Bot。France 11:61. 1864),Boissier(Fl 。Orient。1:258. 1867),Halácsy(Cons。Fl。Graec。1:83. 1900),Hayek(Prof. Fl。Penins。Balcan。1 [in Repert.Spec。Nov. Regni Veg。Beih。30 ]:426。1927年),舒尔茨在《英格勒与哈姆斯》(Nat。Pflanzenfam。,第2版,17B:490。1936年),库伦在戴维斯(Fl。Turkey 1:358。1965),Greuter等 (Med‐Checklist 3:116. 1986),Ball in Tutin等人。(Fl.Europ。,ed.2,1:369.1993),Jalas等人。(Atlas Fl.Europ。11:60. 1996),Phitos(lc),Çetin等。(African J. Biotechnol。11:110. 2012)和Dimopoulos等人。(Vasc。Pl。Greece [Englera 31]:72. 2013)。不断更新的希腊国家数据库Flora网络版本III(http:// portal。)采纳了相同的概念。cybertaxonomy.org/flora-greece/)和全球电子资源全球生物多样性信息基金(https://gbif.org),《物种2000》和ITIS生命目录(https://www.catalogueoflife.org),植物List(http://www.theplantlist.org)和Tropicos.org(http://tropicos.org)以及Warwick等人(均于2020年4月访问)。(Pl。Syst。Evol。259:249–258。2006)。

Rešetnik等人的分子系统发育研究。(在Molec。Phylogen。Evol。69:772-787。2013中)强烈支持在Alysseae中维护该物种,但在Fibigia Medik中不支持。在两个可用的通用名称中,Acuston Raf。(Sylva Tellur .: 131. 1838)和PevalekiaTrinajstić(Suppl。Fl。Anal。Jugosl。7:10. 1980),较老的一个由Španiel等人复活。(Pl。Syst。Evol。301:2463–2491。2015),该部落和该物种的经修订的限制为A. lunarioides (Willd。)Raf。已被包括在该工作中,此后被包括在诸如AlyBase(http://www.alysseae.sav.sk/)和BrassiBase(http://www.brassibase.cos.uni- heidelberg.de/)以及Euro + Med PlantBase(http://ww2.bgbm.org/EuroPlusMed/query.asp)中。

最近重新发现了Lunaria perennis的全型(Al-Shehbaz&Mabberley,Novon 25:414-418。2017),从而验证了Acuston perenne(Mill。)Mabb的组合。与铝Shehbaz和A.多年生亚种。Obovatum(Boiss。&Kotschy)Mabb。&Al-Shehbaz。这种方法是ICN严格应用所必需的(Turland等人于Regnum Veg.159.2018中),目前仅被一些出版物采用(Mabberley,Mabberley's Plant-book,ed.4:13.2017; Al-Shehbaz&Barriera in Boissiera 72:1–192 .2019)和资源,例如世界植物在线(http://www.plantsoftheworldonline.org),世界植物检疫清单(https://wcvp.science.kew.org),世界植物志在线(http: //www.worldfloraonline.org)和Francis等人。(更新《十字花科物种检查清单v.1.2.2020》,http://ipt.pensoft.net/resource?r = aafc-十字花科检查清单&v = 1.2)。从那时起,A。perenne亚种的等级。卵巢已被修订,该分类群被认为是花瓣状拟南芥(DC。)Al-Shehbaz(Al-Shehbaz&Barriera,lc:86)。

总而言之,有两个与一个物种有关的上位词。第一个“ perennis ”出现在文献中,除了原始出版物和极少的近期出版物外,仅以同义词的形式出现,并且在过去的120年中被普遍忽略(如果不计入Kewensis指数,则更多),并且尚未积极参与在当前的分类/植物学研究中。该称谓优先于第二个“ lunarioides””已连续200多年明确使用,如今仍在使用。我们认为,保留后一种上皮显然是保持术语命名的最佳选择,现在是在相关文献中广泛使用被忽视的上皮之前的适当时机。反对排斥的论点可能是该物种的分布相当有限。但是,我们认为,拒绝的理由更加强大,并且完全与“提案指南……”(McNeill等人,https://www.iaptglobal.org/taxon-guidelines)一致, “如果几乎完全忽略了替代方案,则保留有限使用的名称”的措施。因此,我们建议拒绝Lunaria perennis为了保持命名稳定性,是通过继续使用基于香雪莲花的广泛认可的组合。

更新日期:2020-10-30
down
wechat
bug