Tiarella cordifolia has been split
Flora of North America (FNA) accepts a single taxon of Tiarella in eastern North America known as Tiarella cordifolia. Until recently, the treatment in FNA has been widely recognized by authorities (including iNaturalist) but a revised taxonomy of Tiarella in eastern North America was proposed in July 2021. The proposal splits Tiarella cordifolia sensu lato into five species, three of which are new:
- Tiarella austrina (Lakela) G.L.Nesom
- Tiarella cordifolia L. sensu stricto
- Tiarella nautila G.L.Nesom
- Tiarella stolonifera G.L.Nesom
- Tiarella wherryi Lakela
This new taxonomy has been accepted by Plants of the World Online (POWO) and Flora of the southeastern United States (FSUS, 2022 edition), and as of November 2022, by iNaturalist as well. Besides POWO and FSUS, one or more of the new species has been accepted by VASCAN, Alabama Plant Atlas, and Vascular Plants of North Carolina.
In the southeastern United States, where the greatest diversity of Tiarella occurs, it will be difficult to distinguish species. For easy reference, the identification key from the original paper has been reproduced in wikipedia.
REFERENCES
Primary source:
- Nesom, Guy L. (2021). "Taxonomy of Tiarella (Saxifragaceae) in the eastern USA" (PDF). Phytoneuron. 31: 1–61.
Foamflowers (Tiarella):
- https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/51644-Tiarella
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiarella
- https://powo.science.kew.org/taxon/urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:30002940-2
Heartleaf Foamflower (Tiarella cordifolia):
Comments
I do not concur with this change. I believe it is premature. The split has not yet been accepted by Flora of North America. It has not yet been accepted by the Integrated Taxonomic Information System. It has not yet been accepted by the New York Flora Atlas. Until these organizations accept the proposed change, a consensus does not exist. I strongly suggest that iNaturalist wait until those organizations accept the proposal before making this change.
Thanks for the feedback @ellenjones6 you're not the only one who disagrees with the split. I don't know if it can be reversed, but I do know that the only way that can happen is if someone creates a new flag.
Thank much! I didn't know how to create a flag, but someone gave me instructions, so I did create one. Not that it will do any good. I don't have a dog in the fight over this specific proposed. I am not a specialist in this field.
My position is a general one and emerges from my experience as a specialist in an entirely different field. Scholars are constantly challenging established positions on X, as new evidence emerges and newly hatched PhD's rethink old evidence. In the best of all possible worlds, researchers put their cards on the table and convince the advocates of the old established positions to take another look. If the evidence and the arguments are compelling enough, a new consensus emerges. Or maybe it doesn't. Maybe the revision was premature, and even newer evidence emerges to support the old position.
One explanation for the unwillingness (so far) of ITIS and Flora of North America to accept the proposal to split tiarella is that they are just slow. An alternate explanation is that they have reviewed the evidence and remain unconvinced.
My suggestion is that iNaturalist reverse this change until ITIS and FNA have adopted it. I know that this is contrary to iNaturalist poliicy, so I am also suggesting that iNaturalist change their policy.
Add a Comment