In his review of the monocotyledonous angiosperms, Thorne ("The classification and geography of the monocotyledons subclasses Alismatidae, Lillidae and Commelinidae," pp. 75-124. In: B. Nordenstam, G. El-Ghazaly & M. Kassas (eds.), Plant systematics for the 21st century. Colchester, England - see also Thorne 1999) mentioned two family names that were not yet published, Hopkinsiaceae and Lyginiaceae. They had first been suggested in 1998 (Williams, C.A., J.B. Harborne, J. Greenham, B.G. Briggs & L.A.S. Johnson. 1998. Flavonoid evidence and the classification of the Anarthriaceae. Monocots II, Sydney: 92.). The names were formally published in July of this year by Barbara G. Briggs and Lawrence A.S. Johnson in the journal Telopea (Hopkinsiaceae and Lyginiaceae, two new families of Poales in Western Australia, with revisions of Hopkinsia and Lyginia. Telopea 8: 477-502.).
The new families are closely related to Anarthriaceae D.F. Cutler & Airy Shaw, and based on the cladograms presented recently by H.P. Linder (Vicariance, climate change, anatomy and phylogeny of Restionaceae. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 134: 159-177. 2000), there would seem to be little justification for the separation of either Hopkinsiaceae and Lyginiaceae (but see Briggs, B.G., A.D. Marchant, S. Gilmore & C.L. Porter. 2000. "A molecular phylogeny of Restionaceae and allies," pp. 661-671 and Linder, H. P., B.G. Briggs & L.A.S. Johnson, 2000. "Restionaceae - a morphological phylogeny," pp. 653-660. In: K. L. Wilson & D. A. Morrison (eds.), Monocots: Systematics and evolution. Victoria, Australia).
In Cronquist's 1981 system, the new families would fall into his Restionales, and specifically the Restionaceae. Based on more recent work, the taxa are to be assigned to the Poales (Chase, M. W., D. E. Soltis, P. S. Soltis, P. J. Rudall, M. F. Fay, W. J. Hahn, S. Sullivan, J. Joseph, M. Molvray, P. J. Kores, T. J. Givnish, K. J. Sytsma & J. C. Pires. 2000. "Higher-level systematics of the monocotyledons: An assessment of current knowledge and a new classification," pp. 3-16. In: K. L. Wilson & D. A. Morrison (eds.), Monocots: Systematics and evolution. Victoria, Australia).
The standardized abbreviation for Hopkinsiaceae and Lyginiaceae are HOPK and LYGI, respectively (see Kiger & Reveal 1999-onward. A comprehensive scheme for standardized abbreviation of usable plant-family names and type-based suprafamilial names [http://www.inform.umd.edu/PBIO/fam/famabbr.html]).
Hopkinsiaceae B.G. Briggs & L.A.S. Johnson, Telopea 8: 484. Jul 2000. - T.: Hopkinsia W. Fitzg., J. Western Australia Nat. Hist. Soc. 1: 33. Mai 1904.Lyginiaceae B.G. Briggs & L.A.S. Johnson, Telopea 8: 488. Jul 2000. - T.: Lyginia R. Br., Prodr. 1: 248.. 27 Mar 1810, nom. cons.
Both names were validated by a description in Latin.
5 Dec 2000
Two papers on Rhamnaceae
Two papers were recently published on Rhamnaceae. The first was by James E. Richardson, Michael F. Fay, Quetin C.B. Cronk and Mark W. Chase and is entitled "A revision of the tribal classification of Rhamnaceae." It was published in Kew Bulletin (55: 311-340. 2000). The second paper, also by Chase's laboratory, was authored by James E. Richardson, Michael F. Fay, Quetin C.B. Cronk, Diane Bowman and Mark W. Chase. This was published in the American Journal of Botany (87: 1309-1324. 2000) and is titled "A phylogenetic analysis of Rhamnaceae using rbcL and trnL-F plastid DNA sequences." For our purposes, the two papers overlap considerably.
Richardson and his colleagues divided the Rhamnaceae into eleven tribes. Aside from the attribution of Endlicher's Genera plantarum to Bentham and Hooker, the nomenclature is basically sound. Richardson recognized the following tribes:
Interestingly for North American botanists, the authors exclude Ceanothus L. from the family, considering it incertae sedis at the moment. The tropical and subtropical genus Colubrina Rich. ex Brongn. is also excluded. Four other Old World genera are also not placed at this time: Emmenosperma F. Muell., Schistocarpaea F. Muell., Aphitonia Reissek ex Endl., and Lasiodiscus Hook.f.
