Talk:Vittadinia

Recent species list additions

I've reverted the recent changes ot his article because they are mostly unreferenced, and I have some concerns about the accuracy. For example, they list Vittadinia triloba as coming only from New Zealand, when it is also an Australian native. It lists Vittadinia chamissonis as a species, when it seems to be a synonym, ditto for Vittadinia remyi. I don't have the time right now to go through the edits with a fine tooth comb, but when 3 out of 3 changes that I did check are questionable, I think it worth being a bit cautious. The taxonomy of the Asters generally, and this tribe especially, is notoriously controversial, so we need to discuss this a bit more and make sure we have a consistent source for all these changes. Mark Marathon (talk) 22:32, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Incorrect. Everything was duly referenced at the head of the list. All the info came from reputable sources, i.e. Global Compositae Checklist and Atlas of Living Australia. There may be a few errors, but these can be fixed without negating the entire half hour I spent improving this page.Joseph Laferriere (talk) 10:44, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

@Mark Marathon: like Joseph Laferriere, I don't understand why you claim that the changes were "mostly unreferenced" when a full list of references was provided for the species list. Given the varying sources it would probably be better to reference some of the species individually, but the changes were not unreferenced, and the Global Compositae Checklist seems a good starting point for accepted names. You cite GRIN for names being synonyms. Did you look at the revision date? For Vittadinia chamissonis as a synonym the revision date is given as 1994. GRIN is notoriously out of date in many areas and is not a reliable source, particularly outside the US. Your reversion should be undone and then some individual species can be worked on a bit more. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:55, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

I have indeed seen errors in the GCC, so I double-check anything that looks suspicious. In the case of Vittadinia chamissonis, it was indeed on the GCC but I had to scrounge around search for some other reference to it. I did indeed find something. I forget just where, but I can retrace my steps if need be.Joseph Laferriere (talk) 11:58, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

@Mark Marathon:Peter coxheadI must also express my chagrin that I received a threatening letter accusing me of edit warring. I did one reversion, but you did two, so which one of us is violating policy?Joseph Laferriere (talk) 21:51, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

In the absence of any reasoned explanation as to why the changes by User:Joseph Laferriere were not, overall, an improvement, I will restore them. We can then discuss whether any individual changes should be undone or further changes made. Peter coxhead (talk) 11:56, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. I shall revisit the site and add a few more citations. I am, as always, open to suggestions.Joseph Laferriere (talk) 13:56, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Okay. I double-checked the three species Mark mentioned earlier. He is right about V. triloba. As for V. chamissonis and V. remyi, the same story for both. Tropicos does not list either one. GCC lists them as accepted, but gives no range information. IPNI lists both as native to "Ins. Sandvic." I tried googling "Sandvic" but according to Google, this is the name of a Swedish construction company. I figure they meant "Sandwich Islands," which is an old name for Hawaii. I finally found Asa Gray's original publication on the two species, confirming that they are indeed both described from Hawaiian material.Joseph Laferriere (talk) 14:22, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

@Joseph Laferriere: The Smithsonian Flora of the Hawaiian Islands lists all Asa Gray's Vittadinia species as Tetramolopium, I think. See here. So I suspect that the genus is probably now not considered to occur in Hawaii. I propose to add these to the list of "former species":

• Vittadinia chamissonis A.Gray = Tetramolopium lepidotum (Less.) Sherff
• Vittadinia remyi A.Gray = Tetramolopium remyi (A.Gray) Hillebr.

Peter coxhead (talk) 19:23, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Etymology

I always like to know the etymology of scientific names. Unfortunately Richard doesn't explain it at the source given by IPNI for the genus name (see [1]). Vittatus means "striped, particularly longitudinally" according to Stearn's Botanical Latin, so it could have something to do with stripes. Anyone have any information on this? Peter coxhead (talk) 18:48, 19 January 2015 (UTC)