Showing papers in "Taxon in 1996"
TL;DR: This new edition, with more than 21,000 entries, provides the most complete listing available of generic names of fungi, their families and orders, their attributes and descriptive terms.
Abstract: This is the one essential handbook for all who work with or are interested in fungi (including lichens, slime moulds, yeasts and fungal analogues).This new edition, with more than 21,000 entries, provides the most complete listing available of generic names of fungi, their families and orders, their attributes and descriptive terms. For each genus, the authority, the date of publication, status, systematic position, number of accepted species, distribution, and key references are given. Diagnoses of families and details of orders and higher categories are included for all groups of fungi. In addition, there are biographic notes, information on well-known metabolites and mycotoxins, and concise accounts of almost all pure and applied aspects of the subject (including citations of important literature).All information has been updated as necessary since the publication of the ninth edition in 2001. In addition the tenth edition has the following new features: a completely new classification of the Kingdom Fungi based on recent multi-gene phylogenetics research; a major revision of the classification of the Basidiomycota and substantial modification of the \"basal\" groups; further integration of anamorphic and teleomorphic genera in the classification; enhanced distinctions between the true fungi and unrelated groups traditionally studied by mycologists; and, improved information on references to publications.
788 citations
TL;DR: The genus Ipomoea comprises the largest number of species within the Convolvulaceae and over half of them are concentrated in the Americas, where the total may approach 500 taxa, mostly native and a few introduced as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: The genus Ipomoea comprises the largest number of species within the Convolvulaceae. Throughout the world Ipomoea is usually estimated to contain c. 500 species (e.g., Mabberley, 1989; McDonald & Mabry, 1992). After our compilation, we believe Ipomoea is more likely to contain 600-700 species. Over half of them are concentrated in the Americas, where the total may approach 500 taxa, mostly native and a few introduced. Although there are recent publications dealing with Ipomoea in the floras of several American countries (O'Donell, 1941-1960b; Austin, 19751991b; Austin & Cavalcante, 1982; Austin & al., 1986; McDonald, unpubl. thesis 1978, unpubl. diss. 1982, 1982-1995; McDonald & Austin, 1990; McDonald & Mabry, 1992; Wilkin, 1995), there is no single reference summarizing all the species currently recognized in the western hemisphere. The purpose of this publication is to make available an updated list with relationships of American Ipomoea species examined thus far. There certainly are more species in the Americas than recognized here, especially in Brazil, Bolivia and Paraguay, but many of these have not been studied since Meisner (1869). Moreover, there are species remaining undescribed and/or undiscovered. Infrageneric placement is given, where known, and a documented American geographical range is provided for each species.
255 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors suggest that selection for more efficient pollination systems in a pollinator-limited context, rather than isolating mechanisms, is the primary driving force behind floral evolution in the Cape flora.
Abstract: Recent species definitions have placed emphasis on "diagnostic characters" rather than isolating mechanisms. Such characters can be informative about the evolutionary processes which lead to speciation in highly diversified plant groups, such as those found in the Cape floral region of South Africa. Rampant speciation in the Cape flora has often been attributed to heterogeneity of the physical environment, yet many large Cape genera show radiation in floral, rather than vegetative, characters, which suggests that adaptation to pollinators has played a major role in speciation. Selection for more efficient pollination systems in a pollinator-limited context, rather than isolating mechanisms, is suggested to be the primary driving force behind floral evolution in the Cape flora.
125 citations
TL;DR: Alliaceae, Amaryllidaceae, and Agapanthoideae are recircumscribed, and Tulbaghieae raised to subfamilial status.