NOTE: I misunderstood what Richardson et al. meant to imply by considering the above six genera incertae sedis. Mark Chase indicated that all belong to the Rhamnaceae, but could not be placed in any of the eleven tribes they recognized. The names Ceanotheae Rchb. (Handb. Nat. Pfl.-Syst.: 222. 1-7 Oct 1837) and Colubrineae A. Rich. (in Sagra, Hist. Fis. Cuba, Bot. 10: 146. 1845) are available. -- 9 Oct 2000
The tribes could not be organized into subfamilies but were placed in informal groupings: "Rhamnoid," "Ampeloziziphoid" and "Ziziphoid." At the moment only Rhamnoideae Eaton (Bot. Dict., ed. 4: 46. Apr-Mai 1836) and Zizyphoideae Luerss. (Handb. Syst. Bot. 2: 731. Aug 1881) are known to me to be available at the subfamily rank.
In the second paper, Richardson and his colleagues conclude that the Rhamnaceae are most closely related to Dirachmaceae Hutch. and Barbeyaceae Rendle, and these in turn are followed by the urticalean families.
27 Sep 2000
New names in the Podocarpopsida Doweld & Reveal
The podocarpoid gymnosperms continue to be fragmented into smaller and smaller families. The traditional circumscription of the family is one that includes about 20 genera and some 170 species of Southern Hemisphere trees. Only the Phyllocladaceae Bessey and its single genus, Phyllocladus Mirb., has been recognized with some consistency (see C.N. Page in K.U. Kramer & P.S. Green (eds.), The families and genera of vascular plants, 1: 279-361. 1990). Page recognized 17 genera in 1990; in 1995 Manoao B.P.J. Molloy was proposed and in 1998 Melikyan & Bobrov added Bracteocarpus and Margbensonia.
In addition to the establishment of Podocarpaceae Endl. (Syn. Conif.: 203. Mai-Jun 1847, nom. cons.), five other genera have already been segregated as distinct families:
Acmopylaceae Melikyan & A.B. Bobrov, Proc. Intern. Conf. Plant Anat. Morph.: 93. 25 Mai 1997.
Microcachrydaceae Doweld & Reveal, Phytologia 84: 365. 26 Aug 1999.
Nageiaceae D.Z. Fu, Acta Phytotax. Sin. 30: 522. Dec 1992.
Pherosphaeraceae Nakai, Tyosen-Sanrin 158: 15. 10 Mai 1938.
Saxegothaeaceae Gaussen ex Doweld & Reveal, Phytologia 84: 365. 26 Aug 1999.
Of these only Pherosphaeraceae Nakai presents a problem. Pherosphaera hookeriana Archer (J. Bot. Kew Gard. Misc. 2: 52. 1850) was based on the female amenta of Microcachrys tetragona Hook.f. (in Hooker's London J. Bot. 4: 149. 1845), the type species of that genus. Nonetheless, the name itself was misapplied so as to include the two species now assigned to the genus Microstrobos J. Garden & L.A.S. Johnson (in Contr. New S. Wales Nat. Herb. 1: 316. 1950). As Microcachrys is monospecific, we have the unusual situation of Pherosphaeraceae being the correct name currently for a family that consists solely of the genus Microcachrys. This fact was not known to me when Microcachrydaceae Doweld & Reveal was proposed in 1999. A proposal will be submitted in the near future to conserve Microcachrydaceae.
With the publication of a new review by A.P. Melikyan & A.V. Bobrov (Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Leningrad) 85(7): 50-67. 1 Sep 2000) entitled "Morphology of the female reproductive structures and an attempt of the construction of phylogenetic system of orders Podocarpales, Cephalotaxales and Taxales," eight additional families related to Podocarpaceae were proposed. Each name was validated by a description in Latin.
Bracteocarpaceae Melikyan & A.V. Bobrov, Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Leningrad) 85(7): 60. 1 Sep 2000 - T.: Bracteocarpus Bobrov & Melikjan in Bjull. Moskovsk. Obsc. Isp. Prir., Otd. Biol. 103(1): 58. 1998.)
Dacrycarpaceae Melikyan & A.V. Bobrov, Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Leningrad) 85(7): 59. 1 Sep 2000 - T.: Dacrycarpus de Laub. in J. Arnold Arbor. 50: 315. 15 Jul 1969.
Dacrydiaceae Melikyan & A.V. Bobrov, Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Leningrad) 85(7): 60. 1 Sep 2000 - T.: Dacrydium Lamb., Desc. Pinus 1: 93. 1807.
Falcatifoliaceae Melikyan & A.V. Bobrov, Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Leningrad) 85(7): 61. 1 Sep 2000 - T.: Falcatifolium de Laub. in J. Arnold Arbor. 50: 308. 15 Apr 1969.
Halocarpaceae Melikyan & A.V. Bobrov, Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Leningrad) 85(7): 60. 1 Sep 2000 - T.: Halocarpus Quinn in Austral. J. Bot. 30: 317. 14 Jul 1982.
Lepidothamnaceae Melikyan & A.V. Bobrov, Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Leningrad) 85(7): 63. 1 Sep 2000 - T.: Lepidothamnus Phil. in Linnaea 30: 730. Mar 1861 ('1860').
