Name: Amanita sect. Vaginatae
Author: sensu Zhu L. Yang
Citation: 1997. Biblioth. Mycol. 170: 10-11.
Yes, I know what it means.
Why would someone hypothetically reject Amanita sect. Vaginatae on nomenclatural grounds when it has been in use for so long? it seems to put the cart before the horse to suppose such a thing.
sensu Zhu L. Yang can be used by members of MO regardless of the name status here on MO. It does not prevent you from doing “your” science.
By not using Amanita sect. Vaginatae (Fr.) Quél., you’ve already rejected it.
You can’t maintain that your preferred name is presently valid and invalid at the same time.
“sensu” is the right term to use.
If someone should reject section Vaginatae on nomenclatural grounds, I can still use my “sensu” construction and be understood without criticism. That has been one of my concerns in using “sensu Zhu L. Yang.” It is also the reason I use “section Lepidella sensu Bas” (see Cui et al. paper as justification for my concerns).
Would there be support for Amanita sect. Vaginatae (Fr.) Quél. ex Zhu L. Yang?
Yang uses Amanita sect. Vaginatae (Fr.) Quél. in his publications; separating Amanita sect. Vaginatae (Fr.) Quél. from Amanita sect. Vaginatae sensu Zhu L. Yang would make it appear as if the two names (based on the same type) are competing.
I would kindly ask you why the two names should not be synonymized so that the community can benefit from your experience.
Cui, Y.-Y., Cai, Q., Tang, L.-P., Liu, J.-W., & Yang, Z. L. (2018). The family Amanitaceae: molecular phylogeny, higher-rank taxonomy and the species in China. Fungal Diversity, 91(1), 5–230. doi:10.1007/s13225-018-0405-9
Created: 2010-11-19 08:18:37 CST (-0500) by Erlon (Herbert Baker)
Last modified: 2019-02-13 16:20:58 CST (-0500) by Jason Hollinger (jason)
Viewed: 2830 times, last viewed: 2019-02-14 21:40:08 CST (-0500)