Klopper, R.R., Smith, G.F. and Van Wyk, A.E. 2013. The correct name of Aloe plicatilis in Kumara (Xanthorrhoeaceae: Asphodeloideae). Phytotaxa 115(2):59-60.
The correct name of Aloe plicatilis in Kumara (Xanthorrhoeaceae subfam. Asphodeloideae)
Ronell Klopper
Abstract
The genus Kumara Medikus (1786: 69) was recently reinstated in the Xanthorrhoeaceae: Asphodeloideae (alternatively Asphodelaceae: Alooideae) comprising only one species, namely the fan aloe, Kumara disticha Medikus (1786: 70) with Aloe plicatilis (Linnaeus 1753: 321) Miller (1768: 7) given as a synonym. However, if the fan aloe, currently known as Aloe plicatilis, is treated as a species of Kumara, the epithet plicatilis has priority and a new combination in Kumara is required. The new combination is made here.
desconocido
Sí
Añadido por tonyrebelo el mayo 31, 2018 05:26 TARDE
|
Comprometido por tonyrebelo el 31 de mayo de 2018
I don't know who − if anybody − will read this taxonomic swap ever again. If an unfortunate future reader is afflicted with the same manner of nomenclatural pedantry as I, it is necessary to note that the correct name of the Fan Aloe did not originate with the paper cited above, which is Klopper, Smith & Van Wyk (2013b). These authors were pipped to the post by Rowley (2013). The combination Kumara plicatilis (L.) Klopper & Gideon F.Sm. published in the former paper [also above] is a synonym of Kumara plicatilis (L.) G.D.Rowley, the latter having priority due to earlier valid publication (Klopper, Smith & Van Wyk 2013c). The correct name of the Fan Aloe hence is Kumara plicatilis (L.) G.D.Rowley.
The correct dates of the Alsterworthia International publications were established by Walker (2013), not by Klopper, Smith & Van Wyk (2013c), whose dating is incorrect.
SOURCES •Klopper RR, Smith GF, Van Wyk AE (2013b). The correct name of Aloe plicatilis in Kumara (Xanthorrhoeaceae: Asphodeloideae). Phytotaxa 115(2): 59−60. http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.115.2.5 [publication dated 03 July 2013].
•Klopper RR, Smith GF, Van Wyk AE (2013c). The correct name of Aloe plicatilis, the fan aloe, in the genus Kumara (Asphodelaceae: Alooideae), again. Bradleya 31: 157−158. https://doi.org/10.25223/brad.n31.2013.a20 [publication dated 31 August 2013].
•Rowley GD (2013) Generic concepts in the Alooideae Part 3 − The phylogenetic story. Alsterworthia International 13(2): 24−26 [publication dated July 2013, apparently actually published on 01 July 2013]. Republished with amendments in Alsterworthia International Special Issue 10: 3−6 [apparently published on 02 August 2013].
•Walker CC (2013) All change in Aloe and Haworthia. CactusWorld 31(4): 297.
Los desacuerdos no intencionados ocurren cuando un grupo padre (B) se adelgaza al cambiar un grupo hijo (E) a otra parte del árbol taxonómico, provocando que las Identificaciones existentes del grupo padre sean interpretados como desacuerdos con las Identificaciones existentes del grupo hijo cambiado.
Identification
La ID 2 del taxón E será un desacuerdo no intencionado con la ID 1 del taxón B después del intercambio de ancestros
Si el adelgazamiento del grupo padre provoca más de 10 desacuerdos no intencionados, deberías dividir el grupo padre después de intercambiar el grupo hijo para substituir las identificaciones existentes del grupo padre (B) con identificaciones con las que no esté en desacuerdo,
I don't know who − if anybody − will read this taxonomic swap ever again. If an unfortunate future reader is afflicted with the same manner of nomenclatural pedantry as I, it is necessary to note that the correct name of the Fan Aloe did not originate with the paper cited above, which is Klopper, Smith & Van Wyk (2013b). These authors were pipped to the post by Rowley (2013). The combination Kumara plicatilis (L.) Klopper & Gideon F.Sm. published in the former paper [also above] is a synonym of Kumara plicatilis (L.) G.D.Rowley, the latter having priority due to earlier valid publication (Klopper, Smith & Van Wyk 2013c). The correct name of the Fan Aloe hence is Kumara plicatilis (L.) G.D.Rowley.
The correct dates of the Alsterworthia International publications were established by Walker (2013), not by Klopper, Smith & Van Wyk (2013c), whose dating is incorrect.
SOURCES
•Klopper RR, Smith GF, Van Wyk AE (2013b). The correct name of Aloe plicatilis in Kumara (Xanthorrhoeaceae: Asphodeloideae). Phytotaxa 115(2): 59−60. http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.115.2.5 [publication dated 03 July 2013].
•Klopper RR, Smith GF, Van Wyk AE (2013c). The correct name of Aloe plicatilis, the fan aloe, in the genus Kumara (Asphodelaceae: Alooideae), again. Bradleya 31: 157−158. https://doi.org/10.25223/brad.n31.2013.a20 [publication dated 31 August 2013].
•Rowley GD (2013) Generic concepts in the Alooideae Part 3 − The phylogenetic story. Alsterworthia International 13(2): 24−26 [publication dated July 2013, apparently actually published on 01 July 2013]. Republished with amendments in Alsterworthia International Special Issue 10: 3−6 [apparently published on 02 August 2013].
•Walker CC (2013) All change in Aloe and Haworthia. CactusWorld 31(4): 297.