Infrageneric placement of the Southern Hemisphere taxa of Anemonastrum and Knowltonia earlier included in Anemone sensu lato (Ranunculaceae)

Abstract

The genera Anemonastrum and Knowltonia earlier usually included in Anemone sensu lato (Ranunculaceae: Anemoneae) were recently proposed to be recognized in expanded circumscriptions, based on molecular phylogenetic findings and partly also morphological and biogeographical evidence. Both these genera contain some representatives that are noteworthy from morphological and biogeographical viewpoints, and the general ranges of these genera (combining the ranges of their included species) demonstrate remarkable continent-scale disjunctions. In particular, Knowltonia in its new circumscription (corresponding to Anemone sect. Pulsatilloides sensu Hoot et al., 2012) contains southern African and some American taxa (mostly South American ones, including Oreithales, Barneoudia, etc.), and K. crassifolia from Tasmania. Anemonastrum (corresponding to Anemone subg. Anemonidium sensu Hoot et al., excluding Hepatica) is mainly Eurasian, but it also includes several North American species, as well as A. antucense from southern South America and A. tenuicaule from New Zealand. Species of the newly outlined Anemonastrum and Knowltonia were placed in various infrageneric taxa of Anemone sensu lato. Following the re-circumscription of genera, it is now timely to nomenclaturally update and partly re-circumscribe the relevant infrageneric taxa earlier treated in Anemone sensu lato. Here we propose the following new combinations at the section and subsection ranks: Knowltonia sect.

Anemonastrum tenuicaule and A. antucense (Ranunculaceae), new combinations for a New Zealand endemic species and its South American relative

“…& Byng. This transfer is in line with the earlier suggestion by Mosyakin (2016) , who proposed to recognize Knowltonia in an expanded circumscription and was preparing corresponding nomenclatural transfers (which are, of course, not needed now).…”

“…Recent molecular phylogenetic results obtained for taxa of the tribe Anemoneae ( Ranunculaceae ) and, in particular, Anemone L. sensu lato and Clematis L. (see Hoot et al 1994 , 2012 ; Hoot 1995 ; Ehrendorfer 1995 ; Ehrendorfer and Samuel 2000 , 2001 ; Schuettpelz and Hoot 2000 , 2001; Schuettpelz et al 2002 ; Meyer et al 2010 ; Pfosser et al 2011 ; Xie et al 2011 ; Cossard et al 2016 ; Lehtonen et al 2016 ; Elliott 2016 ; Jiang et al 2017 ), stimulated the long-standing discussion on a rational taxonomic circumscription of genera in that group. In particular, Mosyakin (2016) argued that the very broad taxonomic circumscription of Anemone , as outlined by Hoot et al (2012) [including Hepatica Mill., Pulsatilla Mill., Knowltonia Salisb., Barneoudia Gay, Oreithales Schtdl., and many other generic segregates], is morphologically poorly justified. Moreover, if Clematis is indeed confirmed as phylogenetically rooted in Anemone sensu lato, as suggested by Lehtonen et al (2016) and in some earlier publications (see discussion in Wang et al 2009 ; Pfosser et al 2011 ; Cossard et al 2016 ), then the taxonomic recognition of Anemone (as outlined by Hoot et al 2012 ) will be also unnatural from the phylogenetic viewpoint.…”

“…Other options of phylogenetically non-controversial and taxonomically rational re-circumscription of genera in the group of Anemone sensu Hoot et al (2012) were recently discussed by Mosyakin (2016) who, in particular, advocated the recognition of the lineage with the base chromosome number x = 7 ( Anemone subgen. Anemonidium sensu Hoot et al 2012 ) as comprising two genera, Hepatica in its traditional circumscription and Anemonastrum Holub in an expanded circumscription, including Anemonidium (Spach) Holub, Arsenjevia Starod., Jurtsevia Á. Löve & D. Löve, and Tamuria Starod.…”

“…At present, nomenclatural combinations for many species and several infraspecific and infrageneric entities in Anemonastrum already exist; they were validated mainly by Holub (1973) and later by some other authors ( Löve and Löve “1975 ” (published 1976); Starodubtsev 1989 , 1991 ; Raus 2011a , 2011b ; Tzvelev 2012 ; and others). Several new nomenclatural combinations in Anemonastrum (mainly for North American taxa) have been recently validated by Mosyakin (2016) . Additional nomenclatural transfers are now considered in parallel with continued taxonomic reassessment of Anemone sensu lato (Ziman et al in prep.).…”

“… Omalocarpus DC., and thus also the type of the replacement name Anemonastrum (see Holub 1973 : 158). Consequently, the name Anemonastrum should be used for the genus in that particular circumscription, as it has been already indicated by Mosyakin (2016) .…”