Nomenclatural Consequences Research Articles

Lectotypification of Macromia pyramidalis Martin, 1907 (Odonata: Macromiidae) and its nomenclatural consequences

The type series of Macromia pyramidalis Martin, 1907 was for a long time suspected to be heterogeneous. The photographs of the three syntypes preserved in Muséum National d’Histoire naturelle, Paris, France (MNHN) revealed the male syntype to be consubspecific to the current Macromia pinratani vietnamica Asahina, 1996 and the two female syntypes conspecific to the current Macromia berlandi Lieftinck, 1941. The name M. pyramidalis is the oldest among those mentioned. The male syntype is designated as the lectotype of M. pyramidalis to result in somewhat less inconvenient nomenclatural consequences, which are as follows: Macromia pyramidalis pyramidalis, valid name = Macromia pinratani vietnamica, syn. nov.; Macromia pyramidalis pinratani Asahina, 1983, comb. nov.; Macromia pyramidalis, valid name = Macromia pinratani, syn. nov.

Rodentibacter caecimuris comb. nov., arising from the heterotypic synonymy between Pasteurella caecimuris Lagkouvardos et al. 2016 and Rodentibacter heylii Adhikary et al. 2017.

The misclassification of the species Pasteurella caecimuris Lagkouvardos et al. 2016 along with the heterotypic synonymy between P. caecimuris and Rodentibacter heylii Adhikary et al. 2017 has long been recognized. However, no formal assignment of P. caecimuris to its correct taxonomic position has been made accordingly and therefore the nomenclatural consequences have not been implemented. In the present study, the author first re-evaluates the taxonomic relationships of P. caecimuris using genome-based approaches, confirming the need of reclassification to the genus Rodentibacter and presenting evidence of the synonymy between R. heylii and P. caecimuris. Next, the author proposes a new name Rodentibacter caecimuris comb. nov. and, based on the priority of their specific epithets, treats Rodentibacter heylii as a later heterotypic synonym of Rodentibacter caecimuris.

Etymology of nomina of Amphibians and Reptiles of the French Antilles

We provide a catalogue of 41 genus substantives and 110 species or subspecies epithets of amphibians and reptiles of the French Antilles, with presentation of some nomenclatural consequences that result from our observations, especially for Dryophytes squirella, Iguana rhinolophus, Pholidoscelis cineraceus and Pholidoscelis plei analifer. In order to solve some nomenclatural cases, we had to resort to 9 Articles of the Code (11.3, 28, 30.1.3, 30.1.4.2, 31.2.3, 33.3.1, 51.3, 51.3.1, 58) and to 21 technical nomenclatural terms. Once again, this highlights the fact that nomenclatural problems concerning ancient nomina cannot be properly dealt with in a hurry and without a good, but also critical, knowledge of the Code, and that the use of a more detailed terminology than that of the Code facilitates such a work.

Picks in the Fabric of a Polyploidy Complex: Integrative Species Delimitation in the Tetraploid Leucanthemum Mill. (Compositae, Anthemideae) Representatives

Based on the results of a preceding species-delimitation analysis for the diploid representatives of the genus Leucanthemum (Compositae, Anthemideae), the present study aims at the elaboration of a specific and subspecific taxonomic treatment of the tetraploid members of the genus. Following an integrative taxonomic approach, species-level decisions on eight predefined morphotaxon hypotheses were based on genetic/genealogical, morphological, ecological, and geographical differentiation patterns. ddRADseq fingerprinting and SNP-based clustering revealed genetic integrity for six of the eight morphotaxa, with no clear differentiation patterns observed between the widespread L. ircutianum subsp. ircutianum and the N Spanish (Cordillera Cantábrica) L. cantabricum and the S French L. delarbrei subsp. delabrei (northern Massif Central) and L. meridionale (western Massif Central). The inclusion of differentiation patterns in morphological (leaf dissection and shape), ecological (climatological and edaphic niches), and geographical respects (pair-wise tests of sympatry vs. allopatry) together with the application of a procedural protocol for species-rank decisions (the 'Wettstein tesseract') led to the proposal of an acknowledgement of the eight predefined morphotaxon hypotheses as six species (two of them with two subspecies). Nomenclatural consequences following from these results are drawn and lead to the following new combinations: Leucanthemum delarbrei subsp. meridionale (Legrand) Oberpr., T.Ott & Vogt, comb. nov. and Leucanthemum ruscinonense (Jeanb. & Timb.-Lagr.) Oberpr., T.Ott & Vogt, comb. et stat. nov.

