Amaranthaceae

Houtadviesburo Dipteryx dipteryx at FREELER.NL
Tue Jul 31 10:42:50 CDT 2001


 Hello there,

 Including Chenopodiaceae in Amaranthaceae is one of the results of
"molecular systematics" ie DNA-sequencing. See for example Judd &al, Plant
Systematics (1998)

 There are many similar proposed merges, like Malvaceae (including
Bombacaceae, Sterculiaceae, Tiliaceae) and Caprifoliaceae (including
Dipsacaceae and Valerianaceae). On the whole these decisions were based on a
sampling of relatively very few taxa.

As to how well these proposed merges turn out only time will tell. Note that
the
merge of Araliaceae and Umbelliferae is now counterindicated (Notes RBG
Edinb.): with better taxon sampling it becomes apparent that these are two
well defined separate clades and these families can be kept separate. Some
out of the way taxa in this group may have to be given family status to
justify this.

hope this helps,
Paul van Rijckevorsel
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Phil Bunch <pbunch at CTS.COM>
> To: <TAXACOM at USOBI.ORG>
> Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 2:59 PM
> Subject: Re: Amaranthaceae
>
>
> > How well accepted is this merger? This is a outside my main area of
> > interest and I see the general similarity but it is a little surprising.
I
> > don't think I've ever mixed them up in the field.
> >
> > Phil Bunch
> >
> > On Monday, July 30, 2001 01:07, Abdulghafor Nawaz
> [SMTP:nawaz at KACST.EDU.SA]
> > wrote:
> > > Dear List members,
> > >
> > > Recently families Amaranthaceae and Chenopodiaceae have been merged
and
> > the name accepted is Amaranthaceae, which was first described by
Adanson,
> > Fam. Pl. 2: 266. Jul.-Aug. 1763 (Amaranthi).
> > >
> > > Long ago, in the year 1835, Burnett described the family Betaceae in
> > Outl. Bot.: 591, 1091, 1142. Jun. 1835. Burnett's concept of Betaceae
> > included both the present day Amaranthaceae s. str. and Chenopodiaceae.
> > >
> > > My question to the listmember, especially those interested in
> > nomenclature, is :
> > >
> > > Why Betaceae (1835) should not be adopted for the family comprising
both
> > Amaranthaceae Adans. s. str.(1763) and Chenopodiaceae Vent. (1799).
> > >
> > > Thanks and appreciation for the anticipated replies.
> > >
> > >
> > > Abdul Ghafoor
> > > Scientific Research Specialist,
> > > NRERI, KACST,
> > > P.O.Box 6086,
> > > Riyadh-11442
> > > Saudi Arabia
> > > ---
> > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > > Version: 6.0.250 / Virus Database: 123 - Release Date: 4/18/2001
> >
>




More information about the Taxacom mailing list