| Intro | | Search taxa | | Taxon tree | | Search literature | | Taxon match | | Homonyms | | Statistics | | Webservice | | Manual | | FAQ | | LifeWatch | | Download | | Log in |
IRMNG name detailsTunica F.K. Mertens & W.D.J. Koch, 1831
1454363 (urn:lsid:irmng.org:taxname:1454363)
unaccepted (junior homonym and synonym)
Genus
recent only
Not documented
Taxonomic remark An illegitimate later homonym of Tunica Ludw. (1757) (GRIN). Name in GRIN and Willis, 8th ed., not in other major...
Taxonomic remark An illegitimate later homonym of Tunica Ludw. (1757) (GRIN). Name in GRIN and Willis, 8th ed., not in other major compilations. This name can either be considered a new name instance (per Willis) or simply a different usage of Tunica Ludw., albeit with a different type (R. Govaerts, pers. comm. to T. Rees, Nov 2021); according to the latter interpretation it would not be indexed in IPNI or Plants of the World Online at this time. From Madhani et al., 2018: "The confusion began as Haller (1742) described Tunica with the names Dianthus and Caryophyllus below it (probably as synonyms or equivalents). Without naming any species of Tunica, Ludwig (1757) applied this name beside Dianthus, making the former a synonym of the latter. Using the generic name Tunica, replacing Dianthus, was followed by Scopoli (1771) when he replaced even the type of Dianthus with a Tunica (as T. caryophyllus (L.) Scop.). Tunica was later used by several authors (e.g., Boissier, 1867) as a genus distinct from Dianthus; the genus in this usage is now treated as a synonym of Petrorhagia (for a detailed bibliography see Ball & Heywood, 1964)." [details]
IRMNG (2021). Tunica F.K. Mertens & W.D.J. Koch, 1831. Accessed at: https://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1454363 on 2024-06-02
Date action by
basis of record
GRIN Taxonomy for Plants: U.S. National Plant Germplasm Resources Information Network, September 2011 version. Available online at https://npgsweb.ars-grin.gov/gringlobal/taxon/taxonomyquery.aspx. [details]
basis of record Willis, J. C. (1973). A Dictionary of the Flowering Plants and Ferns. Eighth edition, revised by H. K. Airy Shaw. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1245 pp. plus appendices (keys). [details] additional source Madhani, H.; Rabeler, R.; Pirani, A.; Oxelman, B.; Heubl, G.; Zarre, S. (2018). Untangling phylogenetic patterns and taxonomic confusion in tribe Caryophylleae (Caryophyllaceae) with special focus on generic boundaries. <em>Taxon.</em> 67(1): 83-112., available online at https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Untangling-phylogenetic-patterns-and-taxonomic-in-Madhani-Rabeler/79ac95ac41cec57de1d50616970472abd7d2a195 note: this usage (incrorrectly listed as Tunica Ludw.) included in the synonymy of Petrorhagia [details] source of synonymy GRIN Taxonomy for Plants: U.S. National Plant Germplasm Resources Information Network, September 2011 version. Available online at https://npgsweb.ars-grin.gov/gringlobal/taxon/taxonomyquery.aspx. [details] verified source for family GRIN Taxonomy for Plants: U.S. National Plant Germplasm Resources Information Network, September 2011 version. Available online at https://npgsweb.ars-grin.gov/gringlobal/taxon/taxonomyquery.aspx. [details] name verified source Willis, J. C. (1973). A Dictionary of the Flowering Plants and Ferns. Eighth edition, revised by H. K. Airy Shaw. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1245 pp. plus appendices (keys). [details] extant flag source GRIN Taxonomy for Plants: U.S. National Plant Germplasm Resources Information Network, September 2011 version. Available online at https://npgsweb.ars-grin.gov/gringlobal/taxon/taxonomyquery.aspx. [details] habitat flag source as per family [details] From other sources
Taxonomic remark An illegitimate later homonym of Tunica Ludw. (1757) (GRIN). Name in GRIN and Willis, 8th ed., not in other major compilations. This name can either be considered a new name instance (per Willis) or simply a different usage of Tunica Ludw., albeit with a different type (R. Govaerts, pers. comm. to T. Rees, Nov 2021); according to the latter interpretation it would not be indexed in IPNI or Plants of the World Online at this time. From Madhani et al., 2018: "The confusion began as Haller (1742) described Tunica with the names Dianthus and Caryophyllus below it (probably as synonyms or equivalents). Without naming any species of Tunica, Ludwig (1757) applied this name beside Dianthus, making the former a synonym of the latter. Using the generic name Tunica, replacing Dianthus, was followed by Scopoli (1771) when he replaced even the type of Dianthus with a Tunica (as T. caryophyllus (L.) Scop.). Tunica was later used by several authors (e.g., Boissier, 1867) as a genus distinct from Dianthus; the genus in this usage is now treated as a synonym of Petrorhagia (for a detailed bibliography see Ball & Heywood, 1964)." [details]
|
