Taxonomic Swap 126480
(提交於 2023-05-31)
|
|
替代為 |
|
評論
@sarahlloyd @regularslimeguy @myxograzina @alison_pollack @alainmyxos What are your thoughts on this rushed swap?
Hi Nicolas - I apologise for bringing up this taxon swap; I didn't realise the headaches it would cause. I based it on Eumycetozoa.com which considers C. porioides to be a synonym of C. fruticulosa. I agree that there are limited published phylogenetic studies to support the taxon swap- as is the case with many slime moulds. I had no idea about the previous discussion on the matter and I thank you for bringing this to my attention. I do, however, strongly suspect that the poroid form is simply a morphotype of C. fruticulosa. Ceratiomyxa is very common in my area and I have observed many times both morphs occurring within the same colony, with transitional forms between. This is true also of the yellow and white colour forms often occurring together.
@tyson_ehlers The problem doesn't come from you :) You are not a curator so this is not your responsability. It may be a morphotype, which I think is a reasonable hypothesis. Or it may also a morphotype specific to one or multiple species in C. fruticulosa. As the type is not revised, it's likely as well that this name will be resurrected for a species of this complex. Without that, it's pure speculation...
Carlos Lado's eumycetozoa.com website is generally considered by those who study myxos to be the best source for myxo taxonomy. There are studies being done on Ceratiomyxa, and it will be interesting to see what they reveal. I also would prefer to not lose the distinction. I suggest that we retain the varieties, and use Ceratiomyxa fruticulosa var. poroides. Or now that the change is made is that to no longer possible to revert to that?
I am surprised that anyone can make a taxon change. I thought it was only curators who are allowed to do that.
Sorry for creating a potential mess with this. I did check eumycetozoa.com as that is the best myxo resource for up to date taxonomy, which states it is a synonym. Will certainly reach out and discuss anything like this (my fist taxon swamp obviously) in the future.
@ryan_durand Can you avoid making taxonomic changes without consulting anyone? This topic has been discussed extensively in a previous flag!
- This is a valid name. You can see the full bibliographic citation in Index Fungorum and in Eumycetozoa.com.
- Eumycetozoa website is great but cross-checking sources is necessary. Other sources keep this species as independent or make a variety of it.
- We did keep Ceratiomyxa porioides as this genus is clearly understudied and many species are waiting to be described. However, completely synonymizing the two taxa is a destructive operation as now we don't have a way to name these collections in case it would be proven to be independent based on phylogenetic means and not on a single opinion.