(2817) Proposal to conserve the name Erysimum violascens (Cruciferae)

(2817) Proposal to conserve the name <i>Erysimum violascens</i> (<i>Cruciferae</i>)

Nomenclatural consequences of the Oculudentavis khaungraae case, with comments on the practice of ‘retraction’ of scientific publications

The recent publication in the journal Nature of a paper describing a new fossil as a ‘hummingbird-sized dinosaur', followed immediately by a rebuttal stating that it was in fact a lizard, and then by the ‘retraction' of the original paper, raised concerns about the nomenclatural availability of the new binomen Oculudentavis khaungraae that it introduced. It is shown here that so-called ‘retraction’, by authors, editors or publishers, of a controversial paper, has no bearing under the Rules of the Code on the nomenclatural availability of the paper and of the new nomina or nomenclatural acts it may contain, which can be withdrawn only by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature acting under its Plenary Power. It is furthermore argued that the principle of ‘retraction’ of scientific publications itself is anti-scientific, harmful to the history of science, and belongs in the domain of ‘denialism': it should be fully abandoned by serious scientific journals.

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Capitalised epithets in the works of Linnaeus (1758‒1767): findings and consequences in herpetology&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

Starting from a finding concerning a few specific nomina proposed by Linnaeus (1758, 1760) and Linné (1766–1767) in herpetology, we returned to the ‘rules of nomenclature’ followed, more or less explicitly, in taxonomic works of the 18th century, in an attempt to understand the status of capitalised epithets. We conclude that such epithets were viewed by their authors as nouns in apposition, or more rarely as nouns in the genitive. Therefore, nowadays, they must be treated as invariable, and not as adjectives that should agree in grammatical gender with the generic substantives with which they are combined. We provide a catalogue of these herpetological capitalised epithets in Linnaeus (1758, 1760) and Linné (1766–1767) with some nomenclatural consequences that result from our observations, especially for Corallus hortulana, Macrovipera lebetinus and Thamnophis saurita. In order to solve some nomenclatural cases, we had to resort to 12 Articles of the Code (1.3.1, 3, 11.9.1.2, 11.9.1.3, 23.2, 23.9, 31.1, 31A, 31.2.2, 32.5.1, 33.3.1, 34.2.1, 58) and to 29 technical nomenclatural terms. One more time, this highlights the fact that nomenclatural problems concerning old nomina cannot be properly dealt with in a hurry and without a good, but also critical, knowledge of the Code, and that the use of a more detailed terminology than that of the Code facilitates such a work.

Marinobacterium iners (Iizuka and Komagata 1964) comb. nov. arising from the Synonymy of Marinobacterium georgiense González et al. 1997 and Pseudomonas iners Iizuka and Komagata 1964 (Approved Lists 1980).

Although there is documented evidence in the literature that Marinobacterium georgiense González et al. 1997 and Pseudomonas iners Iizuka and Komagata 1964 (Approved Lists 1980) should be treated as heterotypic synonyms, the nomenclatural consequences have not been implemented. Based on the rules of the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes when Marinobacterium georgiense González et al. 1997 and Pseudomonas iners Iizuka and Komagata 1964 (Approved Lists 1980) are considered to belong to the genus Marinobacterium González et al. 1997, the earliest epithet (from the competing heterotypic synonyms) is to be used for the resulting taxon, i.e., the combination Marinobacterium iners (Iizuka and Komagata 1964) must be created.

The troublesome genus Thamnolia (lichenized Ascomycota)

AbstractA new neotypus is designated for Thamnolia vermicularis in accordance with the protologue. The taxonomy is best reflected by molecular evidence which recognizes three subspecies: the widespread subsp. vermicularis, and the geographically more restricted subsp. taurica (in the eastern Alps) and subsp. tundrae (in the Arctic region). The nomenclatural consequences resulting from these changes require that two new combinations are made.