Parasitaxaceae Melikyan & A.V. Bobrov, Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Leningrad) 85(7): 61. 1 Sep 2000 - T.: Parasitaxus de Laub., Fl. Nouv. Calédonie 4: 44. Jul-Sep 1972.
Prumnopityaceae Melikyan & A.V. Bobrov, Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Leningrad) 85(7): 58. 1 Sep 2000 - T.: Prumnopitys Phil. in Linnaea 30: 731. Mar 1861 ('1860').
In addition to these families, Melikyan and Bobrov also establish two new ordinal names.
Falcatifoliales Melikyan & A.V. Bobrov, Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Leningrad) 85(7): 61. 1 Sep 2000 - T.: Falcatifolium de Laub. (Falcatifoliaceae Melikyan & A.V. Bobrov)
Parasitaxales Melikyan & A.V. Bobrov, Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Leningrad) 85(7): 61. 1 Sep 2000 - T.: Parasitaxus de Laub. (Parasitaxaceae Melikyan & A.V. Bobrov)
The authors proposed a third ordinal name based on the genus Microstrobos, a name they considered a synonym of Pherosphaera. This name is not validly published as Art. 16.1 of the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature requires all ordinal names based on a generic stem to be directly associated with a family name. At the moment, no family name has been published based on Microstrobos.
The above ordinal names join the following two:
Podocarpales Pulle ex Reveal, Novon 2: 239. 13 Oct 1992.
Saxegothaeales Doweld & Reveal, Phytologia 84: 365. 26 Aug 1999.
7 Sep 2000
Gronoviaceae, an old family name now in current use
As may be inferred from my 20 Jul 2000 comments, I was not aware of the1997 book by Maximilian Weigend of the Institute of Systematic Botany, Ludwig Maximilians University in Munich, Germany, entitled Nasa and the conquest of South America (Weigend Eigenverlag, Munich). Thanks to Kancheepuram N. Gandhi at Harvard University Herbaria I was able to obtain those portions of the text related to suprageneric names.
It was in his 1997 book that Weigend elected to recognize Gronoviaceae Endl. as distinct from Loasaceae Juss. While Endlicher's Gronoviaceae strictly speaking is unranked, names in this category have been generally accepted as a family name. If the Endlicher name is not accepted (the proposal at the St. Louis Botanical Congress to do so was referred to a special committee), the first place of valid publication would be C.V.D. d'Orbigny (Dict. Univ. Hist. Nat. 6: 340. 1845, as Gronovieae) who gave a reference, in French, to the features given under the heading of the type genus. Thus, Gronoviaceae becomes a family name in current use not in 2000, but in 1997.
A defined by Weigend, he divided the two families into lesser suprageneric taxonomic units (with the correct bibliographic references given here) as follows (see Table 1 in Weigend et al., Amer. J. Bot. 87: 1203. 2000).
Loasaceae Juss. in Ann. Mus. Natl. Hist. Nat. 5: 21. 1804 (Loaseae), nom. cons.
Loasoideae Gilg in Engl. & Prantl, Nat. Pflanzenfam. III, 6a: 107. 27 Feb 1894.
Klaprothieae Gilg in Engl. & Prantl, Nat. Pflanzenfam. III, 6a: 107, 112. 27 Feb 1894.
Loaseae Rchb., Handb. Nat. Pfl.-Syst.: 232. 1-7 Oct 1837.
Mentzelioideae Gilg in Engl. & Prantl, Nat. Pflanzenfam. III, 6a: 107. 27 Feb 1894.
Gronoviaceae Endl., Ench. Bot.: 493. 15-21 Aug 1841 (Gronovieae).
Gronovioideae M. Roem., Fam. Nat. Syn. Monogr. 2: 6. Dec 1846 (Gronovieae).
Petalonychoideae M. Weigend, Nasa: 217. Jun 1997
The above bibliographic references differ slightly from that presented by Weigend in 1997. For example, he does not assign any authorship to Loasoideae, Gronovoideae or Loaseae apparently on the mistaken assumption that suprageneric autonyms are without authorships (see Art. 19.4). Also, he listed all of the 1894 Gilg names as having been published by Urban and Gilg in 1900. Finally, he assumed the Reichenbach name (Loaseae) to be rankless, but in fact Reichenbach assigned this name and others to the rank of tribe as noted recently.
In a footnote on page 215, Weigend wrote:
The name [Cnidonioideae (as "Cnidonieae")] has been invariably quoted as a nomen nudum since Endlicher 1842. However, Fenzl [in Denkschr. Konigl.-Baier. Bot. Ges. 3: 209. 1841] gave a latin desription for the subfamily "Cnidonieae" together with the name Cnidone in 1841, and thus at least the subfamily name must be considered as validly published. Fenzl explicitly states that he intends to publish Cnidone 'in the near future', but failed to do so. I therefore follow the tradition and consider Cnidone as a nomen nudum.
