Atención: Algunas o todas las identificaciones afectadas por esta división puede haber sido reemplazada por identificaciones de Diplacus. Esto ocurre cuando no podemos asignar automáticamente una identificación a uno de los taxa de salida. Revisar identificaciones de Diplacus aurantiacus 161938

Taxonomic Split 39636 (Guardado el 12/09/2018)

First, apologies for adding to the mess of taxon changes on these observations.

iNaturalist now follows Plants of the World Online (POWO) for vascular plant taxonomy. POWO accepts several taxa as species which were formerly recognized as infraspecific to Mimulus aurantiacus. They are now in the genus Diplacus. iNaturalist recently moved these Mimulus aurantiacus taxa to Diplacus, but this swap that merged Mimulus aurantiacus into Diplacus aurantiacus should have been a split instead.* Since it's too late to safely reverse that taxon change, we'll have to do a second one.

The taxon being split, taxon ID 161938 (Diplacus aurantiacus) is the sensu lato version of Mimulus aurantiacus, and taxon ID 777371 (also D. aurantiacus) is the sensu stricto, new version. Taxa that were formerly infraspecific to M. aurantiacus should be identified as their new Diplacus species instead. For example, Mimulus aurantiacus var. aridus should now be identified as Diplacus aridus, not Diplacus aurantiacus.

Mimulus aurantiacus -----split into---->
Diplacus aurantiacus
D. aridus (formerly M. aurantiacus var. aridus)
D. × australis (M. aurantiacus subsp. australis)
D. grandiflorus (M. aurantiacus var. grandiflorus)
D. × lompocensis (M. aurantiacus subsp. lompocensis)
D. parviflorus (M. aurantiacus var. parviflorus)
D. puniceus (M. aurantiacus var. puniceus)
D. longiflorus (M. aurantiacus var. pubescens)

The output taxa in the taxon change here have been atlased, but unfortunately many of these species/hybrids have overlapping ranges, so IDs will mostly not be reassigned automatically. In most cases, the ID will be set as "Diplacus sect. Diplacus," the section within the genus to which these all belong. The newly added section Diplacus IDs should not be in disagreement with any IDs that have been added since the original swap from M. aurantiacus to D. aurantiacus.

Ranges for the atlases were taken from Tulig & Nesom 2012 and Nesom 2013. Recognizing that species ranges are never perfect, some taxa may be given incorrect IDs as a result of this swap. Please be vigilant when identifying observations that fall within this section. In addition, the ranges are based on naturalized populatons, not cultivated organisms, so observations of captive specimens will need to be carefully reviewed. When in doubt, we now have the option to ID to section, rather than back up all the way to genus.

To read more about the taxonomy of this section of Diplacus, including a key to identification, please check out this paper:

Links to Help Reassign IDs:
-Identify rank=section Diplacus observations
-Identify captive observations

See previous discussion about this taxon split here:

* Plants of the World Online does not indicate whether an unaccepted synonym was split into 2 or more taxa, it simply directs the user toward one of the potentially many taxa into which it was split.

Plants of the World Online (Referencia)
Añadido por bouteloua el septiembre 12, 2018 01:17 MAÑANA | Comprometido por bouteloua el 12 de septiembre de 2018
dividido en


Shouldn't D. linearis be in here? I know Nesom (2013) says "Treatment of D. linearis as a nothospecies is speculative" but it's in POWO:

Publicado por kueda hace más de 5 años

I think so? Sorry for missing that! Since I didn't see M. aurantiacus under the list of its synonyms anywhere, it slipped past. See previous discussion here:

Per Tulig & Nesom 2012, D. linearis has been previously treated as:
Mimulus linearis Benth.
Mimulus glutinosus var. linearis (Benth.) A. Gray
Mimulus glutinosus forma linearis (Benth.) Voss
Mimulus longiflorus var. linearis (Benth.) A.L. Grant
Diplacus longiflorus var. linearis

Nesom 2013 says "Diplacus linearis was allied by Pennell (1947) with the Sierran D. grandiflorus as a narrower-leaved and smaller-flowered subspecies [confusingly, as Mimulus bifidus subsp. fasciculatus]. The two were considered synonymous by Thompson (2005) [as Mimulus aurantacus var. grandiflorus], but they are disjunct in geography and ecology."

Publicado por bouteloua hace más de 5 años

Thank you for doing this!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Publicado por seen_on_street_view hace más de 5 años

Agregar un comentario

Acceder o Crear una cuenta para agregar comentarios.