Yes, the "gestalt" of A vs B is undeniable. Hadn't heard about that move by Bruyns. Reference? Are Synadenium and Endadenium doomed as well? On Dec 12, 2007 11:57 PM, Tim Harvey <zigur@hotmail.com> wrote: > > Well I bet there are a whole bunch of different genes and associated > regulators requred to give a leaf a midrib, and we'll very likely not know > what they are this century! > > I agree, philosophically speaking. > > Why on earth Bruyns stuck Monadenium into Euphorbia I'll never understand, > but I can tell a Brunsvigia from an Amaryllis ... > > T> Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 23:51:00 -0800> From: othonna@gmail.com> To: > pbs@lists.ibiblio.org> Subject: Re: [pbs] Sinking Brunsvigia> > Tim,> > Whatever the evidence employed, once substantiated monophyletic groups are> > worked out then the rank of those groups becomes "academic". Hence the> > subjective nature of taxonomic schemes and hence the everlasting hope of> > armchair botanists for more suitable arrangements.> Dylan> > On Dec 12, 2007 > 9:45 PM, Tim Harvey <zigur@hotmail.com> wrote:> > >> > Oh, I see another > genus akin to Euphorbia in the making! I believe some> > investigation of > these relationships have been done at the DNA level, though> > I regard such > data as important as other physical descriptors.> >> > T> Date: Wed, 12 Dec > 2007 19:40:02 -0800> From: othonna@gmail.com> To:> > pbs@lists.ibiblio.org> > Subject: Re: [pbs] Sinking Brunsvigia> > Leo, Jim--> > I've also felt it > would be sensible to at least consider this> merger. They> > are separated > by seemingly non-profound > details of the seeds> and the leaves> > with midrib (Amaryllis) or > without (Brunsvigia), whereas the> traits in> > common are overwhelming. Is > morphological homogeneity important in> defining> > genera? How important?> > The same applies to the seemingly artificial> > distinction of Hessea from> > Strumaria, based on somewhat variable character> > states. Carpolyza has> > already been lumped under the latter. I suppose the> > taxonomists are happy > to> rely more on molecular data when the going gets> > tough regarding when > to> split and when to lump.> Dylan> > On Dec 12, 2007> > 1:23 PM, Leo A. > Martin <leo@possi.org> wrote:> > > > One other way to get> > more species: > given the easy "hybridization" of> > > Amaryllis and> > Brunsvigia, I've > long been wait> > ing for someone to combine> > > those genera: the plants > have already> > done it, now it's time for the> > > taxonomists to catch > up.> > >> > > Jim> > McKenney> >> > That would be great! Amaryllis (1753) is > so much easier to> > > grow than> > Brunsvigia (1755)!> >> > Leo Martin> > Phoenix Arizona USA> > >>> > > _______________________________________________> > pbs mailing list> > >> > pbs@lists.ibiblio.org> > > http://www.pacificbulbsociety.org/list.php> >> > > http://pacificbulbsociety.org/pbswiki/> >>> > > _______________________________________________> pbs mailing list>> > > pbs@lists.ibiblio.org> http://www.pacificbulbsociety.org/list.php>> > > http://pacificbulbsociety.org/pbswiki/> > > _______________________________________________> > pbs mailing list> > > pbs@lists.ibiblio.org> > http://www.pacificbulbsociety.org/list.php> > > http://pacificbulbsociety.org/pbswiki/> >> > _______________________________________________> pbs mailing list> > pbs@lists.ibiblio.org> http://www.pacificbulbsociety.org/list.php> > http://pacificbulbsociety.org/pbswiki/ > _______________________________________________ > pbs mailing list > pbs@lists.ibiblio.org > http://www.pacificbulbsociety.org/list.php > http://pacificbulbsociety.org/pbswiki/ >