As indicated by Wiegend, Cnidone is a nomen nudum and thus not validly published. Contrary to his statement, however, subfamily, tribe or subtribe names must be based on the name of a validly published generic name (Art. 19.1). Therefore, Cnidonioideae simply is not a correctly formed name even though it was associated with a description in Latin. Art. 19.5 does not come into play because Cnidone is not an illegitimate name.
The new subfamily, Petalonychoideae M. Weigend, was validated by a description in Latin.
24 Aug 2000
Amborellales, a new ordinal name
Katherine Challis of the Index Kewensis project kindly sent to me an abstract entitled "A new fruit type in Amborella trichopoda Baill." by Alexander P. Melikian, Alexey V.F.Ch. Bobrov and Ekaterina S. Zaytzeva. The following name was validly published:
Amborellales Melikyan, A.V.Bobrov & Zaytzeva, Symp. Biodiv. Evolutionsbiol.: 122. 1999. Validated by a brief description in Latin.
I have yet to determine an exact date of publication.
Ms. Challis also sent a paper by A.P. Melikian and A.V.F.Ch. Bobrov entitled "Comparative morphology and anatomy of reproductive structures of monotypic families Trochodendraceae Prantl in Engl. & Prantl, Tentracentraceae A.C. Smith, Cercidiphyllaceae Engl., and Eupteleaceae van Tiegh. ex K. Wilh. in connection to its position in system of Magnoliopsida and phylogeny" [in Russian], published in the Proceedings of the X Moscow Meeting on Plant Phylogeny. Therein Melikian and Bobrov suggested the above four families should be removed from the Magnoliidae and the Hamamaleliidae and assigned to their own subclass. They attempted to establish a name based on Trochodendraceae but their name was not validly published as they failed to cite a basionym with a Latin description or diagnosis (Art. 36.1). This is true even when the bibiographic reference for the Trochodendraceae is corrected from Prantl (1888) to Eichler (1865).
Note added 7 Sep 2000: Dr. Hermann Manitz of Jena, one of the editors of 14. Symposium Biodiversität und Evolutionsbiologie. Zusammenfassungen der Vorträge und Poster informed me that this work "was published on 1 Sep 1999." I am uncertain still how to abbreviate the publication, and I am working with others to decide. At the moment, the following seems appropriate:
In addition to the above, validly published name, I have learned that two isonyms were published in the same work:Amborellales Melikyan, A.V.Bobrov & Zaytzeva in Manitz & Hellwig (eds.), 14 Symp. Biodiv. Evolutionsbiol.: 122. 1 Sep 1999.
In an abstract by A.V.F.Ch. Bobrov & F.A. Zhurov on page 21 entitled "Seed structure and systematic position of Saxe-Gothaea conspicua Lindl. (Podocarpaceae (Dumort.) Endl. s.l.)" the authors proposed Saxegothaeales (as "Saxe-Gothaeales") and provided a brief Latin description. The name was published a mere four days earlier by Doweld & Reveal (Phytologia 84: 365. 26 Aug 1999). Bobrov & Zhurov, however, attributed the family name, Saxegothaeaceae, to Woltz whose name was not validly published as he failed to provide a Latin description. The family name was validated by Doweld & Reveal when they proposed Saxegothaeales.
In an abstract by A.V.F.Ch. Bobrov & D.S. Kostrikin on page 19 entitled "Systematic position of Microcharys tetragona (Hook.) Hook. fil. (Podocarpaceae (Dumort.) Endl. s.l.) based on seed coat structure" the authors proposed Microcachrydaceae (as "Microcachryaceae") and provided a brief Latin description. The family name was validated by Doweld & Reveal four days earlier (Phytologia 84: 365. 26 Aug 1999).
I am grateful to Ms. Katherine Challis of Kew, Dr. Ralf Buchner of Vienna, and Dr. Hermann Manitz of Jena for their help in this matter.
11 Aug 2000
A new phylogenetic classification of Polemoniaceae Juss.
In a thorough review of the Polemoniaceae, J. Mark Porter and Leigh A. Johnson (Aliso 19: 55-91. Aug 2000) have presented a new look at this family in a paper entitled "A phylogenetic classification of Polemoniaceae." They divide the family into three subfamilies, eight tribes and 26 genera. The tribe Gilieae is formally established. Five new genera are proposed. The new classification is as follows:
Acanthogilioideae J.M. Porter & L.A. Johnson, Aliso 19: 60. 2000.
Acanthogilieae V.E. Grant, Amer. J. Bot. 85: 744. 1998.
Acanthogilia A.G. Day & Moran
Cobaeoideae (D. Don) Arn., Encycl. Brit., ed. 7, 5: 121. 1832
Bonplandieae Baill., Hist. Pl. 10: 338, 342. 1890
Bonplandia Cav.
Cantueae Peter in Engl. & Prantl, Nat. Pflanzenfam. IV, 3a: 44, 45. 1891
Cantua Juss. ex Lam.
