Taxonomic Swap 15562
(Committed on 2016-07-12)
|
|
replaced with |
|
Comments
Interesting. I went ahead with the swap when I found that the Flora of North America, Flora Novae-Anglieae, & Weakley's Flora of the Southern & Mid-Atlantic States agreed (and one of them needed to be demoted to a synonym in iNaturalist). However, The Plant List favors Pilosella. @bouteloua, care to weigh in?
For taxon changes, I usually consider the native range of the species (which is Palaearctic in this particular case) and try to get the opinion of experts from that region before committing a change. Probably not THE most relevant point to consider (especially for groups with loads of species on both sides of the Atlantic), and potentially leading to a heterogeneous mix of genus-species combinations, but at least an inclusive process.
I've always thought it strange that we don't have a listed European taxonomic authority for plants...
It looks like Weakley has this to say:
"Sometimes included in Hieracium, the separation of Pilosella as a genus is increasingly supported by molecular, morphological, and biological evidence, and has become the dominant approach in Europe (Bräutigam & Greuter 2007) and worldwide (Funk et al. 2009; Kilian, Gemeinholzer, & Lack 2009)."
Seems they should be split!
Re European taxonomic authorities: I had made a proposal here www.inaturalist.org/journal/jakob/10253-taxonomic-backbones-for-europe-plus-some-others
Euro+Med PlantList is now complete and accepted by most http://ww2.bgbm.org/EuroPlusMed/query.asp
Good discussion! I usually use the Kew World Checklist of Selected Plant Families as my first source, but Asteraceae is not one of the Selected Plant Families Good to know there's a widely-accepted taxonomic standard for vascular plants of Europe. Won't hurt my feelings if someone wants to swap this back to Pilosella; I just didn't want them the be listed separately.
What do you think about swapping this back to Pilosella, @amc @blue_celery @jasonrgrant @marcoschmidtffm @vilseskog @veronika_johansson @nannie?
ok, as far as I am concerned, let's swap it back to Pilosella.
Pilosella caespitosa (Dumortier) P. D. Sell & C. West is the accepted name also in our very recent Italian checklist that has been cared by a specialist of both Pilosella and Hieracium
I would go for Pilosella, it is a well-defined group (although that may also be true for Hieracium s.l.), Euro+Med, TPL and WFO accept it, and also more taxon-specific sites like Global Compositae Checklist and Cichorieae portal.
It might be worth cross-checking the current arrangement of the 2 genera for a consistent update (= possibly swapping a bunch of other species):
www.inaturalist.org/taxa/55910-Hieracium
www.inaturalist.org/taxa/203680-Pilosella
Hi everyone, please let me know what you think about these draft changes. Also, please tag other users in who might be interested.
www.inaturalist.org/taxon_changes/32041
www.inaturalist.org/taxon_changes/32045
www.inaturalist.org/taxon_changes/32046
www.inaturalist.org/taxon_changes/32047
www.inaturalist.org/taxon_changes/32048
www.inaturalist.org/taxon_changes/32049
www.inaturalist.org/taxon_changes/32050
@eraskin European flora has it under the combination Pilosella caespitosa
http://ww2.bgbm.org/EuroPlusMed/PTaxonDetail.asp?NameId=125040&PTRefFk=7000000
See also https://doi.org/10.3372/wi.37.37106
https://doi.org/10.3732/ajb.1400466