Asphodelaceae c omprises a round 12 genera a nd about 1060
species (Africa, Mediterranean basin, Arabian Peninsula, west and
central Europe, Madagascar, Central Asia, Australia, New Zealand),
Hemerocallidaceae some 19 genera with about 117 species (tropical
and temperate Eurasia, Australia, New Zealand, several Pacific
islands, Madagascar, western South America, southern Africa),
while Xanthorrhoeaceae s.str. has one genus with some 28 species
(restricted to Australia, including Tasmania). The Angiosperm Phylogeny
Group (APG II in Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 141: 399–436. 2003 &
APG III in 161: 105–121. 2009) combine these three families into
Xanthorrhoeaceae s.l., although APG II provided the option to also
use Asphodelaceae and Hemerocallidaceae, under the system of socalled
“bracketed families”. APG III, however, did away with this
option, thus leaving Xanthorrhoeaceae as the only choice.http://www.botanik.univie.ac.at/iapt/s_taxon.phpam201

Klopper, Ronell Renett

Smith, G.F. (Gideon Francois), 1959-

Van Wyk, Abraham Erasmus (Braam)

Taxon

UPSpace at the University of Pretoria

402 Version of Record (identical to print version).TAXON 62 (2) • April 2013: 402–403Klopper & al. • (2129) Conserve Asphodelaceae(2129) Proposal to conserve the family name Asphodelaceae (Spermatophyta: Magnoliidae: Asparagales)Ronell R. Klopper,1 Gideon F. Smith2 & Abraham E. van Wyk31 Biosystematics Research & Biodiversity Collections Division, South African National Biodiversity Institute, Private Bag X101, 0001 Pretoria, South Africa / Department of Plant Science, University of Pretoria, 0002 Pretoria, South Africa2 Office of the Chief Director: Biosystematics Research & Biodiversity Collections, South African National Biodiversity Institute, Private Bag X101, 0001 Pretoria, South Africa / Acocks Chair, H.G.W.J. Schweickerdt Herbarium, Department of Plant Science, University of Pretoria, 0002 Pretoria, South Africa / Centre for Functional Ecology, Departamento de Ciências da Vida, Universidade de Coimbra, 3001-455 Coimbra, Portugal3 H.G.W.J. Schweickerdt Herbarium, Department of Plant Science, University of Pretoria, 0002 Pretoria, South AfricaAuthor for correspondence: Ronell R. Klopper, R.Klopper@sanbi.org.za(2129) Asphodelaceae Juss., Gen. Pl.: 51. 4 Aug 1789, nom. cons. prop.Type: Asphodelus L.Asphodelaceae comprises around 12 genera and about 1060 species (Africa, Mediterranean basin, Arabian Peninsula, west and central Europe, Madagascar, Central Asia, Australia, New Zealand), Hemerocallidaceae some 19 genera with about 117 species (tropi-cal and temperate Eurasia, Australia, New Zealand, several Pacific islands, Madagascar, western South America, southern Africa), while Xanthorrhoeaceae s.str. has one genus with some 28 species (restricted to Australia, including Tasmania). The Angiosperm Phy-logeny Group (APG II in Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 141: 399–436. 2003 & APG III in 161: 105–121. 2009) combine these three families into Xanthorrhoeaceae s.l., although APG II provided the option to also use Asphodelaceae and Hemerocallidaceae, under the system of so-called “bracketed families”. APG III, however, did away with this option, thus leaving Xanthorrhoeaceae as the only choice.The name Asphodelaceae was published in Jussieu’s Genera Plantarum (1789: 51), which is used as the formal starting date for family nomenclature. Hemerocallidaceae was established by Robert Brown (Prodr.: 295. 1810), followed by Xanthorrhoeaceae by Dumortier (Anal. Fam. Pl.: 60, 62, 103. 1829). Thus both Asphodel-aceae and Hemerocallidaceae predate Xanthorrhoeaceae. Neither Asphodelaceae nor Hemerocallidaceae appears in the list of con-served family names in Appendix IIB of the Vienna Code (McNeill & al. in Regnum Veg. 146. 2006) nor will either appear in the forth-coming Appendices to the Melbourne Code, whereas the name Xanthorrhoeaceae has been conserved and is therefore listed. Thus Xanthorrhoeaceae has priority (through conservation) over the other family names in the expanded family concept of APG III.Appendix IIB was based on a list initially compiled by Bullock in the late 1950s (for a full history of Appendix II see Taxon 53: 1081–1089. 2004). The original list (in Taxon 7: 1–35. 1958) con-tained Asphodelaceae (p. 6), Aloaceae (p. 5—established by Batsch, Tab. Affin. Regni Veg.: 138. 1802, and now generally included in Asphodelaceae), Hemerocallidaceae (p. 18) and Xanthorrhoeaceae (p. 35). However, in the next version of this list (Taxon 8: 154–181, 189–205. 1959) only Xanthorrhoeaceae was present (p. 205). Bentham & Hooker (Gen. Pl. 3: 748–836. 1883) included the alooid, asphodeloid and hemerocalloid genera under various tribes of the Liliaceae s.l. and treated Xanthorrhoea Sm. under Juncaceae (l.c.: 862–865). In Die natürlichen Pflanzenfamilien (2(5): 10–91. 