[Taxacom] Grass taxonomy (paraphylophobia strikes again??)

Ken Kinman kinman at hotmail.com
Wed Aug 8 20:37:55 CDT 2012

Hi Curtis and Mary,        I don't know all the details of this debate, but I get the distinct feeling that this debate is largely fueled by a desire to avoid a paraphyletic genus Festuca.  In this case, one seems to get some advocating lumping to get a larger holophyletic Festuca, while others advocate splitting to get a smaller holophyletic Festuca.  If this is indeed the problem in this particular case, is it worth all the instability and conflicting name changes?                                      --------------Ken

> Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2012 16:36:26 -0700
> From: lists at curtisclark.org
> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Grass taxonomy
> On 8/7/2012 9:42 AM, Mary Barkworth wrote:
> > b) In 2005, several people strongly objected to expanding Lolium to include grasses with a panicle. The answer adopted by many was to recognize Schedonorus. It was the compromise that I went along with ni the Flora of North America.
> Another approach was taken by the new Jepson manual for California: a 
> large, inclusive, monophyletic Festuca, which includes Lolium, Vulpia, 
> and perhaps other segregates
> -- 
> Curtis Clark http://www.csupomona.edu/~jcclark
> After 2012-01-02:
> Biological Sciences +1 909 869 4140
> Cal Poly Pomona, Pomona CA 91768

More information about the Taxacom mailing list