Viola montana and V. persicifolia (Violaceae): Two names to be rejected
| Authors | |
|---|---|
| Year of publication | 2010 |
| Type | Article in Periodical |
| Magazine / Source | Taxon |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Field | Botany |
| Keywords | nomenclature; typification; Viola elatior; V. stagnina; Viola subsect. Rostratae |
| Description | The taxonomic and nomenclatural histories of Viola elatior Fr. (1828), V. pumila Chaix (1785) and V. stagnina Kit. ex Schult. (1814) are discussed. The names V. stagnina and V. elatior are lectotypified with specimens corresponding to the current use of these names. The neglected lectotypification in 1988 of V. montana L. (1753) with a specimen referable to V. elatior is reviewed. The name V. persicifolia Schreb. (1771) is analysed in detail, and we conclude that this name should be interpreted as referring also to V. elatior. In addition the types of V. hornemanniana Schult. (1819) and V. stipulacea Hartm. (1820) are conspecific with V. elatior. The use of V. persicifolia and V. montana, representing earlier legitimate names for the species widely known as V. elatior, and we herein recommend these two names for rejection in order to assure nomenclatural clarity and stability. We recommend conservation of V. elatior against V. hornemanniana and V. stipulacea. |
| Related projects: |