1887) these plants are all included by Engler in Liliaceae s.l. Hutchinson (Fam. Fl. Pl., ed. 2: 591. 1959) also classified the alooid, asphodeloid and hemerocal-loid genera in various tribes of Liliaceae s.l., but treated Xanthor-rhoeaceae s.str. (l.c.: 660) as a separate family. These publications were all taken into consideration when the family names proposed for Appendix IIB were compiled.Had Asphodelaceae been included in Appendix IIB, it would have priority and remain the name to use for the expanded APG fam-ily. This would be the preferable situation, since Asphodelaceae are by far the largest component of the APG family. Its members are also the best known, with many of them being of considerable global importance in horticulture and ethnopharmacology, even though the largest number of taxa is concentrated in southern Africa. The three largest genera, Aloe L. (± 550 species), Haworthia Duval (± 60 species with a multitude of infraspecific taxa) and Bulbine Wolf (± 78 species) Flammula (Fr.) P. Kumm. is currently in use, whereas Flammula (Webb ex Spach) Fourr. has been abandoned and placed in synonymy with Ranunculus L. (l.c.), and therefore the former should be con-served, but I note the complicated long debated typification of the name and further propose that F. flavida be conserved as type of the basionym, Agaricus “trib.” Flammula Fries (l.c.). Finally, I note that when Earle (l.c.) published the new generic name Visculus, he simul-taneously listed “Flammula (Fries) Quél. 1872. Not Flammula DC. 1818” in synonymy while listing as type “Agaricus gummosus Fries”. If Visculus is interpreted as a replacement name, it would be typified with A. flavidus whereas if it is interpreted as a new genus, it should be typified by the named species. Earle (l.c.: 386) also listed “Flammula gummosa (Lasch) Quél.” as type of “Flammula (Fr.) Quél.”, which would be the first lectotypification, but being based upon a largely mechanical system of typification (Earle, l.c.: 374–375), it was argu-ably superseded (Art. 10.5(b)) by Clements & Shear’s (l.c.) lectotypi-fication by A. flavidus. In harmony with the decision by Donk (l.c. 1962), the type of Visculus is accepted as that stated by Earle, i.e., A. gummosus, while stabilization of the typification of Flammula by A. flavidus via conservation is here proposed.AcknowledgementJohn McNeill is thanked for his guidance and advice regarding the validity of the name Flammula (Ranunculaceae) and for editorial help.403Version of Record (identical to print version).TAXON 62 (2) • April 2013: 403–404(2130) Proposal to conserve the name Carex interior against C. scirpoides (Cyperaceae)James L. Reveal1 & Kanchi N. Gandhi21 Department of Plant Biology, Cornell University, 412 Mann Building, Ithaca, New York 14853-4301, U.S.A.2 Harvard University Herbaria, 22 Divinity Ave, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138, U.S.A.Author for correspondence: James L. Reveal, jlr326@cornell.edu(2130) Carex interior L.H. Bailey in Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 20: 426. 15 Nov 1893, nom. cons. prop.Typus: U.S.A., New York, Yates Co., Penn Yan, 1846, Sart-well in Caric. Amer. Sept. Exs. No. 36 (GH No. 00027275; isotypi: BH [2 sheets], G, NY, PH).(=) Carex scirpoides Schkuhr ex Willd., Sp. Pl. 4: 237. 1805, nom. rej. prop.Lectoypus (hic designatus): Pennsylvania, 1803, Muhlen-berg 52 (HAL No. 0103598).Established tradition among caricologists has long held that Carex scirpoides Schkuhr ex Willd. (l.c.; Sect. Stellulatae (Kunth) Christ) is a later homonym of the unrelated C. scirpoidea Michx. (Fl. Bor.-Amer. 2: 171. 1803; Sect. Scirpinae (Tuck.) Kük.). If it is ruled Reveal & Gandhi • (2130) Conserve Carex interiorare mostly restricted to southern Africa, but especially the first two are hugely popular amongst succulent plant collectors around the world.In Hemerocallidaceae, members of Hemerocallis L. (day lilies) and some of the other genera are used as ornamentals or have reported medicinal uses. Xanthorrhoeaceae s.str. only comprise the so-called grass trees in the genus Xanthorrhoea. Members of this genus are some-times included in plant collections, but are generally very little known outside their natural distribution ranges (Australia and Tasmania). Grass trees were used by the Aboriginal people for various purposes, most importantly for their gum used as an adhesive and to fix spears, etc.The adoption of Xanthorrhoeaceae s.l. has not gained much acceptance since publication of APG II in 2003. Most authors preferred to use the “bracketed family” options, or the alternative conventional narrow family concepts (three distinct