Abstract: The family Themidaceae Salisb. is resurrected and recircumscribed. It consists of c. 10 genera of cormous plants principally from western N. America (British Columbia to northern Guatemala). These had been included in Alliaceae, as tribe Brodiaeeae (subfamily Allioideae), but recent molecular and anatomical studies indicate that the group merits familial status. Petronymphe is not a member of this group but rather belongs in Anthericaceae. Agapanthus is misplaced in Alliaceae and, despite its superior ovary, should be considered a member of Amaryllidaceae, as subfamily Agapanthoideae. Alliaceae, Amaryllidaceae, and Agapanthoideae are recircumscribed, and Tulbaghieae raised to subfamilial status.
113 citations
69 citations
65 citations
TL;DR: On the basis of morphological and chemical data, the genus Vincetoxicum is recognized as separate from Cynanchum and Tylophora is identified as the closest relative of Vinceticum.
Abstract: On the basis of morphological and chemical data, the genus Vincetoxicum is recognized as separate from Cynanchum. Tylophora is identified as the closest relative of Vincetoxicum. In consequence, eleven new combinations in Vincetoxicum are proposed. The C. auriculatum group is recognized as C. sect. Rhodostegiella. Tylophoropsis must be included in Tylophora, which results in one new combination.
60 citations
52 citations
TL;DR: It is clear from Williams's (1994) comments that he considers the ultimate goal of systematics to be the most efficient summarization of the patterns of character distributions amongst taxa, and appears that, as a systematist, he is disinterested in the reconstruction of phylogenies.
Abstract: In a recent paper, Williams (1994) commented on the debate between Baum & Ragan (1993) and myself (Rodrigo, 1993). My original comments were directed at Baum (1992) and his method for combining trees based on different data sets. Briefly put, Baum (1992) and Ragan (1992a), recommended (1) that trees from different data sets be coded as binary additive variables; (2) these variables be combined into one larger data set; and (3) this data set be analysed using parsimony to give an overall "summary" of the data. As I state in my discussion (Rodrigo, 1993: 636), my disagreement with Baum, and by extension, Ragan, was that they described their method as a means of combining data. Baum and Ragan have restated their position more clearly and I now appreciate that what they really attempted to do was to "make inferences from multiple data sets" (Baum & Ragan, 1993: 637). A second disagreement that I had with the method of Baum and Ragan relates to the application of binary additive coding and parsimony to obtain an overall "summary" of multiple trees. My disagreement with their method is that it applies techniques (i.e., binary additive coding and parsimony) to "phylogenies" without satisfactory justification that these techniques are indeed applicable. Williams (1994: 450) believes that my comments relating to Baum's (1992), and Ragan's (1992a), analysis are "misplaced" demonstrating my "misunderstanding of the role that parsimony plays in cladistic analysis". However, I fear that all he has highlighted is an apparent incommensurability between our respective research paradigms. It is clear from Williams's (1994) comments that he considers the ultimate goal of systematics to be the most efficient summarization of the patterns of character distributions amongst taxa. It appears that, as a systematist, he is disinterested in the reconstruction of phylogenies. He cites presumably with approval Carpenter (1992: 149): "The substantial progress during 200 years of systematic effort, in the
TL;DR: The objectives of this paper are to formalize the nomenclature of the two subfamilies of Anomochloeae and Streptochaeteae, and to summarize in so far as is possible their defining morphological and anatomical characters.