Brasolia, a new genus highlighted from Sobralia (Orchidaceae)

A phylogenetic study of Sobralia (Orchidaceae) confirmed the polyphyletic character of the genus. Sobralia also appears to be highly heteromorphic in the morphology, especially considering the position and architecture of inflorescence, lip form and kind of its outgrowths, length and form of stelidia of column. The infrageneric relationship of Sobralia species was revealed by analyses of three DNA markers (nuclear ITS, xdh and plastid matK). The nominal section of the genus appears to be more related with Elleanthus and other genera of Sobralieae than with the remaining species of Sobralia. Sobralia section Sobralia differs from other representatives of the genus by the position and architecture of inflorescence, smaller floral bracts and the morphology of the flowers. We propose a generic rank to the group despite its paraphyletic nature. Nomenclatural consequences of this proposal are briefly discussed. Appropriate transfers to the newly erected genus Brasolia are proposed. A new species, Brasolia floribunda, previously detected by Reichenbach, but never formally described, is validated. Lectotypes for five species and a neotype for the other one are proposed.

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The nomenclatural status of &lt;em&gt;Hysaplesia&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;Hylaplesia&lt;/em&gt;, &lt;em&gt;Dendrobates&lt;/em&gt; and related nomina (Amphibia, Anura), with general comments on zoological nomenclature and its governance, as well as on taxonomic databases and websites&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

Dozens of publications, mostly in the last 45 years, have been devoted to nomenclatural problems concerning the status of the zoological nomina Hysaplesia, Hylaplesia, Dendrobates and related nomina. The Commission finally voted on this case in 2009, but this vote shows a misunderstanding of several of the problems at stake, as it contains a double and contradictory decision: the change in the type species of Hysaplesia and its suppression, although one only of these two acts would have been necessary and sufficient to solve this case, whereas taking them both together has other unforeseen and negative nomenclatural consequences. A final comprehensive solution to these nomenclatural problems is presented here, which does not require any more action from the Commission. However, the fact that the Commission, as well as the whole international community, have proved to be unable to understand fully the nomenclatural problems at stake and to solve them truthfully, while ignoring deliberately some contributions to the discussion, calls attention. This case suggests that there is a strong risk that nomenclature might become a domain where intellectual fairness and competence are secondary and where problems are ‘solved’ through the medieval ‘Principle of Authority’, through relying on the ‘opinions’ of a few persons, committees or websites rather than on rational discussions based on a knowledge of taxonomic publications and an understanding of the Code. This course would result in dragging zoological nomenclature so to say outside the field of science and contribute to weakening still more a domain, taxonomy, which is already facing major problems, at the time of the crisis of biodiversity. Additional problems concerning taxonomic databases and websites are pointed out, and suggestions are offered in this respect, including the distinction between the concepts of ‘nomenclatural status’ and ‘taxonomic status’ of nomina.

Taxonomic and nomenclatural implications of a review of the Pied Currawong Strepera graculina in southern Victoria

In a review of knowledge about subspecies of the Pied Currawong in southern Victoria and far south-eastern South Australia, Menkhorst & Morley (2017) hypothesised that the type specimen of Strepera graculina ashbyi Mathews 1913 might be an immature female of the population currently recognized as S. g. nebulosa Schodde and Mason 1999. If this hypothesis is correct, there are nomenclatural consequences, which we detail here. We also retract the suggestion that neotypes should be defined for the subspecies concerned.

The consequences of Bacillus axarquiensis Ruiz-García et al. 2005, Bacillus malacitensis Ruiz-García et al. 2005 and Brevibacterium halotolerans Delaporte and Sasson 1967 (Approved Lists 1980) being treated as heterotypic synonyms

In a recent publication, data was presented supporting Bacillus axarquiensis Ruiz-García et al. 2005, Bacillus malacitensis Ruiz-García et al. 2005 and Brevibacterium halotolerans Delaporte and Sasson 1967 (Approved Lists 1980) being treated as heterotypic synonyms. The nomenclatural consequences proposed were that under these circumstances the correct name to be used is Bacillus axarquiensis Ruiz-García et al. 2005, but this is not consistent with the wording of the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes and it is, therefore, it is necessary to establish the correct name to be used.