Cobaeeae (D. Don) Meisn., Pl. Vasc. Gen.: Tab. Diagn. 273, Comm. 180. 1840
Cobaea Cav.
Polemonioideae (Juss.) Arn., Encycl. Brit., ed. 7, 5: 121. 1832.
Gilieae J.M. Porter & L.A. Johnson, Aliso 19: 63. 2000.
Allophyllum A.D. Grant & V.E. Grant
Collomia Nutt.
Gilia Ruiz & Pav.
Lathrocasis L.A. Johnson
Navarretia Ruiz & Pav.
Saltugilia (V.E. Grant) L.A. Johnson
Loeselieae J.M. Porter & L.A. Johnson, Aliso 17: 84. 1998.
Aliciella Brand
Bryantiella J.M. Porter
Bayia J.M. Porter
Eriastrum Wooton & Standl.
Giliastrum (Brand) Rydb.
Ipomopsis Michx.
Langloisia Greene
Loeselia L.
Loeseliastrum (Brand) Timbrook
Microgilia J.M. Porter & L.A. Johnson
Phlocideae Dumort., Anal. Fam. Pl.: 25. 1829
[Leptodactyleoneae V.E. Grant, Amer. J. Bot. 85: 746. 1998]
Gymnosteris Greene
Leptosiphon Benth.
Linanthus Benth.
Microsteris Greene
Phlox L.
Polemonieae Dumort., Anal. Fam. Pl.: 25. 1829
Polemonium L.
11 Aug 2000
The Gentianales Lindl. (1833) continue to be studied intensively. The latest contribution is entitled "Phylogenetic relationships within the Gentianales based on ndhF and rbcL sequences, with particular reference to the Loganiaceae" (Amer. J. Bot. 87: 1029-1043. 2000) by Maria Backlund, Bengt Oxelman and Birgitta Bremer.
The authors define Gentianales as a taxon composed of five families: Rubiaceae Durande (1783), nom. cons., Gentianaceae Durande (1783), nom. cons., Apocynaceae Adans (1763), nom. cons., Gelsemiaceae Strume & V. Albert (1995) and Loganiaceae R. Br. ex Mart. (1827), nom. cons.. Asclepiadaceae Medik. ex Borkh. (1797), nom. cons. is submerged into the Apocynaceae and the Loganiaceae are circumscribed so as to include such family names in current use as Antoniaceae Hutch. (1959), Genistomaceae Strume & V. Albert (1995), Spigeliaceae Mart. (1827) and Strychnaceae DC. ex Perleb (1818). If one were to adopt families names for the two non-typical clades within the Loganiaceae recognized by Bucklund et al. they would be termed Antoniaceae and Strychnaceae respectively.
The oldest available name for the Gentianales as here circumscribed is Rubiales Dumort. (1829). As names above the rank of family are not subject to priority, the use of Gentianales is acceptable.
Significantly, Bucklund et al. exclude several genera included in the Loganiaceae by Leeuwenberg & Leenhouts (in Engler & Prantl, Nat. Pflanzenfam. 28b(1): 311-237. 1980). Likewise, the whole of the Potalieae Endl. (1838) are transferred to the Gentianaceae, including therefore the Potaliaceae Mart. (1827). They recognize the Plocospermataceae Hutch. (1973) but do not assign the taxon to an order (rather they placed the family in the "euasterid 1"). Polypremum is assigned to the Tetrachondraceae Wettst. (1924) of the Lamiales Bromhead (1838), as suggested earlier by Oxelman et al. (Syst. Bot. 24: 164-182. 1999).
Finally, figures 1 and 2 support the notion of restricting the Scrophulariaceae Durande (1783), nom. cons. to only a few genera (in North America only Scrophularia and Verbascum), with the bulk of the former family falling into what I term the Veronicaceae Durande (1783), or if defined to include Plantago, the Plantaginaceae Durande (1783), nom. cons. The hemi-parasitic genera belong to the Orobanchaceae Vent. (1799), nom. cons.
A revision of Cupressaceae s.l.
Paul A. Gadek, Deryn L. Alpers, Margaret M. Heslewood and Christopher J. Quinn have proposed a new classification scheme for the Cupressaceae Gray (1821), nom. cons. in a paper entitled "Relationships within Cupressaceae sensu lato: A combined morphological and molecular approach" (Amer. J. Bot. 87: 1044-1057. 2000). Quinn divided the family into seven subfamilies, four of which are new. They are as follows with minor corrections:
Gadek et al. retain Sciadopityaceae Luerss. (Grundz. Bot.: 265. Jan 1877) as a distinct family.Cunninghamioideae (Siebold & Zucc.) Quinn, Amer. J. Bot. 87: 1056. 14 Jul 2000, based on Cunninghamiaceae Siebold & Zucc, Fl. Jap. 2: 1, 3. 1842 (Quinn cited a later isonym, namely Hayata, Bot. Mag. (Tokyo) 46: 26. 1932). Monogeneric: Cunninghamia.
