Nomenclatural and taxonomic comments on some taxa of Chenopodiaceae of the Himalayas and Tibet/Xizang

0551896 - BÚ 2022 RIV UA eng J - Článek v odborném periodiku
Mosyakin, S. L. - Krak, Karol
Nomenclatural and taxonomic comments on some taxa of Chenopodiaceae of the Himalayas and Tibet/Xizang.
Ukrainian botanical journal. Roč. 77, č. 6 (2020), s. 413-427. ISSN 0372-4123
Grant CEP: GA MŠMT LTAUSA18007; GA ČR GA20-20286S
Institucionální podpora: RVO:67985939
Klíčová slova: Atriplex * Bassia * Chenopodium
Obor OECD: Plant sciences, botany
Způsob publikování: Open access
https://doi.org/10.15407/ukrbotj77.06.413

Nomenclatural corrections and comments are provided on several taxa of Chenopodiaceae occurring in the Himalayas and Xizang/Tibet and adjacent areas, following the recent monographic revision of the family in that region and earlier publications. In particular, the original identity of the name Atriplex bengalensis (Chenopodium bengalense) is discussed and it is confirmed, based on additional evidence, that the name was originally (before its epitypification in 2014) applicable to a robust diploid of the Chenopodium ficifolium aggregate, not to the robust hexaploid currently known as C. giganteum. It is thus also concluded that the recent proposal by Mosyakin and Mandák (2018) to conserve the name C. giganteum with a conserved type corresponding to the current understanding and application of that name will best serve nomenclatural stability. A nomenclatural solution alternative to the proposal to reject the name A. bengalensis might be the following: (1) to conserve the name Atriplex bengalensis with a conserved C. ficifolium against C. bengalense. The nomenclaturally paradoxical situation with the names Chenopodium pallidum, C. harae, and Atriplex pallida (all now considered homotypic, as justified by Mosyakin and McNeill in 2018), which emerged from the conflicting lectotypification and epitypification of the name C. pallidum, is revisited and reconsidered. Possible options for dealing with that nomenclatural problem are outlined: (1) keeping the status quo, (2) proposing to conserve the name C. pallidum with a conserved type other than the standing lectotype, and (3) proposing to reject the name C. pallidum. The last option is considered preferable. Additional considerations are presented on a possible taxonomic identity of Chenopodium strictum as originally described by Roth, it is confirmed that that name was misapplied to a widespread Eurasian tetraploid species now properly known as C. betaceum. The identity of the name Bassia fiedleri is discussed, being a replacement name for Echinopsilon divaricatum, it is homotypic with Bassia divaricata (Kar. & Kir.) Kuntze (nom. illeg., non F. Muell.) and is a taxonomic synonym of Grubovia dasiphylla (as correctly stated by Kadereit and Freitag in 2011), but not a synonym of Bassia scoparia. Several comments on type designations of selected taxa of Chenopodiaceae from the Sino-Himalayan region are provided as well, e.g., for Acroglochin persicarioides and associated names, Chenopodium karoi, and Salsola monoptera.
Trvalý link: http://hdl.handle.net/11104/0327102