Aster trinervius - IngentaConnect

Loading...
Zhang & al. • (2568) Conserve Aster trinervius Roxb. ex D. Don

TAXON 66 (6) • December 2017: 1472–1473

(2568) Proposal to conserve the name Aster trinervius Roxb. ex D. Don against A. trinervis (Pers.) Nees (Asteraceae) Guo-Jin Zhang,1,2 Yun-Fei Deng,3 Bao Nie1,2 & Tian-Gang Gao1,2 1 State Key Laboratory of Systematic and Evolutionary Botany, Institute of Botany, the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100093, People’s Republic of China 2 University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People’s Republic of China 3 Key Laboratory of Plant Resources Conservation and Sustainable Utilization, South China Botanical Garden, the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou 510650, People’s Republic of China Author for correspondence: Tian-Gang Gao, [email protected] DOI  https://doi.org/10.12705/666.19

(2568) Aster trinervius Roxb. ex D. Don, Prodr. Fl. Nepal.: 177. 26 Jan–1 Feb 1825 [Angiosp.: Comp.], nom. cons. prop. Typus: Nepal, “Narain Hetty”, 23 Oct 1802, BuchananHamilton (BM barcode BM000521872!). (H) Aster trinervis (Pers.) Nees, Syn. Aster. Herb.: 18. Jan–Apr 1818 (A. acris var. trinervis Pers., Syn. Pl. 2: 442. Sep 1807), nom. rej. prop. Typus: non designatus.

1472

The name Aster trinervius Roxb. ex D. Don has been used for about 200 years for one of the most common asters, which is characterized by 3-veined leaves. It is widely distributed in eastern Asia from Japan to the Himalayan region in the east-west direction, and from Russia to Luzon Island in the north-south direction (Chen & al. in Wu & al., Fl. China 20–21: 581. 2011; Pelser & al., Co’s Digit. Fl. Philipp. 2011–, http://www.philippineplants.org). The name A. trinervius Roxb. ex D. Don has been employed in many local floras and checklists (Malla, Fl. Langtang Cross Sect. Veg. Surv.: 131. 1976; Ling in Ling &

Version of Record

Zhang & al. • (2568) Conserve Aster trinervius Roxb. ex D. Don

TAXON 66 (6) • December 2017: 1472–1473

Chen, Fl. Reipubl. Popul. Sin. 74: 166. 1985; Chen in Wu, Fl. Xizang. 4: 632. 1985; Hajra in Hajra & al., Fl. India 12: 98. 1995; Press & al., Ann. Check. Flow. Pl. Nepal: 52. 2000; Chen & Jin, High. Pl. China 11: 185. 2005; Newman & al., Check. Vasc. Pl. Laos: 92. 2007; Chen & al., l.c.; Pelser & al., l.c.), and other works (Grierson in Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 26: 98. 1964; Manandhar in Indian J. Tradit. Knowl. 3: 102. 2004; Farooq & al. in Pakistan J. Weed Sci. Res. 18: 277–291. 2012). It is extremely variable in morphology. About 50 names of infraspecific taxa have been published under A. trinervius (Diels in Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 29: 610. 1901; Makino in J. Jap. Bot. 1: 3. 1916; Kitamura in Acta Phytotax. Geobot. 21: 128. 1965). “Aster trinervius” was originally proposed by Roxburgh (Hort. Beng.: 61. 1814) and annotated with “Napaul” and “Dr. F. Buchanan, 1802”. But that designation was not validly published by him because no description or diagnosis was provided or referenced (Art. 38.1 of ICN; McNeill & al. in Regnum Veg. 154. 2012). In 1825, the name A. trinervius was validly published by Don (Prodr. Fl. Nepal.: 177. 1825) through providing a description, while citing another invalidly published designation “A. asper. Hamilton MSS.” Don also noted that the plant was collected from “Narainhetty Nepalensium” by Hamilton [Francis Buchanan-Hamilton]. “Aster trinervis” was first proposed by Desfontaines (Tabl. École Bot.: 102. 1804). In this work, he provided in tabular form a list of species with a translation of the specific epithet into French along with abbreviations for distribution and habit. For “A. trinervis”, he added “à trois nervures” and the perennial sign (), but no indication of distribution. Although the possession of three nerves, presumably by the leaves, might be thought of as a descriptive statement, having

been published in the manner of voted Ex. 3 of Art. 38, “A. trinervis” of Desfontaines should be treated as an invalid designation. Later, Persoon (Syn. Pl. 2: 442. 1807) described A. acris β trinervis Pers. for A. acris sensu Willd. (Sp. Pl. 3: 2023. 1803, cited as “2025” in Persoon’s work). Nees (Syn. Aster. Herb.: 18. 1818) made the combination A. trinervis (Pers.) Nees to upgrade this variety to a species. According to voted Ex. 11 of Art. 53, the epithets “trinervius” and “trinervis” are so similar that they are likely to be confused. As recommended by Wagenitz (in Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 83: 327–329. 1964), Aster trinervius Roxb. ex D. Don (1825) should be treated as a later homonym due to the existence of the valid name A. trinervis (Pers.) Nees (1818). Aster trinervius Roxb. ex D. Don has been used for nearly two hundred years. Aster trinervis (Pers.) Nees was treated as a synonym of Galatella sedifolia (L.) Greuter subsp. rigida (DC.) Greuter (in Willdenowia 35: 58. 2005; Med-Checklist 2: 227. 2008). The rejection of this name will not cause any inconvenience in communication and any changes in other names. Therefore, for stabilization of names and convenience of communication, we propose to conserve A. trinervius Roxb. ex D. Don (1825) against A. trinervis (Pers.) Nees (1818). Acknowledgements We would like to thank curators and relevant staff of the following herbaria: B, BM, E, K & PE, for granting us access to their collections, photos, and literature. The authors appreciate Dr. Wiersema and Dr. McNeill for their editing and improvement of the manuscript. This study was funded by the Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 31270237, 31570204, J1310002) and Science & Technology Basic Work (Grant Nos. 2013FY112100, 2014FY210300).

Version of Record

1473

Loading...

Aster trinervius - IngentaConnect

Zhang & al. • (2568) Conserve Aster trinervius Roxb. ex D. Don TAXON 66 (6) • December 2017: 1472–1473 (2568) Proposal to conserve the name Aster tr...

644KB Sizes 4 Downloads 0 Views

Recommend Documents

No documents