Taiwanioideae (Hayata) Quinn, Amer. J. Bot. 87: 1056. 14 Jul 2000, based on Taiwaniaceae Hayata, Bot. Mag. (Tokyo) 46: 26. 20 Jan 1932. Monogeneric: Taiwania.
Athrotaxidoideae Quinn, Amer. J. Bot. 87: 1056. 14 Jul 2000. Monogeneric: Athrotaxia D. Don.
Sequoideae (Luerss.) Quinn, Amer. J. Bot. 87: 1056. 14 Jul 2000, based on Sequoiaceae Luerss., Grundz. Bot.: 265. Jan 1877. The taxon is defined by Quinn to include Metasequoiaceae Hu & W.C. Cheng (Bull. Fam. Mem. Inst. Biol., Bot., ser. 2, 1: 154. 15 Mai 1848). Genera: Metasequoia, Sequoia and Sequoiadendron.
Taxodioideae Endl. ex K. Koch, Dendrologie 2(2): 186. Nov 1873. The taxon is defined by Quinn to include Cryptomeriaceae Gorozh, Lekts. Morf. Sist. Archegon.: 88. 1904. (Quinn attributed the name to a later isonym: Hayata, Bot. Mag. (Tokyo) 46: 23. 1932 and also listed the inadmissible "Limnopityaceae" a substitute name proposed by Hayata (l.c.) for Taxodiaceae.) Genera: Cryptomeria, Glyptostrobus and Taxodium.
Callitroideae Saxton, New Phytol. 12: 253. 1913. (Quinn did not cite Callitraceae Seward, Fossil Pl. 4: 124, 141, 336. 1919.) Genera: Actinostrobus (not listed by Quinn in summary), Austrocedrus, Callitris, Diselma, Fitzroya, Libocedrus (including Pilgerodendron), Neocallitropsis, Papuacedrus, and Widdringtonia.
Cupressoideae Rich. ex Sweet, Hort. Brit.: 372. Sep-Oct 1826. (Quinn did not cited Juniperaceae Bercht. & J. Presl, Prir. Rostlin: 262. 1820, Microbiotaceae Nakai, Tyosen-Sanrin 165: 13. 10 Dec 1938, Tetraclinaceae Hayata, Bot. Mag. (Tokyo) 46: 27. 20 Jan 1932, Thujaceae Burnett, Outl. Bot.: 502, 1149. Jun 1835, or Thujopsidaceae Bessey, Nebraska Univ. Stud. 7: 325. Oct 1907.) Genera: Calocedrus, Chamaecyparis, Cupressus, Fokienia, Juniperus (including Sabina), Microbiota, Platycladus, Tetraclinis, Thuja, and Thujopsis.
Gronoviaceae: A new "name in current use."
Gronoviaceae Endl. (Ench. Bot.: 493. 15-21 Aug 1841) is about to be recognized as a taxon distinct from Loasaceae Juss. (Ann. Mus. Natl. Hist. Nat. 5: 21. 1804), nom. cons. In the August issue of American Journal of Botany a forthcoming paper by Weigend, Kufer & Müller entitled "Phytochemistry and the systematics and ecology of Loasaceae and Gronoviaceae (Loasales)" will take up the name.
20 Jul 2000
New classification of monocots by Chase et al.
Mark W. Chase, Douglas E. Soltis, Pamela S. Soltis, Paula J. Rudall, Michael F. Fay, William H. Hahn, Stuart Sullivan, Jeffrey Joseph, Thomas J. Givinish, Kenneth J. Systma and J. Chris Pires have proposed a modification of the orders and families as given recently by Bremer et al. (the so-called "APG" or "Angiosperm Phylogeny Group") published in Ann. Missouri Bot. Garden 85: 531-553. 1999 ["1998"] in a newly published article (July 2000) entitled "Higher-level systematics of the monocotyledons: An assessment of current knowledge and a new classification" in Monocots: Systematics and evolution, edited by K.L.Wilson and D.A. Morrison (Collingswood, Australia: CSIRO).
I have provided a review of this paper altering the family nomenclature slightly by adopting the conserved (and now oldest) family name Ruscaceae instead of Convallariaceae, and have substituted Najadaceae (1783) for Hydrocharitaceae (1789). To their alphabetical listing of orders and families I have added authorships and synonymy. In addition I have attempted a linear sequence of the taxa insofar as possible as presented in their figure 2.
14 Jul 2000
An unnecessary new family name
Alexander Doweld (Moscow) kindly drew my attention to a recent paper by Professor Nikolai Tzvelev (Novosti Sist. Vyssh. Rast. 32: 26. 20 Feb 2000) who attempted to proposed a new family name that fortunately was not validly published and would have been an isonym in any case. The name Spergulaceae was proposed as a new name for trib. Sperguleae Dumort. (Anal. Fam. Pl.: 49. 1829). The isonym is not validly published as the Dumortier name is not associated with a description or diagnosis in Latin (see Art. 36). Furthermore, the name was first validly published by, and should be attributed to, Adanson:
Spergulaceae Adans., Fam. Pl. 2: 270. Jul-Aug 1763 (Spergulae).
