>From: Mary Sue Ittner <msittner@mcn.org> >Reply-To: Pacific Bulb Society <pbs@lists.ibiblio.org> >To: Pacific Bulb Society <pbs@lists.ibiblio.org> >Subject: [pbs] Ipheion, Tristagma, Nothoscordum again >Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 13:32:20 -0800 > >Dear All, > >I hate to bring this up again, but the recent addition of a Tristagma wiki >page and picture makes me want some clarification so I can address it on >the wiki. I've looked through some of our messages on this subject in the >past. It becomes a real challenge to be talking about the same thing when >some of these plants have gone through so many name changes. Our last >discussion about Ipheion 'Rolf Fiedler' generated some strong words I think >and shortly thereafter one of the participants in the discussion left our >list. I don't think Alberto Castillo and Germán Roitman offered an opinion >then and I hope they will this time. > >I'll summarize some statements from the past. There is a real question >about Tristagma peregrinans, a plant named by Ravenna that Alberto told us >was never found by anyone else. One correspondent in November 2003 said >that Ipheion 'Rolf Fielder' was this plant and that as of 1963 Ipheion had >been included in Tristagma. Obviously not every one agrees since Ipheion is >still very commonly being used. Mark M. pointed out that Traub who was the >one responsible for this change was a consummate splitter. Alberto told us >'Rolf Fielder' was a new species, but apparently not this one. > >David Victor quoted Brian Mathew who traced Ipheion vittatum's move from >Milla to Brodiaea to Beauverdia to Ipheion to Tristagma and into >Nothoscordum. He was leaving it in Ipheion because of an account he had >received from Dr Rosa Guaglianone, an Argentinian botanist, who felt that >it should stay there. Mark M. who specializes in this family feels >comfortable with the yellow species being considered Nothoscordum. > >For our wiki Tristagma page I'd like some understanding of whether this >genus has species people recognize that are not considered Ipheion by >others or are all of the species in this genus ones that were previously >(and still by some) considered Ipheion. > >I looked up the species Osmani added to the wiki with Arnold's help. >nomenclatural synonym: >This appears to be the original name: >Alliaceae/liliaceae Triteleia bivalvis Lindl. > >followed >Liliaceae Ipheion bivalve ( Lindl. ) Traub >in Plant Life, ix. 69 (1953). > >and >Alliaceae Tristagma bivalve ( Lindl. ) Traub >Pl. Life 19: 61. 1963 > >If there are some species that those of you in South American consider >Ipheion and some Tristagma can you tell me what is the difference that >defines this? Is Tristagma bivalve the name most of you use now? > >Thanks for help on this. > >Mary Sue Dear Mary Sue: This confusion is completely understandable. I regret I missed the discussion on 'Rolf Fiedler" you mention. To be honest, at times I think explaining all these taxonomic problems must be pretty boring to most. The real problem with Tristagma, Nothoscordum and Ipheion is that the three genera are only well delimited when you see the seed surface highly magnified. Tristagma and Nothoscordum have mostly (not always) several fl. umbels while Ipheion does not. Tristagma bivalve ( did you know it was Brodiaea porrifolia until a few years ago?) is the only species of Tristagma that is not alpine (you can grow it like a Cape bulb or better as a Texan Cooperia),the others require "alpine house" cultivation. I hesitate to explain where this confusion between 'Rolf Fiedler' and "Tristagma" peregrinans arouse because most people will not believe their eyes when reading about Ravenna's splitting or lumping at will. In my opinion there should be three pages in the wiki, one for Tristagma including bivalve, leitchlinii, ameghinoi, patagonica, etc. Another for Ipheion including 'Rolf Fiedler', uniflorum, sessile, tweedianum, recurvifolium A third for Nothoscordum including felipponei, vittatum, dialystemon, bonariense, montevidense, osteni, etc.. Alarming news, Nothoscordum is in the middle of a monumental speciation and there are seemingly tenths (perhaps hundreds!) of good species. The same thing is happening with Narcissus. The centre of speciation is SW of Porto Alegre, Brazil , and covers five South American countries. Part of it is agricultural land and we will never be able to see the whole picture as all we find are tiny patches of species safe in inaccesible places. One big problem with this kind of plant and that slows down their knowledge (besides the existence of Ravenna) is that you MUST see the living plants to fully understand their taxonomy. A pressed specimen is almost useless (they all look alike!). The ball has been kicked in again. Best Alberto _________________________________________________________________ MSN Amor: busca tu ½ naranja http://latam.msn.com/amor/