Abstract: Recent molecular data (Clark & al., 1995; Soreng & Davis, 1995; Duvall & Morton, 1996) have shown unequivocally that the anomalous, tropical forest tribes Anomochloeae and Streptochaeteae (as one clade), and the Phareae (as another clade) occur as the first two offshoots at the very base of the grass family tree. Subfamilial status is warranted for each of these two lineages because of their cladistically basal position and great divergence from the rest of the family. A review of the reasons for this disposition is given in Clark & al. (1995). The objectives of this paper are to formalize the nomenclature of the two subfamilies, and to summarize in so far as is possible their defining morphological and anatomical characters. As discussed in Clark & al. (1995), the Bambusoideae as circumscribed in recent classifications of the Poaceae (Clayton & Renvoize, 1986; Watson & Dallwitz, 1992) are polyphyletic according to various sets of molecular data (Clark & al., 1995, and references cited therein; Duvall & Morton, 1996). Many of the morphological characters previously used to define the subfamily, such as the presence of pseudopetioles and fusoid cells in the chlorenchyma, are in fact symplesiomorphies (Clark & al., 1995). A monophyletic subfamily Bambusoideae is obtained by the inclusion of only the Bambuseae (woody bamboos), the Buergersiochloeae (a rare, monogeneric tribe of herbaceous bamboos endemic to New Guinea), and the Olyreae (an American tribe of monoecious herbaceous bamboos, with one species also in Africa) (Zhang & al., 1995). The Anomochloeae, Streptochaeteae, and Phareae cannot be accommodated in any currently accepted grass subfamily without rendering it polyphyletic, and it is cladistically appropriate to recognize the earliest divergences within the grass family at the subfamilial level. All the molecular data support Anomochloa Brongn. and Streptochaeta Schrad. ex Nees as sister taxa, but it is not easy to find shared-derived anatomical or morphological characters that define the clade. The homologies of the inflorescences and "spikelets" between the two genera, and between them and all other grasses, is unclear (Judziewicz & Soderstrom, 1989; Clark & al., 1995), and the absence of well developed grass-type ligules and lodicules in both genera is noteworthy. There is a possible synapomorphy in the shared presence of a swollen pulvinus at the junction of the pseudopetiole and blade, a character not known in any other grasses (or at least
TL;DR: Terms are proposed to designate different subzones and regions within the paracladial zone of the inflorescence, in the Poaceae, where in general the inflorescences of grasses lack bracts other than those belonging to the spikelets.
Abstract: Terms are proposed to designate different subzones and regions within the paracladial zone of the inflorescence, in the Poaceae. In some taxa the inflorescence is composed of short paracladia only. In others the main axis bears short paracladia in the distal region and long paracladia in the proximal region, so that two subzones can be distinguished. In general the inflorescences of grasses lack bracts other than those belonging to the spikelets. In the Andropogoneae, however, some inflorescences have long paracladia that lack bracts and prophylls but others have long paracladia with well developed bracts and prophylls. The former are designated as "long paracladia without trophotagma", and the latter as "long paracladia with trophotagma".
TL;DR: An information-theoretic view has been applied to biological classification to capture taxonomic concepts as taxonomic data entities and to develop a system for managing these concepts and the lineage relationships among them.
Abstract: An information-theoretic view has been applied to biological classification to capture taxonomic concepts as taxonomic data entities and to develop a system for managing these concepts and the lineage relationships among them. In order to develop the data model, it has been necessary to apply explicit definitions to several taxonomic terms that generally have not been precisely defined and to coin and define several new terms and concepts. Methods are outlined for comparing interacting classifications and querying hierarchical taxonomic databases. A program/database system called HICLAS, which provides an X-Window interface to query classification data, is available on the Internet.
TL;DR: The method is applied in direct studies of hybrids and their parents, taxonomic treatments, pinpointing of specimens that merit study with other techniques, and screening of data sets for putative hybrids and hybrid species prior to phylogenetic reconstruction.
Abstract: Summary containing hybrids is presented. The method applies to a collection of specimens in which two or more species along with some or all of their hybrids are suspected to be represented. The purpose of the method is to hypothesize which specimens might be of hybrid origin, and for each of these specimens to indicate which other two specimens resemble those that might have been its parents. The method is employed in the computer program HYWIN by using two kinds of computationally intense techniques: evaluation of a hybrid optimality score for each triplet generated from three quantitatively defined criteria: hybrid intermediacy (IN), parental distance (PD), and equality (EQ); and simulation of a probability hypothesis to generate measures of the level of statistical certainty. The method can be applied in direct studies of hybrids and their parents, taxonomic treatments, pinpointing of specimens that merit study with other techniques, and screening of data sets for putative hybrids and hybrid species prior to phylogenetic reconstruction.