What is important, nonetheless, is that Spergulaceae now becomes a name in current use.
16 Jun 2000
A new family of Magnoliophyta
Maesaceae Anderb., B. Ståhl & Källersjö, Taxon 49: 185. 16 Mai 2000. Validated by a full and direct reference to an A. de Candolle (Trans. Linn. Soc. London 17: 132. 1834, as trib. Maeseae) name with a description in Latin. T.: Maesa Forssk.
Arne A. Anderberg, Bertil Ståhl and Mari Källersjö (Maesaceae, a new primuloid family in the order Ericales s.l. Taxon 49: 183-187. 2000) have proposed Maesaceae as a new family related to Theophrastaceae Link, Primulaceae Vent., and Myrsinaceae R. Br. The new family is monogeneric, including only Maesa, a taxon of approximately 100 species of trees and shrubs found mainly in the Old World tropics. They distinguish Maesaceae from the above families by "flowers pedicels with two bracteoles, a semi-inferior ovary, and indehiscent fruits with many seeds."
In their paper, Anderberg & al. elevate the tribe Maeseae A. DC. to the rank of family, writing the scientific name as "Maesaceae (A. DC.) Anderb., B. Ståhl & Källersjö." The question of whether or not suprageneric names should be treated as names that are "transferred" from one rank to another or are new names was discussed at the last Botanical Congress in St. Louis without resolution. Nonetheless, in the St. Louis Code (Greuter & al., Regnum Veg. 138), the Editorial Committee decided all suprageneric names shall be treated as new names, and thus even though Anderberg & al. cited a parenthetical author and validated their name solely on the Latin description given by de Candolle in 1834, this is now incorrect and the proper citation of the authorship is simple Maesaceae Anderb., B. Ståhl & Källersjö.
The authors divided their primuloid complex into several subgroups. If one were to recognize each at the rank of family, the names would be Maesaceae, Theophrastaceae, Samolaceae Raf., Primulaceae, Coridaceae J. Agardh, a name based on Ardisiandra, Anagallidaceae Adans., and Myrsinaceae. If only four family are accepted, then the following nomenclature would be correct (insofar as know to me): Maesaceae, Theophrastaceae (including Theophrasteae Bartl. and Samoleae Rchb.), Primulaceae, and Myrsinaceae (including Corideae Dumort., Ardisiandreae [authorship and place of validation unknown to me], Anagallideae Dumort. [incorrectly termed Lysimachieae Rchb. by Anderberg & al. and defined here to include as well Cyclameae Dumort. and Glauceae Dumort.], and Myrsineae Miq.). I hereby propose to adopt Anagallideae over the simultaneously published Cyclameae and Glauceae for if Anagallidaceae were accepted, the autonym Anagallideae would have to be used. It is well to remember that Myrsinaceae is a conserved name, and although it was proposed in 1810, it has priority over the non-conserved Anagallidaceae established in 1763.
Two family names conserved
The Committee for Spermatophyta (Brummitt, R.K. 2000. Report of the Committee for Spermatophyta: 49. Taxon 49: 261-278.) has voted to recommend to the General Committee the conservation of two recently proposed names.
Tricyrtidaceae Takht., Divers. Classif. Fl. Pl.: 482. 1 Mai 1997.Tricyrtidaceae was conserved (p. 268) so that it would have priority over Compsoaceae Horan. (Prim. Lin. Syst. Nat.: 51. Jul-Dec 1834). The genus Compsoa D. Don (1825) is a synonym of Tricyrtis Wall. (1824). Walleriaceae was conserved (p. 268) over Androsynaceae Salisb. (Gen. Pl.: 61. Apr-Mai 1866). Neither Androsynaceae nor Androsyne Salisb. was every adopted by any other author. Conservation permits the continued use of both of the Takhtajan names which are now in current use.
Walleriaceae H. Huber ex Takht., Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Leningrad) 79(12): 65. Jan-Jul 1995.
13 Jun 2000
After months of delay following my retirement from the University of Maryland at the end of July 1999, moving from College Park to Montrose, Colorado, and then playing a minor part in adding new rooms to our home, I am able to update the "news" on this site. The office space is now finished and while the library remains to be thoroughly unpacked and organized, I am slowly getting things arranged to the point that I can return to a review of suprageneric nomenclature.
The following new suprageneric names have been proposed since 1 Jul 1999:
Podocarpopsida Doweld & Reveal in Phytologia 84: 365. 26 Aug 1999.
Taxopsida R. Florin ex Doweld & Reveal in Phytologia 84: 364. 26 Aug 1999.
Podocarpidae Doweld & Reveal in Phytologia 84: 366. 26 Aug 1999.
