mblanco at flmnh.ufl.edu
Sun Apr 12 19:57:37 CDT 2009
Probably because they use a recircumscribed order Malpighiales Jussieu
(published in 1835). But you have a point; Euphorbiales Lindley was
published earlier, in 1833, so Euphorbiales should have priority.
There is a short note on priority of family names in the APG II paper
(2003. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 141, note on pages 415-416), but there is no
mention of how they dealt with names of higher level taxa. They might
have simply overlooked the name Euphorbiales. Or there could be some
michael.heads at yahoo.com wrote:
> Dear Colleagues,
> Why do some authors call the large order including Euphorbia
> 'Malpighiales' instead of Euphorbiales, when Euphorbiaceae occur just
> about everywhere and Malpighiaceae are much less common?
> Michael Heads
> Wellington, New Zealand.
> My papers on biogeography are at the Buffalo Museum website:
More information about the Taxacom