Reemplazado con |
|
I expect the orthographic correction by the nomenclatural curators of MycoBank and Indexfungorum irritated the authors, but nevertheless the consensus is against 'liquidambar'. They did not explicitly state the use was a noun in apposition in the original publication, and it would be aberrant even if it had been. My colleague Shaun Pennycook comments "The time-honoured standard method for forming an epithet referring to a host is the genitive case, i.e., liquidambaris meaning “of Liquidambar” [see Stearn 4th ed., p. 73, for the genitive ending of a noun ending in --ar] ; and that is how the epithet was presented throughout the 19th and 20th centuries --- I have checked the orthography used by various authors (European, American, Asian) in the >50 liquidambaris names listed in IF, and have not yet discovered any other noun in apposition (only a few spelling errors!). For the sake of consistency, I think the Xylaria epithet correction is justified."
This was specifically addressed in https://doi.org/10.1080/00275514.2018.1469879 where the authors of the species explain that X. Liquidambar is the correct name.
"Notes: Xylaria liquidambar is specific to fruits of Liquidambar species and has a close
affinity with X. hypoxylon (Hsieh et al. 2010). It is readily recognized by the spiral ascospore
germ slit. The specific epithet was unnecessarily changed to “liquidambaris” in Index of Fungi
and MycoBank; “liquidambar” is a noun legally used in apposition."