TL;DR: The tribe Boragineae Bercht was regarded by Johnston (1924) as a natural group of the Boraginaceae, consisting of closely related genera showing reticulate variation of several significant characters, but one of the taxonomic problems concerns the delimitation of two Linnaean genera, Anchusa and Lycopsis.
Abstract: The tribe Boragineae Bercht. & J. Presl was regarded by Johnston (1924) as a natural group of the Boraginaceae, consisting of closely related genera showing reticulate variation of several significant characters (see also Smith, 1932). Past taxonomic treatments largely depended upon the relevance attributed by different authors to such characters. One of the taxonomic problems concerns the delimitation of two Linnaean genera, Anchusa and Lycopsis, which in the past had mostly been separated by the flower zygomorphy typical of Lycopsis. Despite general agreement on the species names that provide the types of these two generic names, neither species name appears to have yet been typified.
TL;DR: The rather difficult situation arising from the fact that the same fungus, when associating with different photobionts, may form very different-looking lichens, previously named as separate species or even placed in different genera is brought up.
Abstract: Laundon (1995) has brought up for discussion the rather difficult situation arising from the fact that the same fungus, when associating with different photobionts, may form very different-looking lichens, previously named as separate species or even placed in different genera. While I agree that this problem needs to be clarified, I disagree with the solution suggested by Laundon: to classify correlated photobionts as forms of the same species. To me this is not a question of classification, only of nomenclature. It is quite clear that a lichen is classified according to its mycobiont. In mycology there is no tradition to classify, at a specified taxonomic rank, different-looking infections by the same fungus, e.g. different growth forms induced on different hosts. In parasitic fungi there has been a tradition to designate as formae speciales taxa which are characterized by their physiological adaptation to different hosts, being morphologically identical or nearly so, but this is an informal system without nomenclatural status (Code, Art. 4, Note 3). The situation for lichen phototypes is rather similar to and actually parallels that of fungi which show different morphological expressions during their life cycle, and accordingly have been given different names (Jorgensen, 1991), which are acceptable under the dual naming system provided for in Art. 59. Unfortunately the phototypes of lichens are not covered by that Article, not only because it excepts lichens, but because this kind of variation is not expression of a pleomorphic life cycle. I have previously (Jorgensen, 1991) argued that we need a similar system for phototypes, and Greuter (pers. comm.) has suggested that this would find its logical place among the exceptions mentioned in Art. 11.1, referring to names of form-taxa. A formal proposal for the emendation of that Article has not, however, been made, as opinions among lichenologists are rather divided in this respect, as recognized by Laundon (1994). The nomenclatural difficulties in handling this situation are clear from the examples chosen by Laundon (1995). I am sure that both Galloway (1988) and White & James (1988) felt a need to name the two phototypes of one species since they occur separately, having a different ecology and distribution, but they ran into nomenclatural difficulties which were not solved in a satisfactory way. Galloway
TL;DR: The wild, red-flowered Phaseolus glabellus is generally considered either as a species of the P. coccineus complex or as a subspecies of P. rosacea, butBiogeographic considerations as well as experimental hybridization, seed storage protein electrophoresis and cpDNA polymorphism point at its isolated taxonomic position and distinctness from P. Coccineu.
Abstract: The wild, red-flowered Phaseolus glabellus is generally considered either as a species of the P. coccineus complex or as a subspecies of P. coccineus. Biogeographic considerations as well as experimental hybridization, seed storage protein electrophoresis and cpDNA polymorphism point at its isolated taxonomic position and distinctness from P. coccineus. The position of P. glabellus in Phaseolus and its relationships with the remaining taxa of the P. coccineus complex are discussed.
TL;DR: The Cretan reed has been taxonomically equated by some authors with a doubtful Linnean species, Cenchrus frutescens, and the latter name has been recently proposed for rejection so as to prevent displacement of P. australis by the older supposed synonym.