Morphometric and geographical variation in theCeratozamia mexicanaBrongn. (Zamiaceae) complex: evolutionary and taxonomic implications

The Cycadales contain 11 nonproblematic genera and approximately 331 species where, in a number of cases, delimitation and circumscription is not so clear. Ceratozamia, the most diverse cycad genus in Mexico, clearly illustrates this situation because a large percentage (close to 70%) of the 28 currently valid species in the genus was recently described on the basis of inconspicuous differences. We evaluated population-level morphological variation (i.e. phenotype) in related plants of Ceratozamia that share geological and ecological units, seeking a refined taxonomic assessment of their populations in an explicitly evolutionary context. The populations/species of interest included the type species Ceratozamia mexicana, as well as the taxa Ceratozamia brevifrons, Ceratozamia decumbens, and Ceratozamia morettii. Data analysis was performed using uni- and multivariate techniques on morphological variability, which showed statistically significant differences. The characters ‘leaflet width’ and ‘leaflet shape’ supported diagnostic distinctions between groups of populations, and implied a classificatory rearrangement with nomenclatural consequences. This research is an initial step in the detailed, statistics-oriented study of phenotypic variation in the Ceratozamia populations of central Veracruz in Mexico that will allow the construction of evolutionary hypotheses in the context of phylogeography and historical demography.

Taking the discovery approach in integrative taxonomy: decrypting a complex of narrow-endemic Alpine harvestmen (Opiliones: Phalangiidae: Megabunus).

Species delimitation is fundamental for biological studies, yet precise delimitation is not an easy task, and every involved approach has an inherent failure rate. Integrative taxonomy, a method that merges multiple lines of evidence, can profoundly contribute to reliable alpha-taxonomy and shed light on the processes behind speciation. In this study, we explored and validated species limits in a group of closely related Megabunus harvestmen (Eupnoi, Phalangiidae) endemic to the European Alps. Without a priori species hypotheses, we used multiple sources of inference, including mitochondrial and multilocus nuclear DNA, morphometrics and chemistry. The results of these discovery approaches revealed morphological crypsis and multiple new species within two of the five hitherto known species. Based on our analyses, we discussed the most plausible evolutionary scenarios, invoked the most reasonable species hypotheses and validated the new species limits. Building upon the achieved rigour, three new species, Megabunus cryptobergomas Muster and Wachter sp. nov., Megabunus coelodonta Muster and Steiner sp. nov., and Megabunus lentipes Muster and Komposch sp. nov., are formally described. In addition, we provide a dichotomous morphological key to the Megabunus species of the Alps. Our work demonstrates the suitability of integrative, discovery-based approaches in combination with validation approaches to precisely characterize species and enabled us to implement nomenclatural consequences for this genus.

Checklist of british and irish hymenoptera - sawflies, 'symphyta'.

