Taxon swap aaaaaa 48px Taxonomic Swap 32079 (Committed on 2018-05-18)

The Plant List accepts S. cerulea as a distinct species, and it was found to be well separated from S. nigra by Eriksson & Donoghue in their genetic analysis of the genus (1997; Systematic Botany 22: 555-573).

The correct spelling of the epithet is cerulea (not caerulea); see the original description by Rafinesque.

unknown
Yes
replace with

Comments

Thumb

certainly these western ones seem different than Sambucus nigra out east. Would this include what was previously called Sambucus mexicana?

Posted by charlie about 1 year ago (Flag)
Thumb

interesting! I am not aware of anything in terms of invasive sambucus around the US. The ones out in southern CA are mostly mexicana. In Vermont we have nigra (or whatever form it is here) and racemosa. nigra isn't too common.

Posted by charlie about 1 year ago (Flag)
Thumb

yes.

Posted by charlie about 1 year ago (Flag)
Thumb

It's in Haines/GoBotany as canadensis. https://gobotany.newenglandwild.org/species/sambucus/nigra/ And iNat doesn't use all of those names but often uses them where there aren't conflicts elsewhere. For instance we thankfully don't use their mutilation of cornus.

Posted by charlie about 1 year ago (Flag)
Thumb

also what he turns cornus canadensis into has an unacceptable genus name.
Sounds like the 'true' S. nigra is only an occasional escape from cultivation in CT. From what I see in the description I haven't seen it before in Vermont. Will keep an eye out.

Posted by charlie about 1 year ago (Flag)
Thumb

Just trying to fully understand how iNaturalist works with taxonomy conflicts. According to the curator guide policies (link below), the reasoning is this:

"We try to follow regional floras as they tend to be more useful and up-to-date. When regional floras conflict, we resort to The Plant List. For example, if Calflora thinks a dogwood is in Cornus and GoBotany thinks it's in Swida, we choose the placement favored by The Plant List."

Was there such a conflict regarding Sambucus nigra ssp. caerulea, between Calflora and another regional flora, or was the decision to go with primary sources and the Plant List made for some other reason?

https://www.inaturalist.org/pages/curator+guide#policies

Posted by leef about 1 year ago (Flag)
Thumb

Sambucus nigra subsp. canadensis was also pulled out into S. canadensis by other regional North American authorities and here on iNaturalist. So while iNaturalist taxonomy usually works on a species by species basis to determine the appropriate authority and conclusion, if thinking more broadly about the scheme of S. nigra sensu lato, to me it makes sense to also pull cerulea out into its own species here.

The newer Plants of the World Online, which iNaturalist is likely to move to once its more complete, also splits them out from S. nigra.
http://plantsoftheworldonline.org/taxon/urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:30018446-2#children

Posted by bouteloua about 1 year ago (Flag)
Thumb

Ok, thanks for filling me in on that context.

Posted by leef about 1 year ago (Flag)

Add a Comment

Sign In or Sign Up to add comments