|
Authors1
|
Species concept, names applied
|
Distribution
|
Names that should have been applied (Cephalotaxus
or Taxus)
|
Specimens cited, types indicated!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Linnaeus
1753
|
T.
baccata
|
Eur.,
Canada
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Siebold
& Zuccarini 1843
|
T.
baccata
T.
cuspidata
T.
globosa
T.
wallichiana
|
Eur.,
Canada
Japan
Mexico
India,
Tibet, Nepal
|
|
|
|
Pilger
1903
|
T.
baccata
ssp.
baccata
brevifolia
canadensis
cuspidata
var. chinensis
var.
latifolia
floridana
globosa
wallichiana
|
N
Afr, Eur., W As.
NW
Am.
NE
Am.
Japan
Sichuan,
China
Manchuria,
Sakhalin Is.
Am.
(Florida)
Mexico
Nepal,
NE India,
Myanmar, Philip.,
Indonesia
|
.
|
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
|
|
Rehder
1919, 1949
Rehder
1936, 1940
|
T.
baccata
T.
brevifolia
T.
canadensis
T.
chinensis
T.
cuspidata
T.
floridana
T.
wallichiana
T.
chinensis
|
N
Afr, Eur., W As.
NW
Am.
NE
Am.
Central
China
Japan,
Korea, Manchuria
Am
(Florida)
?
China
|
T.
mairei
|
Yes!
Yes
|
|
Wilson
1916
Wilson
1926
|
T.
baccata
T.
brevifolia
T.
canadensis
T.
chinensis
T.
cuspidata
T.
floridana
T.
wallichiana
T.
chinensis
T.
wallichiana
|
Eur.
NW
Am.
NE
Am
China
incl. Tai.
SE
Russia, Japan, Korea
Am.
(Florida)
Nepal
to China, Philip., Indonesia
E
Himal., China, Indonesia, Philip.
NW
Himal.
|
T.
wallichiana
T.
contorta
|
Yes
Yes
|
|
3Florin
1948a
|
T.
speciosa!
T.
wallichiana
var. chinensis!
var.
wallichiana!
|
China,
Indonesia, Philip.
China
E
Himal. to SW China
|
C.
sumatrana
|
Yes!
Yes!
|
|
Hu
1964
|
T.
chinensis!
T.
cuspidata
var. cuspidata
var.
microcarpa Hu
T.
mairei!2
T.
wallichiana!
|
China
China
(Shaanxi, Jilin, Heilong.) Korea, Japan
China
(Heilong.)
China
Nepal
To China, Indonesia, Philip.
|
T.
cuspidata
var.
microcarpa Kolesn.
C.
sumatrana3
|
Yes!
Yes
Yes
Yes!
Yes
|
|
Cheng
et al. 1975; Cheng & Fu 1978
|
T.
chinensis
var. chinensis
var. mairei
T.
cuspidata
T.
wallichiana
T.
yunnanensis!
|
China
China,
Indonesia
China
(Jilin), SE Russa, Korea, Japan
Himal.,
SW Tibet
Bhutan,
Myanmar, China (SE Tibet, Yun., Sich.)
|
T.
wallichiana
var. chinensis
C.
sumatrana
T.
contorta
T.
wallichiana
|
Yes!
Illustrated
Illustrated
Illustrated
Yes!
|
|
3de
Laubenfels 1978, 1988
|
T.
sumatrana!.
|
E
Himal., China, Philip., Indonesia
|
T.
wallichiana
|
Yes!
|
4Li
& Mill in Li & Fu 1997
Fu,
Li & Mill 1999
|
T.
fuana!
T.
wallichiana
var. mairei
var. wallichiana
var. chinensis
var.
mairei
|
W
Himal.
E
Himal., China, Indonesia, Philip.
Bhutan, Myanmar, China (SE Tibet, Yun.,
Sich.)
China,
N Vietnam
“N
India?” Myanmar, Laos, Vietnam, China
|
T.
contorta
T.
sumatrana
|
Illustration
not
the same as type
?
|
|
5
Farjon 1998
|
T.
baccata
T.
brevifolia
T. canadensis
T.
chinensis
var.
chinensis
var. mairei
T.
cuspidata
var.
cuspidata
var. nana
T.
floridana
T.
fuana
T.
globosa
T.
sumatrana
T. wallichiana
|
N
Afr., Eur., W As.
NW
Am.
NE
Am.
China
main., Vietnam
China
main., Tai.
