That one or two people can slow the progress of science here and, at the same time, levy slanderous remarks about the authors. Bias, jealousy, and a lack of critical thinking skills is apparent.
Desarmillaria subgenus Desarmillaria cannot be valid unless Desarmillaria is subdivided at the subgenus rank, and it isn’t.
depends on whether you believe in Desarmillaria. Whether this name should be approved does not. Please read my previous comments here for an explanation of why that is the case.
Again, even if Desarmillaria is upheld and this this name covers the exact same species as genus Armillaria, it is a 100% valid, legitimate, acceptable, correct, approved name. All genera automatically get autonyms of this sort. For example, Desarmillaria subgenus Desarmillaria is also fine.
(And of course, for those of us who choose not to use Desarmillaria, this name has meaning beyond the genus name.)
This is necessarily not a synonym of Armillaria, because it’s at a different rank: it’s a subgenus, not a genus. It has the same type species whether Desarmillaria is recognized or not.
Even if Desarmillaria is considered a separate genus, Armillaria subgenus Armillaria still exists (all Armillaria s.s. species would be in it.)
Contains all annulate species of Armillaria. Autonyms should never be deprecated when their genus is accepted.
Created: 2016-10-22 22:05:32 -05 (-0500) by Herbert Baker
Last modified: 2020-01-24 10:20:12 -05 (-0500) by Joseph D. Cohen (Joe Cohen)
Viewed: 218 times, last viewed: 2020-03-31 16:23:29 -05 (-0500)