Flag for Taxon: southern annual saltmarsh aster (Symphyotrichum divaricatum)
| Flagger | Content Author | Content | Reason | Flag Created | Resolved by | Resolution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| bouteloua | loarie | southern annual saltmarsh aster (Symphyotrichum divaricatum) |
synonym (see comment) |
Dec. 3, 2017 14:06:37 +0000 | bouteloua |
committed taxon change |
Comments
Hey Cassi,
I'm totally cool if you'd like to merge these two. I had it on my radar for a while, but I was concerned about all of other subspecies of Symphyotrichum subulatum: http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=1&taxon_id=250049273 It scared me from doing any curation for these! ;)
So yep, you can totally go ahead and merge. :)
Hmm, shoot. Weakley is calling these S. divaricatum.
http://www.herbarium.unc.edu/flora.htm
Yeah, Asteraceae is one of those fun... challenges... Especially down here in TX -- lots of different folks call different plants different things. :) Synonymy is tricky with Symphyotrichum!
see https://www.inaturalist.org/taxon_changes/40599
@whiteoak do you think iNaturalist should deviate from Plants of the World Online for this one?
here's a deviation for now https://www.inaturalist.org/taxon_framework_relationships/311317
@whiteoak, @bouteloua, @sambiology, @loarie, @danielatha
Symphyotrichum divaricatum (Nuttall) G.L. Nesom, MIdwestern Salt-Marsh Aster is a good species name for what has been called Symphyotrichum subulatum (Michxaux) G.L. Nesom var. ligulatum (Shinners) S.D. Sundberg. The latter name is a synonym. See Weakley, 2015, p 1194, Nesom, 2005 and USDA PLANTS, 2020
There are nearly 2,000 observation identified as Symphyotrichum divaricatum in iNaturalist as of 20 Aug 2020. . I have not reviewed all of these but it looks like the vast majority are species other than Symphyotrichum divaricatum sensu Nesom, Weakley and USDA. i looks like most are Symphyotrichum pilosum and Symphyotrichum dumosum.
I have observed plants answering to Symphyotrichum divaricatum sensu Nesom, Weakley and USDA PLANTS in New York City. i called them Symphyotrichum subulatum var. ligulatum, even though they should be called Symphyotrichum divaricatum.
The observations misidentified as Sympyotrichum divaricatum in iNaturalist should be re-identified, clearing up the name at the rank of species for observations that are correctly identified. The taxon page in iNaturalist should also be corrected to reflect the correct usage.
This all came to my attention because I and others have observed the real Symphotrichum divaricatum in New York City, a considerable range extension for the species, which I want to publish soon.
I will contact Guy Nesom, the expert on this group for his assistance in clearing up the nomenclature and identification. I will keep you all posted on the progress.
Good. I agree this needs to be done.
It is part of a broad problem where a treatment of a taxon at varietal status tends to make it "disappear" in many kinds of applications. Some floras do not treat infrataxon or just mention them in text ("our plants are vars. X and Y"). The recent Checklist of Mexico does not treat what it regards as infrataxa. In very many cases, these taxa being treated at rank below species actually warrant species rank based on modern species concepts, but are "swept under the rug" and ignored by these practices.
iNaturalist also denigrates infrataxa. Its AI algorithm does not suggest IDs at ranks below species, even when such taxa are morphologically recognizable by AI or could be reliably determined by the "seen nearby" element of the ID algorithm (for instance a species with infrataxa that are completely allopatric). These leads to at best (over-broad) IDs and very frequently to wrong IDs (an assumption that anything labeled just as the species is the typic variety or subspecies), especially when Taxon Changes are made.
EXAMPLE. The western Solomon's-plume (Maianthemum amplexicaule) is treated in iNat as a subspecies (M. racemosum amplexicaule) [that's actually another problem, as a name without an explicit indication of var. or subsp. is not legal in plants]. In western North America, there are > 5000 occurrences of this taxon, nearly all of which (100:1 ratio) are just labeled M. racemosum and < 1% are labeled M. racemosum amplexicaule. One can debate the taxonomy (though the eastern and western taxa are different ploidy, morphologically distinguishable, and completely allopatric). But the fact that most observations just get recorded as a "lumped" entity (M. racemosum s.l. = amplexicaule + racemosum) is unfortunate.
Committed taxon change: https://www.inaturalist.org/taxon_changes/87883
Here's a link to ID S. divaricatum outside of its core range: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/identify?geoprivacy=open%2Cobscured¬_in_place=9%2C12%2C18%2C19%2C25%2C26%2C27%2C28%2C36%2C37%2C45%2C6793&quality_grade=casual,research%2Cneeds_id&taxon_id=169457 (393 observations)
And to review all observations of S. divaricatum: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/identify?quality_grade=needs_id%2Cresearch%2Ccasual&taxon_id=169457 (2909 observations)
It looks like this is a synonym of Symphyotrichum subulatum var. ligulatum (Shinners) S.D.Sundb but I would prefer some other peoples' agreement since there are so many observations clustered in Texas, where we don't have a regional North American taxonomic priority set.
http://www.theplantlist.org/tpl1.1/record/gcc-124134
http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=1&taxon_id=250068863
@sambiology