Talk:Saponaria pumila

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

About the name, copied from the discussion page of Franz Xaver:

Saponaria

[edit]

Hi Franz,

During our (too short) holiday in the Dolomites i encountered a plant which with Oskar Angerers und Thomas Muers Aplen Pflnze I identified as Saponaria pumilio. On the german language wiki i noticed an article on Saponaria pumila, for which you seem to have uploaded the pix. How can I distinguish them?

vielen dank,

Teun Spaans 18:04, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Until Franz can answer this, I can tell you what I see:
The quick answer when I search for those two terms http://www.google.com/search?q=Saponaria+pumila is the wrong name as most of the first 10 to 20 search results return software phished taxonomy web sites, with the exception of one site which lists both names as being a synonymous http://www.uniprot.org/taxonomy/288948. http://www.google.com/search?q=Saponaria+pumilio has some web sites in its returns which are maintained by botanists.
Further searching (because it is interesting to find out where the name gets changed for those phished sites) http://books.google.com/books?id=JOZsPEYNmcMC&pg=RA1-PA10&lpg=RA1-PA10 Atlas Florae Europaeae: Distribution of Vascular Plants in Europe from 1988 lists in its Exclusions that Saponaria pumila Janchen be used instead of Saponaria pumilo (L.) Fenzl ex A.Braun, perhaps this book is where the name begins to diverge? Native to Lebanon and Turkey -- I attempted to find the flora which was closest to that area but the Euro+Med database is only displaying a limited section for me today which does not include this family. It is the United States taxonomy name servers which are not in agreement with that book and the original name was Silene pumilio http://www.illustratedgarden.org/mobot/rarebooks/page.asp?relation=QK318J231773V5&identifier=0274 <-- which I might upload a cleaned copy of soon. The further research and the finding of the book challenge my "quick answer".
So, it looks like it is that one book from 1988 that has changed the name. And IPNI treats them as two different species http://www.ipni.org/ipni/idPlantNameSearch.do?id=156649-1 (originally a Cucubalus and http://www.ipni.org/ipni/idPlantNameSearch.do?id=156647-1 (originally Silene pumila) and I think it should be interesting now to compare the two photographs with the illustration from 1773. -- carol (talk) 01:12, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Carol,
Thank you for the speedy reply and all your efforts. Prior to posting my question i had checked ipni and the tropicos database. Tropicos held only s. pumilio Fenzl ex A. Braun, but ipni listed no relation between them, which suggested 2 separate species.
I didnt know about http://www.uniprot.org, and find it interesting to see that a search for s. pumilio it turns up with s. pumila, suggesting that s. pumila is the correct name.
Frankly, i think you may have made a typo in http://epic.kew.org/searchepic/summaryquery.do?searchAll=true&scientificName=Saponaria+pumilia, i think you mentioned http://epic.kew.org/searchepic/summaryquery.do?searchAll=true&scientificName=Saponaria+pumila which does turn up with 2 kew garden links +ipni. The kew garden link refers to Gutermann W. 1975 Notulae nomenclaturales 1 - 18. Phyton (Austria), which seems to be older than 1988.
Does that alter the quick answer? Teun Spaans 04:56, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Doing some more lookup, ipnu mentions 1907 as the publication data for s. pumila Janch., and 1843 as the year of publication for Saponaria pumilio Fenzl ex A.Braun. So if they are indeed identical, i think s. pumilio should be the correct name. Teun Spaans 05:36, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Lately, if the gallery is named with a synonym that I am not completely certain which should be the accepted name and which should be the synonym of, I make the category with whatever seems to be the most correct of the options and then link the category to the gallery via a linked synonym mention. I did move a gallery or two to not the most correct name a few times before determining this.
Also, after writing the first part of this reply, I thought about everything I had seen and had come to the same conclusion that you did, about the book citing the publication of 1907 and the other name citing a publication for 1843. I guess that I will just go ahead and make that category with the synonyms listed and all (good to do now since the search and such was so recent).
An interesting exercise, I would like to be sorry that I am answering on anothers talk page but I am unable to be.... -- carol (talk) 05:54, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I just attempted to blame my spelling error on anything but myself -- and I failed. Thank you for catching this mistake I made. -- carol (talk) 06:12, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have invited Franz on the german wiki to voice his opinion on this subject, lets wait till he has answered. He usually has good arguments. Teun Spaans 06:47, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi TeunSpaans and Carol,
In this case it is essential to pay attention to the authorities of the names. It is not about two names but three: Saponaria pumila Janchen ex Hayek, Saponaria pumilio (L.) Fenzl ex A.Br., and Saponaria pumilio Boiss. The two first mentioned names refer to a species from the eastern Alps and southern Carpathians, whereas the third name belongs to a different species from south-western Asia. It is true, that Saponaria pumilio (L.) Fenzl ex A.Br. from 1843 (not before June) is older than Saponaria pumila Janchen ex Hayek from 1908, but it is younger than Saponaria pumilio Boiss., which was published in January (or February?) 1843. So Saponaria pumilio (L.) Fenzl ex A.Br. is a younger homonym and cannot be used. Therefore the younger name Saponaria pumila Janchen ex Hayek is correct for this species. (If Saponaria was merged with Silene, it would be a different story - Silene pumilio (L.) Wulfen is from 1778.)
The British authors of Silene in “Flora Europaea” (1964) had neglected the name Saponaria pumila or not known of its existence. (It was published in a German language flora of Steiermark. In 1975, Walter Gutermann published “Notulae nomenclaturales 1-18” (Phyton (Austria) 17: 31-50, in German), in which he commented his decision to use the name Saponaria pumila Janchen ex Hayek in “Liste der Gefäßpflanzen Mitteleuropas” from 1973 - for many years the authoritative checklist of the Central European flora. Nevertheless, also in the second edition of “Flora Europaea” (1993) the name was not corrected, whereas in Atlas Florae Europaeae (1986) it was. Anyway, the 2nd edition of “Flora Europaea” only partially was revised and most parts only were reprinted. Cheers --Franz Xaver (talk) 13:58, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Franz, velen dank! Teun Spaans 04:49, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Saponaria_pumila&oldid=15515776"