families), and subsequent research on members of Asphodelaceae and Hemerocal-lidaceae were mostly published under the latter two names. A search for publications covering the period 2003 to 2009 in Google Scholar (http://www.scholar.google.com, accessed 28 Nov 2012) showed 565 hits for “Aloe and Asphodelaceae”, 30 for “Aloe and Xanthor-rhoeaceae”, 157 for “Bulbine and Asphodelaceae”, 31 for “Bulbine and Xanthorrhoeaceae”, 66 for “Haworthia and Asphodelaceae”, 6 for “Haworthia and Xanthorrhoeaceae” 104 for “Kniphofia and Asphodelaceae”, 9 for “Kniphofia and Xanthorrhoeaceae”, 122 for “Hemerocallis and Hemerocallidaceae” and 20 for “Hemerocallis and Xanthorrhoeaceae”. Many of the hits for Xanthorrhoeaceae either did not have this family name in the title or the article did not deal specifically with these genera, but were rather more general in scope.After publication of APG III in 2009 (and removal of the “brack-eted families” option), this trend continued to a great extent. However, the use of Xanthorrhoeaceae s.l. did increase after 2009. A search for publications covering the period 2010 to 2012 in Google Scholar (http://www.scholar.google.com, accessed 28 Nov 2012) showed 482 hits for “Aloe and Asphodelaceae”, 133 for “Aloe and Xanthor-rhoeaceae”, 109 for “Bulbine and Asphodelaceae”, 23 for “Bulbine and Xanthorrhoeaceae”, 51 for “Haworthia and Asphodelaceae”, 19 for “Haworthia and Xanthorrhoeaceae”, 61 for “Kniphofia and Asphodelaceae”, 14 for “Kniphofia and Xanthorrhoeaceae”, 69 for “Hemerocallis and Hemerocallidaceae” and 20 for “Hemerocallis and Xanthorrhoeaceae”. Many of the examples using Xanthorrhoeaceae were due to the forced requirement of certain journals to follow APG III, and no doubt some of these authors reluctantly adopted Xanth-orrhoeaceae s.l. rather than one of its synonyms. Most post-2009 examples using Xanthorrhoeaceae s.l. come from the fields of bio-chemistry and pharmacology. Very few taxonomic papers were found that used this name for the broadly defined family, apart from those by members of the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group (e.g., Chase & Reveal in Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 161: 132–136. 2009). Other articles include those by Zonneveld & Fritz on Chortolirion (in Bradleya 28: 27–36. 2010), Fritz on Chortolirion (in Aloe 49: 4–10. 2012) and Grace & al. on the economic botany of Aloe (in S. African J. Bot. 77: 980–987. 2011). Grace & al. have used the family Asphodelaceae in other publications dating from the same time period (e.g., in Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 38: 57–62. 2010), indicating a preference for the latter. Most taxonomic papers published on Asphodelaceae after 2009 dealt with the genus Aloe and were co-authored by at least one of us. Publications by other authors that used the family name Asphodelaceae include: Ramdhani & al. on Haworthia (in Taxon 60: 1001–1014. 2011), Thulin describing a new aloe (in Nordic J. Bot. 30: 1–3. 2011), Boatwright & Manning on Trachyandra (in S. African J. Bot. 76: 499–510. 2010) and on Bulbine and Jodrellia (in Bothalia 40: 59. 2010), Boatwright on Asphodelus fistulosus (in S. African J. Bot. 79: 48–50. 2012), and Khan & al. on Eremurus (in Pakistan J. Bot. 43: 2311–2313. 2011). Publications that used the family name Hemerocallidaceae include Boatwright & Manning on Caesia (in S. African J. Bot. 76: 542–529. 2010) and Nitta & al. on Hemerocallis fulva (in Amer. J. Bot. 97: 261–267. 2010).Many scientists, amateur botanists and the general public are obvi-ously not in favour of using the relatively obscure Xanthorrhoeaceae s.l., which in addition is not only difficult to pronounce but is also often misspelt. Based on a nomenclatural technicality, the name of the small-est, youngest, and least-known constituent of the APG family has prior-ity and became the name of the expanded family concept. Conservation of the name Asphodelaceae would rectify a situation where an older and well-established name is being displaced for purely nomenclatural reasons. Such a step would not only promote nomenclatural stability, but also the information content and practicality of the expanded APG III family concept. It will further alleviate the frustration that is present amongst the botanical community and many other end-users of plant names related to this current disadvantageous nomenclatural change.

Proposal to conserve the family name Asphodelaceae (Spermatophyta : Magnoliidae : Asparagales)

https://repository.up.ac.za/bitstream/2263/39596/1/Klopper_Proposal_2013.pdf

Proposal to conserve the family name Asphodelaceae (Spermatophyta : Magnoliidae : Asparagales)

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

UPSpace at the University of Pretoria