Abstract: Phragmites is represented by two taxa on the S. Aegean island of Crete (Greece), one of which corresponds to the cosmopolitan common reed, P. australis. The other deviates in several features and is here described and named as a new species, P. frutescens H. Scholz; it has been studied in the wild and was found to have a peculiar, frutescent, branched habit, to produce inflorescences only occasionally, and never fertile flowers; reproduction appears to take place only vegetatively, by stolons and by leafy propagules replacing the flowers. The Cretan reed has been taxonomically equated by some authors with a doubtful Linnean species, Cenchrus frutescens, and the latter name has been recently proposed for rejection so as to prevent displacement of P. australis by the older supposed synonym. Although one of the original elements of C. frutescens arguably belongs to P. frutescens, it is an old illustration that cannot be interpreted with ultimate certainty; furthermore it is in major conflict with the remainder of the protologue. Choice of the epithetfrutescens for the new species eliminates future uncertainty and makes the proposal to reject C. frutescens unnecessary. Those who (like one of the authors) are unconvinced of the specific distinctness of the Cretan reed are free to treat it at an appropriate infraspecific level under P. australis.
TL;DR: The capability of DCA to combine both categorical and quantitative characters is especially useful in morphometric studies and in areas of evolutionary biology, e.g. chronistic studies of extinction events in morphospace.
Abstract: Summary Parnell, J. & Waldren, S.: Detrended correspondence analysis in the ordination of data for phenetics and cladistics. - Taxon 45: 71-84. 1996. - ISSN 0040-0262. Most methods of morphometric and phylogenetic analysis do not permit the incorporation of both categorical and quantitative data. Detrended correspondence analysis (DCA) was used to produce ordination diagrams of strictly categorical data from a cladistic analysis, and mixed data from a morphometric study of hybridization. In both cases it proved preferable to standardize the data prior to DCA, because increased separation on ordination was found when larger scale ranges were used. A standardization is suggested, such that characters are scaled on a range from 1 to the total number of characters scored; this will produce more informative ordinations if large numbers of characters are scored. When used in conjunction with appropriate cladograms this phenetic technique may help reveal features such as homoplasy which are not readily apparent in cladograms, while the capability of DCA to combine both categorical and quantitative characters is especially useful in morphometric studies and in areas of evolutionary biology, e.g. chronistic studies of extinction events in morphospace.
TL;DR: The terms and conditions are here met for validating the name Qiongzhuea, and all species names concerned, under the provisions of the Code.
Abstract: Qiongzhuea, when first published, was based on ''Q. tumidinoda'' as designated type. However, the latter name was not validly published because two different type specimens were cited. therefore the generic name, and all specific names that were subsequently published under it, are not valildly published either. A new name for Q. tumidinoda was later validated by Ohrnberger under Chimonobambusa, C. tumidissinoda, whereas the generic name still needs to be validated. The terms and conditions are here met for validating the name Qiongzhuea, and all species names concerned, under the provisions of the Code.
TL;DR: Hong et al. as mentioned in this paper proposed a new subspecies of Paeonia decomposita, P. suffruticosa subsp. rockii (S. W. Smith, No. 4641), which has not been recognized as a correct name since its publication.
Abstract: Paeonia decomposita was described in 1939 by Handel-Mazzetti on the basis of the specimen H. Smith 4641 from Chosodjo, N.W. Sichuan, China. Ster (1946: 142) considered it conspecific with P. suffruticosa Andr., stating: "I have seen a photograph of the type specimen (H. Smith, No. 4641) of P. decomposita ..., and if this photograph is compared with Rock's specimen of P. suffruticosa in the Kew Herbarium they will be found to be alike". Rock's specimen of P. suffruticosa was since described as a new subspecies, P. suffruticosa subsp. rockii S. W. Haw & Lauener (1990), which has been raised to specific level, P. rockii (S. G. Haw & Lauener) T. Hong & J. J. Li (in T. Hong & al., 1992). In his revision of Chinese peonies, Fang (1958: 302, 314-315) stated, under P. suffruticosa, that P. decomposita was an imperfectly known species, which he treated as a doubtful synonym of P. suffruticosa in the English abstract. In the same paper he described a new woody species, P. szechuanica Fang, also from N.W. Sichuan. Pan (1979: 41) treated P. decomposita as a straightforward synonym of P. suffruticosa and recognized P. szechuanica as a correct name. H.-Y. Hong (in Fu 1992: 536-537) included P. szechuanica as an endangered species. Osti (1994) also used the name P. szechuanica, ignoring P. decomposita. Therefore, P. decomposita has not again been recognized as a correct name since its publication.