The superfamilies Cephoidea, Orussoidea, Pamphilioidea, Siricoidea, Tenthredinoidea, Xiphydrioidea and Xyeloidea are combined as one checklist section, as the sawflies represent a distinctive assemblage of phytophagous (except Orussidae) Hymenoptera. More than fifty years have passed since the publication of the final part of Robert B. Benson’s three part identification key to the “Symphyta” of the British Isles (Benson 1935, Benson 1952, Benson 1958). Whilst the first two parts were based substantially on the acute monography by Eduard Enslin (Enslin 1912, Enslin 1913, Enslin 1914, Enslin 1915, Enslin 1916, Enslin 1917 and Enslin 1918), Benson’s treatment of the Nematinae represented an original and significant step forward in our knowledge of this subfamily. The results of subsequent research on the British and Irish sawfly fauna were collated by Quinlan (1978). Since then, renewed investigation of the taxonomy of West Palaearctic sawflies has led to a great number of taxonomic and nomenclatural changes, affecting many taxa occurring in the British Isles. Of particular value in accessing the extensive but widely scattered literature on sawflies, is the online database “Electronic World Catalog of Symphyta (ECatSym)” (Blank et al. 2012). Unfortunately, the only identification guide to the European “Symphyta” published since 1958 with a more than local geographical scope, by Zhelochovtsev (1988), suffers from weaknesses, such as the reliance placed on the opinions and illustrations of E. Lindqvist in its treatment of the Nematinae. Mistakes in translation from Russian make the later English language edition of this work even more difficult to use. Special problems are attached to the interpretation of records for some species not found in the British Isles since their inclusion in the works of Leach (1817) and Stephens (1835). Some of these are probably extinct, but their presence in the British Isles has in many cases never been unequivocally proved: see for example Benson (1943). We therefore maintain the practice, as in Fitton et al. (1978), of marking names of such taxa with a preceding “?”. Further, the taxonomic status of some of the nominal taxa described from the British Isles by Hill, Stephens, Newman and Cameron is still unclear, particularly where no type material has been located. The number of confirmed British sawfly species now stands at 537, compared to 471 in the 1978 checklist (Quinlan 1978; Broad 2014). Note that, since the publication of the introduction section (Broad 2014) a further family, Heptamelidae, has been recognised (Malm and Nyman 2014), including two British species previously included in Tenthredinidae. Authorship and date of publication of original descriptions by various authors follow mainly the bibliographic research of Taeger and Blank (1996), Taeger and Blank (2006), Blank and Taeger (1998), Blank et al. (2009) and Taeger et al. (2010). The classification of genera used here is largely based on the system of Benson (1951-1958). This has the advantages of being relatively simple and widely known. Detailed phylogenetic studies on several major lineages of Tenthredinidae are still lacking. However, some definite conclusions on generic groupings were reached by Nyman et al. (2006) on the Nematinae and Leppanen et al. (2012) on the Fenusini of the Blennocampinae. For the higher Nematinae, the full taxonomic and nomenclatural consequences of the recently proposed phylogeny have not yet been drawn. Far fewer genera will in future be recognised. For the present, we revert here to a generic classification that is similar to that used by Benson (1958), even though we are aware that Pachynematus, for example, is not monophyletic. Genus and species group names are included selectively in the synonymy. For a complete current synonymy of all these, including important misidentifications, see ECatSym (Blank et al. 2012). A name is only included as a synonym when it fulfils one or both of the following criteria: has at some time been used for a taxon occurring in the British Isles; is used in widely consulted works on taxonomy or distribution, or in original accounts of biological characters / descriptions of immature stages. The general scope and rationale for the checklist are covered by Broad (2014). As for the rest of the checklist, the Channel Islands fauna is excluded: see Sheppard (1990) on the sawfly fauna of the Channel Islands. There is a lack of data on the sawflies of the Isle of Man. It should be noted that several species were mistakenly listed as occurring in Scotland by Liston (1995). Some of the diversity of British sawflies is illustrated in Figs 1, ​,2,2, ​,3,3, ​,44. Representative British sawflies, superfamilies Cephoidea, Pamphilioidea and Siricoidea. Figure 1a. Cephidae, Phylloecus xanthostoma (G. Knight)

Take up the challenge! Opportunities for evolution research from resolving conflict in integrative taxonomy.

What's in a species? The multiple connotations of the question tend to lack simple answers, and not surprisingly so. For example, speciation is a gradual process. Can we say when exactly a child has become an adult? We have precocious youngsters and late bloomers, and often, adults are in some ways childish. There are many triggers for and routes to adolescence. All this holds for speciation, and delimiting species can therefore be a tricky task. Recently, the field of integrative taxonomy has emerged-species delimitation based on multiple sources of evidence. Given that we expect species to exhibit peculiarities in at least one or a few aspects, might it be their alleles of a gene, their morphology, chemistry, behaviour, ecology, reproductive compatibility, or whatever, investigating not just one but several of these aspects makes it more likely that we capture such peculiarities. If the same pattern is found multiply, we talk about agreement among disciplines, and species delimitation is easy. But what if different disciplines tell different stories? Such disagreement makes species delimitation more difficult but is also an opportunity for evolutionary biology (Schlick-Steiner et al. 2010). In this issue of Molecular Ecology, Andújar et al. (2014) present a comprehensive integrative-taxonomic case study of Mesocarabus ground beetles including nomenclatural consequences. They resolve extensive disagreement among disciplines by invoking evolutionary explanations, and the process of conflict resolution thus advances knowledge on species boundaries and evolutionary processes simultaneously.

On two reports associated with James Wood-Mason and Alfred William Alcock published by the Indian Museum and the Indian Marine Survey between 1890 and 1891: implications for malacostracan nomenclature.