SE
Russia, NE China, Japan, Korea
Japan
Am.
(Florida)
China
(SW Tibet)
Mexico,
Guatemala
Philip.,
Indonesia
W
Himal. to SW China
|
T.
mairei
T.
wallichiana
var.
chinensis
|
|
|
Spjut
this paper
|
T.
baccata!
T.
brevifolia!
T.
caespitosa!
T.
canadensis
T.
chinensis!
6T.
aff. chinensis!
6T.
aff. chinensis!
6T.
aff. chinensis
T.
contorta!
var. contorta
var.
mucronata!
T.
cuspidata!
T.
biternata
T.
globosa!
T.
sumatrana!
(T.
celebica!
T.
mairei!
T.
speciosa!
Taxus
kingstoii.)
T.
wallichiana
var. wallichiana!
var.
yunnanensis!
6T.
aff. wallichiana
6T.
aff. wallichiana!
|
N
Afr., Eur., W As.
NW
Am.
China
(Shaanxi), SE Russia (Primorye), Korea, Japan
NE
Am., N Afr. Eur., W As.
China
main., Vietnam
China
(Yun., Sich., Hubei)
China
(Yun., Tai.), Philip., Indonesia
Vietnam
W Himal, Sikkim
SW
Tibet
Nepal, Bhutan,
Japan
China
(Shaanxi, Heilong., Jilin), SE Russia, Korea, Japan, SW Asia?
Mexico
to El Salvador,
Honduras
E
Nepal to China, Philip., Indonesia (Species Group under study)
Nepal
to China (Sichuan, Yunnan)
NE
India to China (Tibet, Sichuan, Yunnan)
China
(Sichuan, Yunnan)
Myanmar
|
|
Yes!
Yes!
Yes
designated
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
|
|
|
Table
1. Authors for species names of Taxus interpreted according to
their morphological and /or geographical data.
1Omission
of names does not mean that the author did not recognize the species. Based on the authors’ data, the species name was
interpreted as correct (italics) or incorrect (plain type).
2Hu
(1964) excluded T. celebica because a specimen from Sulawesi did
not meet her taxonomic criteria for T. mairei; however, her
exclusion of T. celebica, and also Cephalotaxus sumatrana
(not mentioned) does not mean that her new combination was legitimate;
the earliest available epithet still should have been applied. She
recognized Pilger (1903) who cited both C. celebica and C.
sumatrana, and for him to do so he would almost certainly have had
to seen their types. Moreover,
Florin (1948a) also cited C. celebica and its type, which Hu
should have accepted since she employed the same taxonomic character as
Florin did for distinguishing T. mairei (T. speciosa) from
T. wallichiana.
3The
combination for Taxus sumatrana made by de Laubenfels (1978) was
based on his study of the holotype at Utrecht. While it may be argued
that previous authors may not have accepted Pilger’s reference to Cephalotaxus
sumatrana as a synonym of T. wallichiana without seeing the
type, they did not explicitly exclude C. sumatrana.
Therefore, this is the name that should have been applied by Cheng
& Fu (1978), Florin (1948a), Hu (1964), and Li & Fu (1997),
instead of T. chinensis or T. mairei.
4Li
& Fu (1997) published an illegitimate combination T. wallichiana
var. mairei (Art. 11.5, 43.5) as seen in the protologue by
reference to elements (geographical data) for which earlier names
exist—T. sumatrana and T. celebica, but later excluded
these (Fu et al. 1999), and arbitrarily attributed all plants in the
Philippines and Indonesia to T. sumatrana; however, T.
sumatrana has never been applied correctly.
5Farjon
(1998) implies morphological distinction of species because his
geographical species data are not the same as that of his predecessors.
In the absence of morphological and specimen data in Farjon (1998), his
distinction of species in Taxus appears arbitrary and
inconsistent. For example, he does not distinguish between the western
Himalayan and eastern Himalayan yews but does recognize T. fuana
from only the type locality, while he also indicates the Indonesian and
Philippine plants (T. sumatrana) are different from those in
China (T. chinensis).
6Spjut
(in adnot., A, BM, GH, K, P, U, US) recognized T. kingstonii
Spjut (ined.), T scutata Spjut (ined.),
T. ocreata Spjut (ined.), T. florinii, Spjut (ined.)T.
suffnessii, Spjut (ined.)T. phytonii, Spjut (ined.) and T.
obscura Spjut (ined.). These names were published in
2007, J. Bot. Res. Inst. Texas Vol. 1.
|