TL;DR: The inclusion of outgroup taxa during parsimony may alter the branching pattern of the ingroup to destroy distinct monophyletic groups and instead create nested series of monophylettic groups, reminiscent of the chaining properties of some phenetic methods.
Abstract: Some of the effects of including outgroup taxa on the branching pattern of the ingroup taxa are revealed by an artificial example, and illustrated with a more complex natural example involving the grass genus Kengyilia. To reduce the total number of changes required by a branching pattern, parsimony may prefer to reduce the number of changes on temporally long phyletic lines to more distant outgroups while increasing changes on temporally short phyletic lines within the ingroup. This may have the effect of bringing the ancestors that define monophyletic groups within the ingroup down to the phyletic line to the outgroup, which converts them to paraphyletic groups. Thus the inclusion of outgroup taxa during parsimony may alter the branching pattern of the ingroup to destroy distinct monophyletic groups and instead create nested series of monophyletic groups, reminiscent of the chaining properties of some phenetic methods. If similarities between ingroup and outgroup are true homoplasies, then removal of these homoplasies will produce error. However, parsimony estimates of ingroup may produce bogus monophyletic groups because no account has been made of the ingroup's most recent common ancestor.
TL;DR: Hawksworth (1995) has provided a synopsis of steps towards the writing and possible adoption of a unified International code of bionomenclature, arising from a number of small workshops held in the years between 1985 and 1994.
Abstract: Many taxonomists, from both the botanical and zoological sides of the fence, will have been startled to find that proposals are well advanced to change radically the way in which they practice their science. Hawksworth (1995) has provided a synopsis of steps towards the writing and possible adoption of a unified International code of bionomenclature, arising from a number of small workshops held in the years between 1985 and 1994. His mandate for doing this was the establishment of a Special Committee on Harmonization of the Codes, set up after minimal discussion at the nomenclature sessions of the International Botanical Congress in Yokohama in 1993. It arose out of a proposal by Hawksworth (1993) to alter Art. 65 of the Berlin Code to extend the consideration of homonymy of generic names beyond the botanical Code. In coining new generic names botanists were to include consideration of the Approved List of Bacterial Names and any zoological names on proposed future Lists of Names in Use accorded special protected status by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. This proposal was heavily rejected in the postal ballot prior to the Yokohama congress, but was resurrected at the formal meeting. The brief discussion revealed that the major concerns in raising the matter were twofold: the problem experienced by some taxonomists in having to differentiate between identical generic names legitimately in use for both plant and animal groups under the botanical and zoological Codes, and the problems experienced by those working in some protist groups where organisms can legitimately bear two correct names, depending on whether one decides to treat them as plants or animals. The Special Committee on Harmonization of the Codes was set up with the mandate "to investigate all borderline problems between the biological Codes, and the special problems of all borderline groups, and eventually all questions of harmonization of the Codes that were felt to be soluble" (Greuter & al., 1994: 193). Most of those present at the meeting where this Committee was established presumably believed that they were voting on a mechanism to bring the Codes closer together in relatively minor matters where disruption to existing names and practices would be minimal. At no time was it suggested that the process would involve complete scrapping of the existing Codes and the writing of a new "Harmonized Code" involving elements of all of them.