Two rare documents associated with the Indian Museum and the Indian Marine Survey for the administrative year April 1890 to March 1891 have been examined and found to have nomenclatural consequences for malacostracan crustaceans. Even though they constitute available published works according to the International Code for Zoological Nomenclature, these reports have rarely been cited. Dating these two publications is of importance as they make decapod scientific names available and, in a few instances, describe the same taxa. After searching the collections deposited in the Asian and African Room, British Library, the Administration Report of the Indian Marine for the year April 1890 to March 1891 could be dated with some degree of certainty as 25 August 1891. In contrast, dating the Indian Museum Annual Report proved more difficult because after examination of copies held by the General Library in the Natural History Museum, London, it was evident that not all of these reports were consistently published on time to meet an end of year deadline. However, the publication of volume XXII of the Indian Museum Annual Report for the year April 1890 to March 1891 appeared to be contemporary with the year printed at the bottom of the title page. As no exact date could be established with confidence, the publication date for this volume was fixed as 31 December 1891 in accordance with ICZN Art. 21.3.2. Therefore the Administration Report of the Indian Marine (published 25 August 1891) is considered to take precedence over the Indian Museum Annual Report (published 31 December 1891) and as such the names made available in the former take priority. As original copies of the Administration Report of the Indian Marine are not readily available in most libraries and few scientists have actually had access to these publications, the relevant Appendix No. XIII, in which the names of several malacostracan taxa are made available, is reproduced here. Since the appendix is not conclusively attributable to a specific author, it is considered to be written anonymously and should therefore be cited as Anonymous (1891). A number of names in Appendix No. XIII are available since they are accompanied by a brief description of the taxa they denote, and are either attributable to James Wood-Mason or remain with anonymous authorship; others are nomina nuda without a diagnosis or indication, or have been diagnosed previously in the "Natural History Notes from H.M. Indian Marine Survey Steamer Investigator". The nomenclatural implications for eight names made available in Anonymous (1891) are discussed: Glyphocrangon caeca, Glyphocrangon sculptus var. coecescens, Psalidopodidae, Psalidopus, Psalidopus mirabilis, Psathyrocaris, Psathyrocaris fragilis and Psopheticus crepitans. The nomenclatural history of various other taxa, initially denoted by unavailable names in Anonymous (1891), is also documented. The authorships of the various crustacean taxa collected by the Indian Marine Survey Steamer Investigator during the seasons 1889-1890 and 1890-1891, and published in two series of connected parts in the Annals and Magazine of Natural History, are also re-assessed and summarised. A rare document containing the list of R.I.M.S. Investigator stations for the period 1884-1913 is reproduced for the future benefit of the scientific community.

Nomenclatural changes in heterocytous Cyanoprokaryotes (Cyanobacteria, Cyanophytes).

The criteria for systematic classification of Cyanoprokaryota (Cyanobacteria, Cyanophyta) were changed considerably in last decades. The molecular and morphological analyses, ecological characterization and biochemical markers are indispensable premises for modern cyanobacterial taxonomic re-classification. Many genera were divided, newly described and numerous species were transferred in generic entities, characterized on the basis of molecular, ecological and revised morphological criteria. All of the proposed taxonomic changes are included in the manuscript of the recently prepared 3rd volume of "Cyanoprokaryotes" in the frame of the new edited compendium SĂźsswasserflora von Mitteleuropa" (2nd edition, volume 19/3, Heterocytous genera). The used taxonomic status of many taxa is already clearly revised in numerous modern publications, but in several cases the nomenclatural consequences were not yet validly published (new combinations, few new names of taxa). However, it is necessary to publish validly the corrected names before edition of any monographic review. The valid nomenclatural transfer of 9 species, one new name and description of two species, the changed position of which follows without doubts from the recent modern revisions, are therefore included in the present article. The validation is published in agreement with the last edition of Botanical Nomenclatoric Code (ICBN; McNeill et al., ed. 2007). All the mentioned species belong to the heterocytous monophyletic group Nostocales (or Nostochineae, respectively), and are arranged alphabetically.

The infrageneric nomenclature of Tulipa (Liliaceae)

Zonneveld (Pl Syst Evol 281:217–245, 2009) proposed an infrageneric classification of Tulipa (Liliaceae) based on the nuclear content determined by flow cytometry and available morphological data. The nomenclatural consequences of this are discussed here, involving the typification of generic and infrageneric names. Additional notes on some species are given. Four subgenera are distinguished, of which two are new; ten sections are proposed, four new; three new combinations are made, and seven lectotypes are designated. Tulipa praecox Ten. is a later homonym of T. praecox Cav. (Descripcion de las plantas. 2: 448, 625, 1803); its correct name is Tulipa agenensis DC. Tulipa lemmersii Zonn., A. Peterse, J. de Groot is validated here by giving the type citation.