Buxanae (Mull. Arg.) Takht. ex Reveal & Doweld in Novon 9: 549. 30 Dec 1999, based on subtr. Buxinae Mull. Arg. in DC., Prodr. 16(1): 11. 1869.
Casuarinanae (Lindl.) Takht. ex Reveal & Doweld in Novon 9: 549. 30 Dec 1999, based on Casuarinales Lindl., Nix. Pl.: 167. 1833.
Ceratophyllanae Takht. ex Reveal & Doweld in Novon 9: 549. 30 Dec 1999.
Dioscoreanae (R. Br.) Takht. ex Reveal & Doweld in Novon 9: 550. 30 Dec 1999, based on Dioscoreaceae R. Br., Prodr.: 294. 1810.
Lactoridanae Takht. ex Reveal & Doweld in Novon 9: 550. 30 Dec 1999.
Poanae Takht. ex Reveal & Doweld in Novon 9: 550. 30 Dec 1999, based on Gramineae Juss., Gen. Pl.: 28. 1789.
Rhizophoranae (Pers.) Takht. ex Reveal & Doweld in Novon 9: 550. 30 Dec 1999, based on Rhizophoraceae, Syn. Pl. 2: 3. 1807.
Anisophylleales (Benth. & Hook.f.) Takht. ex Reveal & Doweld in Novon 9: 550. 30 Dec 1999, based on trib. Anisophylleeae Benth. & Hook.f., Gen. Pl. 1: 678, 683. 1865.
Chrysobalanales (DC.) Takht. ex Reveal & Doweld in Novon 9: 550. 30 Dec 1999, based on trib. Chrysobalaneae DC., Prodr. 2: 525. 1825.
Flagellariales (Meisn.) Takht. ex Reveal & Doweld in Novon 9: 550. 30 Dec 1999, based on subf. Flagellarioideae Meisn., Pl. Vasc. Gen.: Tab. Diagn. 406. 1842.
Griseliniales (J.R. Forst. & G. Forst. ex Cunn..) Takht. ex Reveal & Doweld in Novon 9: 550. 30 Dec 1999, based on Griseliniaceae J.R. Forst. & G. Forst. ex Cunn. In Ann. Nat. Hist. 3: 261. 1839.
Hydatellales (Hamann) Cronquist ex Reveal & Doweld in Novon 9: 551. 30 Dec 1999, based on Hydatellaceae Hamann in New Zealand J. Bot. 14: 195. 1976.
Hypoxidales (Bernh.) Takht. ex Reveal & Doweld in Novon 9: 551. 30 Dec 1999, based on trib. Hypoxideae Bernh. in Flora 23: 426. 1840.
Lowiales Takht. ex Reveal & Doweld in Novon 9: 551. 30 Dec 1999.
Medusagynales Takht. ex Reveal & Doweld in Novon 9: 551. 30 Dec 1999.
Rapateales (Meisn.) Colella ex Reveal & Doweld in Novon 9: 551. 30 Dec 1999, based on subf. Rapateoideae Meisn., Pl. Vasc. Gen.: Tab. Diagn. 405. 1842.
Rhizophorales (Pers.) Tieghem ex Reveal & Doweld in Novon 9: 551. 30 Dec 1999, based on Rhizophoraceae, Syn. Pl. 2: 3. 1807.
Saxegothaeales Doweld & Reveal in Phytologia 84: 365. 26 Aug 1999.
Torricelliales Takht. ex Reveal & Doweld in Novon 9: 551. 30 Dec 1999.
Xanthorrhoeales Takht. ex Reveal & Doweld in Novon 9: 552. 30 Dec 1999.
Zygophyllales (Bartl.) Takht. ex Reveal & Doweld in Novon 9: 552. 30 Dec 1999, based on trib. Zygophylleae Bartl., Ord. Nat. Pl.: 391. 1830.
Engelhardtiaceae Reveal & Doweld in Novon 9: 552. 30 Dec 1999.
Exbucklandiaceae Reveal & Doweld in Novon 9: 552. 30 Dec 1999.
Microcachrydaceae Doweld & Reveal in Phytologia 84: 365. 26 Aug 1999.
Saxegothaeaceae Gaussen ex Doweld & Reveal in Phytologia 84: 365. 26 Aug 1999.
Working with Robert W. Kiger, Director of the Hunt Institute for Botanical Documentation at Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, U.S.A., we are about to publish a comprehensive scheme for standardized abbreviations of useable plant-family names and type-based suprafamilial names (Huntia 11: 55-84. 2000). The scheme provides semi-mnemonic abbreviations of four letters for all families published prior to 1 Sep 1999. The purpose of the electronic version is to maintain and update the published list. Unlike the printed listing which present abbreviations for each family name, the electronic version provides authorships and lists separately all of the suprafamilial names. Reprint requests for hardcopies or an ASCII file of the published data on diskette in Macintosh or DOS format should be sent to Kiger.
22 Mar 2000
