Talk:Aptenia cordifolia
Latest comment: 7 years ago by Thiotrix in topic Synonymy
Synonymy
editApparently Aptenia cordifolia is a synonym for Mesembryanthemum cordifolium
The Plant List => Aptenia cordifolia (L.f.) Schwantes is a synonym of Mesembryanthemum cordifolium L.f.
Aptenia cordifolia From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Redirected from Mesembryanthemum cordifolium)
Rewriting the "Aptenia cordifolia" article is a small task since it is a small stub.
I do not know the process for moving the existing "Aptenia cordifolia" article to "Mesembryanthemum cordifolium".User-duck (talk) 22:17, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
- Not entirely true, even though you might be on to something. The English Wikipedia lists Aptenia cordifolia (L.f.) N.E.Br. as the legitimate name and Mesembryanthemum cordifolium L.f. as a synonym. As for The Plant List they claim that Mesembryanthemum cordifolium is the legitimate name, and that Aptenia cordifolia (L.f.) Schwantes is a synonym. However please note that the latter is not the same taxon as the Aptenia cordifolia (L.f.) N.E.Br. listed by Wikipedia.
- A check in Tropicos doesn't make things much clearer. According to Tropicos Aptenia cordifolia (L.f.) Schwantes is the currently legitimate name, and Aptenia cordifolia (L.f.) N.E.Br. a synonym. Furthermore they list Mesembryanthemum cordifolium as the basionym, i.e. also a synonym.
- Lastly, no, it's not a stub. Wikispecies is not Wikipedia and the taxa pages should only include data regarding the taxonomy and systematics of the particular taxon. Unlike Wikipedia our pages never include records about appearance, size, geographical distribution and such, since that information is rarely of any use from a taxonomical point of view. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 02:11, 25 June 2017 (UTC).
- Thanks, Tommy Kronkvist. So here is the million dollar question, Who is the authority on plant names? Wikipedia certainly isn't. From what I can tell Tropicos is a data source for The Plant List. The KEW website requires membership before it gives out anything useful (I just tried to verify a KEW reference in another article). I have a 1978 edition of "A Handbook of Succulent Plants" by Herman Jacobonsen which lists Mesembryanthemum cordifolium L.f. as a synonym for Aptenia cordifolia (L.f.) Schwantes but I don't accept it as the authority.
- I just checked Tropicos. No offense but I no longer believe everything I am told. The taxon Aptenia cordifolia (L.f.) N.E.Br. is invalid. Should anything be done to the Wikipedia article?.User-duck (talk) 17:16, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
- @User-duck: I'm not easily offended, so none taken. :-) And yes, just as I said Tropicos treats Aptenia cordifolia (L.f.) N.E.Br. as a synonym. The WP article probably needs updating, but that in itself doesn't necessarily mean that the Wikispecies page is correct. However I'm not a botanist so I've put the question forward to our Village Pump. There are some skilled and very experienced botanists around here, with access to all sorts of up to date reference material (including KEW, of course, which are often best). Someone will most likely help us shed light on things in a day or two. (By Wikispecies praxis they will probably answer here rather than at the Village Pump, so you might want to add this page to your watchlist, if you haven't done so already.) Cheers, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 18:00, 25 June 2017 (UTC).
- In a molecular phylogenetic study (Klak, Bruyns & Hedderson 2007), it was proposed to unite all genera of subfamily Mesembryanthemoideae in one genus, Mesembryanthemum sensu lato. But this was critically discussed (Schumann & Hartmann 2009) and suggested to return to the previous classification recognizing eleven genera. In 2013, Klak & Bruyns re-affirmed their broad generic circumscription for Mesembryanthemum and proposed several subgenera. But according to the references in Tropicos it seems, that most current Floras still prefer Aptenia cordifolia (L. f.) Schwantes instead of Mesembryanthemum cordifolium L. f.. Probably the botanists would like to wait for further phylogenetical studies. Cheers, --Thiotrix (talk) 08:54, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
- Interesting tidbit for a Mesembryanthemoideae Wikipedia article. I do not usually find articles about subfamilies. Maybe I will add the tidbit to Aizoaceae. Wikispecies has only four genera listed under Mesembryanthemoideae: Aptenia – Mesembryanthemum – Psilocaulon – Sceletium. I think I know what I will do: change authorship in Wikipedia Aptenia cordifolia article, adding an appropriate citation.User-duck (talk) 16:14, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
- I saw that the broad circumscription of Mesembryanthemum is accepted in "A taxonomic backbone for the global synthesis of species diversity in the angiosperm order Caryophyllales" (2015). I think Wikispecies should be updated according to this publication. Its just that we need more botanists here to do this work --Thiotrix (talk) 06:31, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
- Interesting tidbit for a Mesembryanthemoideae Wikipedia article. I do not usually find articles about subfamilies. Maybe I will add the tidbit to Aizoaceae. Wikispecies has only four genera listed under Mesembryanthemoideae: Aptenia – Mesembryanthemum – Psilocaulon – Sceletium. I think I know what I will do: change authorship in Wikipedia Aptenia cordifolia article, adding an appropriate citation.User-duck (talk) 16:14, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
- In a molecular phylogenetic study (Klak, Bruyns & Hedderson 2007), it was proposed to unite all genera of subfamily Mesembryanthemoideae in one genus, Mesembryanthemum sensu lato. But this was critically discussed (Schumann & Hartmann 2009) and suggested to return to the previous classification recognizing eleven genera. In 2013, Klak & Bruyns re-affirmed their broad generic circumscription for Mesembryanthemum and proposed several subgenera. But according to the references in Tropicos it seems, that most current Floras still prefer Aptenia cordifolia (L. f.) Schwantes instead of Mesembryanthemum cordifolium L. f.. Probably the botanists would like to wait for further phylogenetical studies. Cheers, --Thiotrix (talk) 08:54, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
- @User-duck: I'm not easily offended, so none taken. :-) And yes, just as I said Tropicos treats Aptenia cordifolia (L.f.) N.E.Br. as a synonym. The WP article probably needs updating, but that in itself doesn't necessarily mean that the Wikispecies page is correct. However I'm not a botanist so I've put the question forward to our Village Pump. There are some skilled and very experienced botanists around here, with access to all sorts of up to date reference material (including KEW, of course, which are often best). Someone will most likely help us shed light on things in a day or two. (By Wikispecies praxis they will probably answer here rather than at the Village Pump, so you might want to add this page to your watchlist, if you haven't done so already.) Cheers, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 18:00, 25 June 2017 (UTC).
- I just checked Tropicos. No offense but I no longer believe everything I am told. The taxon Aptenia cordifolia (L.f.) N.E.Br. is invalid. Should anything be done to the Wikipedia article?.User-duck (talk) 17:16, 25 June 2017 (UTC)