Category talk:Oxalis stricta

Scientific name under discussion

Copied from User talk:Franz Xaver

Hello, Franz Xaver. I'd like to get ur commentaries, Wikimedia needs them again.

Uleli built up Category:Oxalis stricta and Category:Oxalis fontana as its redirect.

Réginald alias Meneerke bloem, based on (Nouvelle Flore de la Belgique, du G.-D. de Luxembourg, du Nord de la France et des Régions Voisines, 5th ed., 2004), wants a Category:Oxalis fontana and Category:Oxalis stricta as its redirect.

Royal Botanic Gardens (Kew): Oxalis stricta L. is an accepted name;

Oxalis corniculata var. corniculata , syn. Oxalis fontana Bunge;

Oxalis stricta f. villicaulis (Wiegand) C.F. Reed, syn. Oxalis fontana f. villicaulis (Wiegand) H. Hara

tela-botanica.org/eflore: Oxalis fontana Bunge

Synonymes taxonomiques: Oxalis stricta var. lejeunei (Rouy) P.Fourn., Oxalis stricta subsp. diffusa (Boenn.) Tourlet

Synonymes "au sens de (sensu)": Oxalis stricta

I didn't expect this botanic salad in the internet. Regards --Chris.urs-o (talk) 05:53, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

I suppose, this salad is even greater than you are aware. It is clear, that Oxalis stricta L. should be the oldest name for whatever it means. However, this name was used for a long time in different meanings in North America and Europe, two different species being involved. In 1955, G. Eiten discussed typification and selected a lectotype - see [1]. This lectotypification agreed with the European usage until that. However, in 1968 Flora Europaea switched to the former North American usage, contrary to the lectotypification of Eiten - see also Gutermann (1975). Gutermann - on page 40 - argues that the name Oxalis stricta can not be used any more, referring to Art. 69 of the Code (= ICBN). The Code has been changed several times since then and there doesn't exist an Art. 69 any more. However, according to Art. 57 of the Vienna Code, the name Oxalis stricta probably is not to be used any more until there is any decision on its typification and/or rejection/conservation. The current usage of the name Oxalis stricta still is contradictiory: The Plant List based on a draft Kew Checklist sticks to Flora Europaea, using it for Sp. III in the sense of Eiten. On the other hand USDA Plants uses it in the sense of Eiten's typification, i.e. for Sp. II sensu Eiten. Whatever the type of the name is, which also seems unclear, as Eiten had changed an older choice of types, any use of the name Oxalis stricta is either in conflict with some current usage or is excluding its type. Anyway, I cannot find Oxalis stricta in the List of conserved and rejected species names. So, a decision or even a proposal seems to be missing yet. However, the questions of typification maybe already have been solved in this paper by Watson (1989), where I only have access to the abstract. According to the preliminary treatment for Flora Iberica (see page 7), Watson agrees with Eiten's typification. So, according to this the Plant List is wrong anyway. It may be discussed, if Sp. II of Eiten should be named Oxalis stricta or if this name has to be rejected and cannot be used until it has been decided on a proposal of rejection. The latter solution, obviousely was applied in MedChecklist by Greuter, Burdet & Long, as mentioned in Flora Iberica. I have to mention, that Greuter is one of the most important experts of nomenclature and editor of the older St.Louis Code, and Burdet is one of the editors of the Vienna Code (ICBN). --Franz Xaver (talk) 17:00, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Wow, thank you very much Franz Xaver Regards --Chris.urs-o (talk) 06:07, 12 April 2012 (UTC)