Flag for Taxon: Armenian Blackberry (Rubus armeniacus)
| Flagger | Content Author | Content | Reason | Flag Created | Resolved by | Resolution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| aroe | kueda | Armenian Blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) |
R. armeniacus has been synonomized with R. bifrons (see ITIS and Flora of North America) |
Jul. 4, 2020 22:12:08 +0000 | rfoster |
follow POWO taxonomy |
Comments
Yes but they also accept R. bifrons, which is what FNA has decided all of the complex that is in North America, so at least all North American obs probably should be moved.
If the taxa involved were North American endemics, it wouldn't be a problem to deviate from POWO and follow a regional flora but, given that these are weeds around the world we need maintain consistency, as far as possible, in taxonomic concepts. Unfortunately the blackberries are amongst the most difficult of plant groups to achieve this with. With regard to N. American occutrrences, FNA notes that "until a much-needed genetic study is performed that includes a broad selection of plants of ser. Discolores from throughout North America, Europe, and elsewhere, the precise identities of all of our material in this complex will be elusive. With this degree of uncertainty, a conservative approach is taken here. The results of more comprehensive DNA research may show that a different name than R. bifrons is to be used...". So it's clearly a label of convenience but what they don't make clear is why they opted for bifrons and why they consider armeniacus a synonym.
@enkidoo I see you have European observations of both R. bifrons and R. armeniacus - any thoughts?
I can only answer from a Central European viewpoint (leaving aside the fact that the name Rubus armeniacus has been misapplied to a species not meant by the original author):
In Germany and neighbouring countries R. armeniacus and R. bifrons are unanimously separated and with (imho) good reasons. Though they have some features in common (apart from the fact that they both belong to Series Discolores), like e.g. the straight prickles in the inflorescence and the +- hairy stem (but the manner of hairiness clearly differs) other features are clearly different, e.g. lower lateral leaflets digitate (armeniacus) vs. pedate (bifrons), leaves +- convex (at least most of them most of the time, armeniacus), leaves always flat (bifrons), upper surface matt (armeniacus) +- shiny (bifrons), petal and fruit size also differ (both larger in armeniacus). R. armeniacus (the species currently labelled so) is an introduced species of obscure origins (I haven´t seen any clear evidence that it really stems from the Caucasus, but I also can´t rule out that possibility), whereas R. bifrons is a native of southern temperate and northern mediterranean countries
I personally follow FNA (treat them all as R. bifrons) but some pople here prefer R. armeniacus. I've given up fighting, so I just agree with R. bifrons or R. armeniacus, whichever, figuring they're the same thing here, whatever they might have been in Europe. We have several introduced Rubus species, but the ones people call R. bifrons and R. armeniacus appear to be one species, a.k.a. The Blackberry That Ate The Pacific Northwest.
("Despeciation" -- two or more species introduced to a new area, breeding together, loosing their distinctions. Happening to Tamarix in North America. The tendency of Rubus to set seed asexually may slow this process.)
@aroe iNat uses POWO as its vascular plants authority and they still list R. armeniacus as valid
http://powo.science.kew.org/taxon/urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:735202-1